Colorado Pols.com is Weird

16 Comments

by: MADCO

But mostly because we who post make it so.

A few days ago – a long time in CoPols.com land – I promised to research some old posts and report back later this week. Then by happenstance sxp151 did a thing last night that got me looking even further into the past posts.

A few observations from a relative noob, in no particular order.

Some of you are quite brilliant and some of you can write really well. Not always the same posters and not always the ones I agree with. And, no, not all you know who you are.

The underlying architecture of the site is what it is.

Example- when you change your signature line, it changes on every post for that user name for all time. So all of a sudden that post from two years ago looks weird with some comment about balloon boy or triguardian.

Here’s something that surprised me: there is no way to close comments on a diary. And there are a few posters that post well after the pack has moved on. Sure they get the last word, and their comments are recorded, but it just seems….dumb. Find an old post getting no traffic and then post a response that makes it look like the lack of reply defeats the original. Touché, mon ombre. I haven’t looked back into old posts much and when I do, I don’t post. Where’s the wisdom in getting the last word when no one is listening?

Why do some posters consistently fuck up the mechanics of the site?

Eg: huge, unnecessary white space between post and sig line? Consistently posting replies to the wrong post? C&P quotes from other sources with no accompanying link?

The site architecture is what it is, but these kinds of netiquette failures are just us. Sure they are minor compared to the auto loading audio we used to sometimes get, or the no warning autoload images that no one wants to see, but it’s our community.

SH, TFO and others calling for civiity and moderation in language- you are right on.

Some posters here have been complete a**holes- worse than pointless invective and name calling. Worse than pointless because it distracts and excludes. If political discussion is useful (it is) and the political process is valuable (it is) then distracting from the discussion in a exclusionary, mean spirited way is not funny, it’s just wrong.

In following the “volume poll” and my little research project for more recent posts, I was curious about my own potential obnoxiousness. In 1755 posts I can recall calling one poster a “dickhead ” and another a “misinformed, arrogant nut job”. I wish I could consistently engage in more useful discussion. Though both were accurate characterizations in context, neither was especially productive communication.

I’ve been thinking about DT’s idea about candidates being able to “own the web.” A site like this that provides a recorded memory of who said what when can be a part of that. That said, searching the past on this site is a painfully awkward process. And because real world identities are not always available and trolls, sockpuppets and other blogonalities are easy enough to manage and manipulate I don’t see sites like this really playing a major role.

16 thoughts on “Colorado Pols.com is Weird”

Ray Springfield says:

December 30, 2009 at 8:36 pm

has been my experience, unless one is an insider.

Manipulating activist perception has it’s advantages for candidates. If a side makes no appearance whatsoever, either the blog is dead (like ST is becoming), or the candidacy is dying.

Log in to Reply
1. MADCO says:
  
  December 30, 2009 at 9:34 pm
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. sxp151 says:
    
    December 30, 2009 at 9:46 pm
    
    I think the bubble might have burst on the Snuggie market.
    
    Log in to Reply
  2. Ray Springfield says:
    
    December 30, 2009 at 9:47 pm
    
    n/a.
    
    Log in to Reply
    1. Ray Springfield says:
      
      December 30, 2009 at 9:47 pm
      
      n/a
      
      Log in to Reply
      1. MADCO says:
        
        December 30, 2009 at 9:49 pm
        
        and I don’t get SqSt.
        
        Log in to Reply
Skyler says:

December 31, 2009 at 2:18 am

Some posters here have been complete a**holes- worse than pointless invective and name calling.

I absolutely agree. And, back when I started commenting here two years ago, I absolutely matched that description.

But the great thing about ColoradoPols, and those who post here, is that they facilitate political growth. I’ve evolved my political views as one does over time, but I’ve done so as much in the comment section here on Pols as in real life. Looking back at my diaries, I went from a hard-line progressive to a much more moderate Democrat.

To judge me based off what I wrote two years ago would be folly. I think that’s the great thing about ColoradoPols. Who knows? Maybe one day we’ll be looking at Libertad and Laughing Boy as experts rather than partisan jokes. It’s all about evolution.

Squarestate is dying for a lot of reasons. I’d say one of the top ten, however, is that they absolutely have a liberal slant. So does ColoradoPols, don’t get me wrong, but we’re equal opportunity attackers here. Over at S2, well, they’re all cut from the same idealogical mold.

Log in to Reply
1. MADCO says:
  
  December 31, 2009 at 7:03 am
  
  And I don’t recall you ever being a dickweed progressive lunatic to me.
  
  But welcome to the long grass where ya gots to have long legs to run with the big dogs.
  
  Log in to Reply
Jambalaya says:

December 31, 2009 at 6:23 am

…but I refuse to be civil….that’s so boring! I gave up the Church for less.

Log in to Reply
1. DavidThi808 says:
  
  December 31, 2009 at 6:49 am
  
  I agree with you 100% on this. Well delivered snark is oh so entertaining.
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. Steve Harvey says:
    
    December 31, 2009 at 7:30 am
    
    but that is not what MADCO, I, and others are talking about (it’s amazing how often that can be repeated to no effect). Personally, anything that is both intended to offend, and aimed exclusively at the individual divorced from any of the substance of what they’ve ever said, is just obnoxious. Now, some might think that, as long as it’s funny, well, that’s just the price you pay for playing. But, let’s face it, a whole lot of it is nowhere near the realm of humor, not by any measure.
    
    So, can we agree on this: If it’s not in response to what anyone has posted, is intended to offend, is aimed at an individual, and is not even remotely funny, (and, just for the hell of it, let’s throw in “and is repeated ad nauseum“), then it’s not really defensible behavior? That’s a pretty low threshold to meet to maintain some modicum of civility.
    
    Log in to Reply
    1. droll says:
      
      December 31, 2009 at 9:13 am
      
      Log in to Reply
    2. DavidThi808 says:
      
      December 31, 2009 at 9:17 am
      
      Don’t take things so much to heart. In many cases the best response is no response.
      
      Log in to Reply
      1. Steve Harvey says:
        
        December 31, 2009 at 6:02 pm
        
        but a separate issue. There are three that I can see: what constitutes “unacceptable behavior” in a community such as this; how the recipient of such behavior should best deal with it; and how the community itself should respond to it.
        
        As for the aspect you’ve addressed: The “no response” option is not without its drawbacks. It cedes more opportunity to others to define you. John Kerry, for instance, chose not to respond to the Swift Boaters, to his considerable loss. It’s not that cut-and-dry, when people have something at stake.
        
        It’s hard to respond to persistent attempts at character assassination effectively: Most responses sound defensive, and help accomplish what the perpetrators were hoping for. But sometimes, shirking the challenge isn’t a viable option. Whether or not my situation falls into that category or not is open to debate, but when there are multiple belligerents persistently trying to define you in a particular way, they are reinforcing their message while you are either countering it or letting it take root in the minds of whatever audience they have managed to reach.
        
        Log in to Reply
2. MADCO says:
  
  December 31, 2009 at 7:06 am
  
  and then there’s biting omg funny without being mean.
  
  I think you can forgo the former cause you can do the latter. It’s like Don Rickles. Or Chris Rock doing nigger jokes. Or … or… well, … you doing you.
  
  Log in to Reply
peacemonger says:

January 2, 2010 at 11:15 am

There’ve been times I thought I reacted too quickly and wanted to eraase it later. Can’t do that. Oh well.

As for complete a**holes, things seem much tamer here than they did at the other place. There are some jerks even here, but for the most part, abuse and slander are policed by all. I think this is a pretty decent group of bloggers… not to mention the comedians and poets among us.

As for white space, sorry, I like a little here and there.

Log in to Reply