A thread about starting threads (forum social dynamics)

[Linna Heartbooger]

Hey, y'all... anyone else have trouble getting threads started?
Sometimes you get invested in a conversation that you want to start, and you make this carefully-crafted OP, (or you make a quick-and-dirty OP, but you spend time imagining how you'll respond to all the different viewpoints) but then... nothing.

Some days, I wish I were more like peter (or old Lord Foul), and gamely keeping at it... if one thread I try to start happens to flop, just... try something new!

You can do it Linna. Like in conversation...sometimes you just have to change the subject.

Okay, so ^that^ was encouraging...

And I have a second question!
"What are thread topics you've thought of, but hesitated to start because you thought there wouldn't be interest?"
(or thought you might offend, etc.)

Here are some of mine, based on recurring obsessions I have:
* "Moralistic, Therapeutic Deism is not Christianity"
* "Evangelism"
* "Concrete-relational thinking"
* something or other about shame-based cultures (?)

[Edit: added more topics to list..]

[Avatar]

It's an interesting question, and surely one that has puzzled posters all around the web.

I think (at least part of) the problem is asynchronous communication.

If we were standing somewhere and started to discuss it, no problem...it's part of the moment etc.

But you start a topic when you're interested in something, but I come along 8 hours later and maybe I'm just not into thinking about it.

Old Mighara Sovmadhi is a good example. He starts some interesting threads, but damn they're complex. They require work to participate in, and sometimes I just don't feel like work.

I've started threads in the past that got 0 replies, or that maybe struggled through a desultory couple of posts. The question is really how much do other people have to say on a subject.

As for your second question, none really. Maybe one or two in the distant reaches of time that I can't remember anymore, but I've never been much of a thread starter.

It's much easier to join in a conversation than it is to start one, and with so many going at once, I'm usually spoilt for choice.

--A

[Hashi Lebwohl]

I never have trouble starting topics--a couple of clicks, a little typing, one more click, and I am finished. I don't take future interest in the thread--or lack thereof--into account when starting a thread, either. For me, starting threads (or replying in them) is a simple matter of "I have something to say and I am going to say it"; whether people listen or respond is not my concern.

I never take into account whether someone might find something I say offensive and thus censor myself. I don't go around saying things which are offensive on purpose...unless, of course, my purpose is to be offensive, in which case I will tell you that I am being offensive.

[Avatar]

Ah, it's all so simple, right?

--A

[Linna Heartbooger]

I think (at least part of) the problem is asynchronous communication.

If we were standing somewhere and started to discuss it, no problem...it's part of the moment etc.

But you start a topic when you're interested in something, but I come along 8 hours later and maybe I'm just not into thinking about it.

Oh, I strike out on conversation topics in real life.

otoh, I have a friend who decided to cure me of my tendency to have -horrible- transitions from topic-we-are-talking-about to topic-I-want-to-bring-up.

It would go like this:
*we are having a conversation that touches on some horribly unethical medical thing in the news or something*
Me: "Oh, that reminds me - I know someone whose kid-"
Friend: "No. Do you see what a horrrrible transition that was? You don't even get to continue that thought."

So now I actually think about transitions a lot more than I used to.
And whether it's even good to transition at all.

Old Mighara Sovmadhi is a good example. He starts some interesting threads, but damn they're complex. They require work to participate in, and sometimes I just don't feel like work.

*nod*
I feel like some of those could maybe have been re-directed to something adjacent to the thesis he was putting forward... and then conversation could be more accessible but still vaguely in the locus of what he was thinking about / interested in.

The question is really how much do other people have to say on a subject.

That's a big part of it... sometimes, I think once the ball gets rolling people who would say "I don't really know about that subject" could end up noticing things they contribute nonetheless.

Figuring out how general or specific to make things...

I never take into account whether someone might find something I say offensive and thus censor myself.

but doesn't that sometimes cut you off from getting to hear the voices of others who have some wisdom, strengths, knowledge or virtues you don't?

I am way on the other end of the spectrum. I hate angering others, and even worse is alienating others. I think offending needlessly is a waste. But I sometimes hold back from standing up for things too much... telling myself I'll build up more social capital... then they'll be more able to listen to me.
I mean, what do I think I'm going to accomplish? I'm not Valentine Wiggin.

one time I was editing and re-editing a post of mine, and I asked someone sensible to tell me which of two edits was better, and that person was like, "Umm, I think you're optimizing for the wrong things!"

[balon!]

one time I was editing and re-editing a post of mine, and I asked someone sensible to tell me which of two edits was better, and that person was like, "Umm, I think you're optimizing for the wrong things!"

THIS. This is totally me. I can't tell you how much I've sweated over some stupid work email after re-editing it like a hundred times.

As for starting threads... I'm not sure. The best ones I've ever gotten responses to have been surprises to me, and the ones I like best were directly related to the Chrons. (I'm remembering one about Ak-har Kenaustin Ardenal from a long time back.) For me I think it has to do with being one of the ultimate lurkers on KW. At least in the top ten.

[kevinswatch]

Great thread! I've never been any good at starting new threads. Figure I never have anything interesting to say.

However, apparently, I have a hell of a knack for creating entire message boards. Who knew?

-jay

[Linna Heartbooger]

THIS. This is totally me. I can't tell you how much I've sweated over some stupid work email after re-editing it like a hundred times.

Yeaaaahhh... My instinct is to try to figure everything out when really, the person on the other end is sort of invisible to me.

I'm trying to train myself to just "toss off an e-mail," as people say. The going is slow, but the change is good.

RE the Ak-haru Kenaustin Ardenal thread..
Maybe it was something that you were passionate about that struck a chord with lots of other Watchers... and maybe for the same reason it intrigued you. (I should maybe go find it.)

For me I think it has to do with being one of the ultimate lurkers on KW. At least in the top ten.

Who knew? (I didn't. but now I do!)

...I've never been any good at starting new threads...

However, apparently, I have a hell of a knack for creating entire message boards. Who knew?

Ya win some, ya lose some?

[Avatar]

one time I was editing and re-editing a post of mine, and I asked someone sensible to tell me which of two edits was better, and that person was like, "Umm, I think you're optimizing for the wrong things!"

THIS. This is totally me. I can't tell you how much I've sweated over some stupid work email after re-editing it like a hundred times.

Most people at work get me to write any important emails for them.

--A

[Linna Heartbooger]

Most people at work get me to write any important emails for them.

Is your heuristic "throw out 95% of the words while retaining the content."?

Also, balon! and I would like to know what your rate is for doing this service for non-colleagues.
(no; I'm kidding.. I'm kidding...)

[Hashi Lebwohl]

I never take into account whether someone might find something I say offensive and thus censor myself.

but doesn't that sometimes cut you off from getting to hear the voices of others who have some wisdom, strengths, knowledge or virtues you don't?

I am way on the other end of the spectrum. I hate angering others, and even worse is alienating others. I think offending needlessly is a waste. But I sometimes hold back from standing up for things too much... telling myself I'll build up more social capital... then they'll be more able to listen to me.
I mean, what do I think I'm going to accomplish? I'm not Valentine Wiggin.

Of course it doesn't. It doesn't happen often, but if I say something that makes me look like a jackass and/or offends someone then that person needs to step up and say "what you said was offensive". At that point we can figure out whether it really was offensive, why they might have gotten offended, or why I said whatever it was I said. These days, though, so many people are so easily offended by even the most innocuous words or phrases that you cannot possibly scrub your words before saying them in order to avoid offending anyone. Note the recent dramatic increase in the "microaggression" trends and the desire for "safe spaces", especially among the traditional university-aged folks (18-22)--they cannot handle any discourse which does fit into their nebulous-yet-pre-defined comfort zone.

Anyone who decides to silence their own voice because of something I might have said has neither wisdom, nor strength, nor knowledge, nor virtue. They should be able to stand on their own feet and voice their opinions regardless of what I say.

[Avatar]

For the sake of argument... That's a pretty harsh and almost exclusionary line to take isn't it? Not everybody has that sort of confidence (or brashness?), but that doesn't mean they don't have valid points to raise.

Personally, I never worry about offending people. I do however want what I have to say be understood, so I try to be (perhaps exhaustively) clear.

--A

[peter]

Very often - in fact most often, it's not the content but the intent that makes something offensive or otherwise. In the car the other day my wife and I were giving a young work collegue of mine a lift home and in an attempt to describe where a particular shop was in town he calmly said "It's down that road next to the chinese massage parlour". Now some would consider this a .... difficult... remark to have made in the presence of a sixty year-old woman you have never met before [and of a certain 'moral type'] but coming from Tom, who is just a lovely guy [if a trifle autistic] it was simply a hoot.

re The problem about starting new threads; yes, some of them work and some of them don't. But threads are the Life Blood of a forum like this and therfore the more the merrier. Some are slow starters then burn brightly at a later point, others go off with a bang from day one. Some alas are 'stilborn' [often the ones you the poster think are the best] and this is just part of the deal. It's as Churchill famously said, when it comes to posting new threads you've just got to "keep on b*ggering on!"

[Linna Heartbooger]

re The problem about starting new threads; yes, some of them work and some of them don't. But threads are the Life Blood of a forum like this and therfore the more the merrier. Some are slow starters then burn brightly at a later point, others go off with a bang from day one. Some alas are 'stilborn' [often the ones you the poster think are the best] and this is just part of the deal. It's as Churchill famously said, when it comes to posting new threads you've just got to "keep on b*ggering on!"

Good descriptions!
And sometimes I don't remember to watch ones that turn out to be slow-starters, and I've maybe missed out on engaging conversations they later produced.

We can use this thread to post lists of thread topics you were really invested in, (sometimes "the ones the poster think are the best") but which didn't "work out"... and maybe we can (collaboratively) figure out how to "work in" more of each-other's interests to our conversations.

Very often... it's not the content but the intent...
...he calmly said "It's down that road next to the chinese massage parlour". Now some would consider this a .... difficult... remark to have made in the presence of a sixty year-old woman you have never met before [and of a certain 'moral type'] but coming from Tom, who is just a lovely guy [if a trifle autistic] it was simply a hoot.

^This!^
Did you and E. both burst out laughing?

[Hashi Lebwohl]

For the sake of argument... That's a pretty harsh and almost exclusionary line to take isn't it? Not everybody has that sort of confidence (or brashness?), but that doesn't mean they don't have valid points to raise.

That is much less harsh than the typical sort of dialogue with which people will be presented on the Internet these days, including direct insults, inflammatory language describing one's mother, or strings of expletives all run together into non-coherent sentences.

It is a personality quirk I have. When meeting someone who has confidence or assertiveness issues (which is not the same thing as "aggressive", of course) I try to make them more confident by pressing them on it. One does not build emotional muscle by being timid; rather, one builds emotional muscle be meeting adversity. Not over-the-top adversity, mind you, but semi-tailored to the person in question. If they cannot handle me then how are they possibly going to handle the real trolls who are out there, the ones for whom there are no depths to which they will not sink?

I don't worry about offending people; then again, I typically do not say anything offensive to or about anyone.

[Avatar]

Very often - in fact most often, it's not the content but the intent that makes something offensive or otherwise.

The problem is, is is not possible to truly know somebodies intent. You may suspect it, but you cannot know it. And online that impossibility is multiplied, as you can't even get the cues from body language and expression.

You cannot know what people intend. Hell. Sometimes they don't even know.

--A

[peter]

( Not laughing Lina, but we did have a smile to each other and I made a mock protestation of having no knowledge of such an establishment.)

Re the intent thing, in my time here I've become very aware of how easily a post can be read differently in terms of intent than that which was intended by the poster - one reason why the use of emoticon's is not superfluous, it's actually very important. In the main however, being honest in your opinion is rarely very offensive as such. Peoples ego's or pride may be briefly pricked, but the integrity of an opinion honestly expressed will usually ride over this unless the hearer is exceptionally thin skinned (and this is certainly how I've always seen your directness Hashi).

[Avatar]

Well said Peter. It's when the slightly wounded ego then retaliates that things can unfortunately escalate beyond their original intent.

--A

[Linna Heartbooger]

Here's something I've been thinking about concerning content that gets a discussion here on the Watch to work.

We need to be asking ourselves, "What do I have to give the world / this community?"
And then, "Where does that intersect with stuff that a number of Watchers are already interested in?"

And then go make new threads/posts that are thought-provoking, while also not being like, "and now I've said it all on that subject. case closed."
Plus, if we decrease the amount of effort to "say it all," that will decrease some of the time/energy/amount-of-thinking barrier to making a given post.

(but of course not every single post/thread needs to have those characteristics - goodness! then we'd find ourselves freezing up for the other reason - "everything I say has to be scintillating, and simultaneously something that has wide appeal - aaagghhhh!")

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

Here's something I've been thinking about concerning content that gets a discussion here on the Watch to work.

We need to be asking ourselves, "What do I have to give the world / this community?"
And then, "Where does that intersect with stuff that a number of Watchers are already interested in?"

And then go make new threads/posts that are thought-provoking, while also not being like, "and now I've said it all on that subject. case closed."
Plus, if we decrease the amount of effort to "say it all," that will decrease some of the time/energy/amount-of-thinking barrier to making a given post.

(but of course not every single post/thread needs to have those characteristics - goodness! then we'd find ourselves freezing up for the other reason - "everything I say has to be scintillating, and simultaneously something that has wide appeal - aaagghhhh!")

Well, that about says it all (no irony intended).

Kudos.