The RedBlue reviews are in. Can you help us?
Posted 48 weeks 6 days ago byThere's a couple of reviews of our Web site today, and this seems like a good time to get your input on our project here.
At the Seattle Times, Mike Fancher points his readers our way. He does more explaining than reviewing, but does offer this bit of support:
Is there a middle place in a time of hyper-partisanship? I hope so.
The words weren't so kind from the Think Good Thoughts blog, which, unfortunately, found us when we had a picture of Carrot Top on the front page.
We will never, ever put Carrot Top on the front page again, we promise. From now on, there will be only photos of Dane Cook.
Unfortunately, that wasn't the only critique offered:
Redblueamerican.com just isn't cutting edge enough for me. It doesn't show me anything new or present any different perspective. It is a repackaging of the same old stuff, much like the Real Simple magazine mentioned earlier. The only thing that it has going for it is that its goal is to stimulate discussion, which, if you have been reading this blog, I am all about. I just don't think that we need yet another mediocre, 'have your say' website. And of course, you can't have your say without giving your private information. So I wonder what Redblueamerican.com is really about.
Fair enough.
We know what we want redblueamerica.com to be: A place where people can find the best thinking from across the political spectrum. Since you're here, we think that's what you want, too.
Are we right? And if so, what would you like to see from us in giving it to you? We're all ears.
Thoughts
Posters need to find topics easily
Submitted on February 3rd, 2008 by Another skepticIt takes awhile to get a blog or message board going, and, relatively speaking, this one is off to a flying start.
In a couple of months the "regulars" will establish themselves and form friendships and even enemies lists.
What seems to be missing here is a way for readers (who out number posters 100 to 1 or better) and posters to quickly find the threads they want to check out and join.
Message boards can offer 1 to 100 or more "forums" where people with shared interests chat and debate. As far as I can tell, the bloggers aren't putting their blogs into categories, which make it easier for users to find and search for the threads and topics that interest them. Not everyone is interested in presidential politics, and not everyone is interested in global warming or alternative energy debates.
I think of blogs as top down sites where the blogger starts all conversations. Message boards are bottom up sites, where members start most threads. On most boards, the administrators are relatively quiet for some reason, while moderators often mix it up, starting and participating in threads as well as keeping everyone as civil as possible.
So what I'm missing most here are the forums that appeal to a wide variety of interests. In my experience, the political forums generally get a lot of readers and a few active posters. General chit chat forums get lots of posters and who knows how many readers.
Maybe, after a month or two, the owners of this site will see patterns that will guide them in setting up forums that make sense for the people who come here.
The mission of this site is to provide a place for intelligent discussion. That means, imo, that the moderators have to keep the place civil. This will be easier than they expect. Once posters understand the rules, they follow them. When there are no rules and no enforcement of the rules, there is chaos, and that drives the people who want to have intelligent discussions away.
I'd also like buttons that make linking and quoting easier. Having to type html code is very inconvenient.
Just some "thoughts."
Re: Message boards
Submitted on February 2nd, 2008 by BenThanks, Skeptic. The good news is, the format is flexible and evolving. We're still trying to figure out how best to give readers what they want. We're also trying to get people acquainted with the format. And as a moderator, I'm still trying to figure out the right balance between prodding and participating in a discussion and dominating it. We're around a lot more than you might think.
The Powerline example is a good one, too.
I do hope you will stick with us. Your participation has been invaluable.
Message boards are more interactive, interesting
Submitted on February 2nd, 2008 by Another skepticRedBlueAmerica.com is designed to be a cross between a blog and a message board, but it's mostly a blog designed by old media journalists who don't participate in the discussions and don't get it.
When I come to this site, I glance at the hosts' blogs and click on blogs to see what real people are discussing. The problem is that the format discourages the threads that make message boards sing. Instead, the blogs involve "thoughts" (comments) that stimulate little interaction among posters.
So we spend most of our time elsewhere.
What I expect will happen with this site is that it will attract a large number of one off posters, not people who want to discuss topics and ideas. They make their points, get no response and go to their favorite message boards.
You may attract a lot of unique visitors, but as the traffic grows and the number of posters crowd out the serious posters, you'll be left with the angry right and angry left.
Take a look at powerlineblog.com. That format does a much better job of allowing blog readers to read a very good blog and active posters to start and participate in discussions on its message board.
I've posted a number of times here and gotten up to six thoughts. On other boards, I'll get 50 to 100 for the same posts. That should tell you something.
Also, while the hosts post a lot of new topics, they don't engage in conversations. They're not around during off hours much, and they're being way too professional.
So we don't know who you are, what you think or if you think.
The hosts need to be more provocative and to be here. And you need a message board.
well, you asked
Submitted on February 1st, 2008 by Cycle_GeezerFirst, the topics shift too often, and the website layout makes the older topics seem less immediate, less in need of comment. Second, I'm not yet a fan of the pick an article, then 2 articles to comment on the article. It seems too second hand. I realize you both have personal blogs where you comment directly, but perhaps there is some way to inject more of your thoughts into the front page. And C, there is no rule 6.