[HN Gopher] Observations about writing and commenting on the int...
___________________________________________________________________
Observations about writing and commenting on the internet
Author : ggoo
Score : 16 points
Date : 2022-02-14 17:07 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (dynomight.net)
(TXT) w3m dump (dynomight.net)
| notacoward wrote:
| As an Online Person for nearly 40 years, many things in this
| resonated with me. The "engagement has a sample bias" part seems
| particularly relevant, and neither OP nor I are the first to
| notice that people are more likely to speak up in disagreement
| than in support.
|
| Overall, I think many of the ills that OP describes come back to
| the same thing: writing on the internet is mostly more like
| public speaking than normal conversation. This is especially true
| for blogs, but even in places like Twitter or here there's a
| division between you as writer and many strangers as readers.
| That's not how people normally operate IRL. In-person discussions
| are usually among only a few people, up to maybe a few dozen in a
| big conference room, and they're more interactive. One-way
| speaking in front of hundreds or thousand of strangers is
| something many people never do, and many more consider it the
| most anxiety-creating thing they've done. But here online, we all
| do it all the time, and we all learn to do it in a very
| particular way - using the voice of authority (or the "high
| school debate club" voice) instead of our normal conversational
| voice, anticipating disagreement or even hostility (see above
| about sample bias), and so on. The more antagonistic the forums
| you've been in, the more you'll adopt that style yourself. Just
| look around right here. It wouldn't be _at all_ surprising to see
| examples outing themselves in replies to this very comment. And
| yes, I 'm exemplifying that tendency myself. It's deliberate, so
| no need to call me a hypocrite for it.
|
| I've been thinking about ways to foster a more "living-room-like"
| environment without these malign effects, but haven't really come
| up with anything. Maybe the so-called metaverse - for all the
| other issues with that concepts - will at least feel real enough
| that people will feel inclined to interact as their normal selves
| instead of as their current (and generally not so congenial)
| internet selves.
| blurker wrote:
| I found this to be very insightful. A good read for anyone
| wanting to do better at putting their ideas out there (aka me).
| Sometimes I consider not reading any comments / online feedback,
| but I think this article makes a good argument for the value that
| online feedback can provide if your goal is to effectively reach
| people. But then I also see some benefit of ignoring that and
| maintaining artistic or value integrity. Sometimes people produce
| amazing new things because they ignore what others tell them. Or
| maybe despite it? I don't know, just gets me thinking...
| melindajb wrote:
| "It's puzzling that there isn't a stronger tradition of "user
| testing" for writing. Occasionally I'll give a friend something
| I've written and implore them, "Please circle anything that makes
| you feel even slightly unhappy for any reason whatsoever." Then
| I'll ask them what they were thinking at each point. There are
| always "bugs" everywhere: Belaboring of obvious points, ambiguous
| phrases, unnecessary antagonistic language, tangential arguments
| about controversial things that don't matter, etc."
|
| This is called an editor. They're invaluable!
| ohwellhere wrote:
| This is an amazing first comment in the context of the article.
| melindajb wrote:
| The irony was not lost on me either. but I really did agree
| with a lot of the piece. :) To his point, again.
| blurker wrote:
| Not disagreeing but just pointing out that I felt the author
| also said this:
|
| > Fixing these is great but your friends (let's hope) don't
| want to hurt your feelings. This makes it almost impossible to
| get them to say things like, "your jokes aren't funny" or "you
| should delete section 3 because it's horrendous and
| unsalvageable". Good editors are gold.
|
| Perhaps this is a good example of their main point, haha!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-02-14 23:02 UTC)