I’ve lurked at dKos since before the 2004 presidential elections. I have a really low UID (RLUID) which substantiates the numerous ways in which I am amazing. You should pay attention to me because my RLUID ensures my opinions are reliable, and that I will disburse them in equal measures of modesty, clarity and profundity.
When dKos first acknowledged my self-evident worth with this RLUID, I deigned to join because I happened to be looking for an online resource to validate the myriad political insights I had already gleaned weeks before everyone else, but using proletarian parlance that would resonate with the commoners who besieged me, craving enlightened political discussion. Some might argue that I really joined because I had been banned from another political site days prior for posting vulgar commentary regarding Karl Rove’s genitalia, but correlation does not imply causation, or some such.
Those were crazy times and I was frequently drunk, so let’s not pick nits.
Since then, I’ve read thousands of diaries and tens of thousands of comments. This is because I am both remarkable and able to read, and reflects just one of my many contributions to progressive causes. I’ve posted a few diaries and comments myself – probably fewer than I would have been inclined to post if I were still drinking, but certainly more than many of you deserve or can comprehend.
Over the years, I’ve witnessed my fair share of pie-fights. But I’ve never paid much attention because to do so would have appeared unseemly – like listening to your neighbors scream at each other in their backyard (apparently unaware that your living room window is open) about how “you’re such a friggin’ tramp for sleeping with my brother” and how “I never did that but maybe I should because at least he’s gentle and listens to my poems” and how “well, go right ahead because I’m pretty sure he still has chlamydia from his last trip to Tijuana!” Unseemly indeed.
Despite the pie-fights, I’ve always been able to get from dKos what I was here for (if I must state it in an unadorned fashion) ….relevant and timely information about the political issues of the day, from a Democratic perspective. This information rounded out my political discussions with those capable of keeping up with me. There was and is a certain noblesse oblige element to these dialogues – making a real impact on the otherwise banal thought-worlds of my co-workers and fans. Your simpler turns of phrase helped me connect with the little people. And for that, I am grateful.
Recently, however, the utility of this site has seemed to wane, which I find vexing. In fact, I find myself frequently wandering the halls of my workplace, asking myself why I had just subjected myself to yet another train-wreck of a diary or comment-thread. At such times, I am faced with no alternative but to return to my desk and get actual work done. Need I describe the untenable nature of such a condition? “Vexed” doesn’t even begin to illustrate…
But what PRECISELY is causing such comment threads to lose their value?
Rather than pine for simpler times, when comment threads did not feel like they were rippled with tripe, I chose instead to un-wring my hands and pursue a more rational course of inquiry into the specific attributes of the present-day comment-thread. Taking a randomly selected diary, I setout to qualify and quantify the characteristics of each comment-theme contained therein. My initial assumption was that I would find the majority of comments to be either mean-spirited attacks on Obama’s character or mean-spirited attacks on the character of more ideologically-minded progressives - both useless and puerile, to be certain. But what I found was far more complex and fascinating a picture than I first hypothesized. What follows is the breakdown:
Actually, what follows is the title of the analyzed diary, followed by a gap in my own diary which I could not for the life of me remove but which I am fairly certain is connected to the HTML related to tables, but whatever.
Diary Title: Obama Administration Building Super Robot To Combat Forces of Anarcho-Syndicalism – Proposes Using Old People Medicine for Fuel
Comment Type |
Comment Frequency |
General Critique of Obama or a Refutation of Support of Obama – Topical and/or Policy-Based |
41 |
General Support of Obama or a Refutation of Critique of Obama – Topical and/or Policy Based |
23 |
Analysis – Actual, Thoughtful |
18 |
Meta-conversation About Prior Pie Fight |
17 |
Smart Ass Substance-Free Pie Fight Bait |
15 |
Seriously Funny Shit |
10 |
Fail in Ways That Defy Description or “100 Monkeys with Keyboards…” |
8 |
General Critique of the Entire Ruling Elite, Including Obama – Approaching Apoplectic |
7 |
Comparison of Civil Disobedience/DFH Credentials/Records – Pissing Up Walls |
4 |
”I Know You Are But What Am I?” - Jousting With Q-Tips |
3 |
General Critique of Obama for Something Totally Unrelated To the Diary Subject or Other Perfidy (Other Axe To Grind and Wave About) |
2 |
General Support of Obama in Response to Critique of Obama for Something Totally Unrelated to the Diary or Other Perfidy (Pointing at the Axe) |
2 |
”I Am The Political Kreskin/Here’s My Prediction” Dartboard and/or 8-Ball Prognostication |
2 |
Platitude – Quaint and Reminiscent of Fortune Cookie or Horoscope |
2 |
Other Meta |
2 |
Counter-Meta – Commentary on the Obtuseness of Meta |
2 |
Analysis – Irrelevant, Incorrect, or With Which Analyst Otherwise Disagrees |
2 |
Analysis – Post-Doctoral, Possibly Based on Alien Intelligence Because Analyst Did Not Get It |
2 |
WATB |
2 |
Personal Anecdote That Made Analyst Cry Inside |
1 |
Defining the Bounds of Humor in an Ironically Humorless Fashion |
1 |
Call Out for Being A Hypocritical Douchebag, With Evidentiary Links |
1 |
Apology for Being A Hypocritical Douchebag - Prompt |
1 |
Right Wing Shit My Dad Says |
1 |
Plea To Share Medication and/or Recreational Drug of Choice |
1 |
Inexplicably Irrelevant Commentary about Vampires |
1 |
Conspiracy Theory Regarding Obama’s Cybernetic Implants |
1 |
Tip Jar |
1 |
TOTAL |
173 |
Analysis: Well, what can one glean from the above, other than amazement at the audacity with which the analyst idled away an afternoon whilst on the clock? Let us count the ways:
1. The majority of comments were policy-based and reasonable or at least on topic, even if half of these were wrong.
2. There were many more comments about comments that fit in the pie-fight category than there were actual comments in the pie-fight category.
3. There are many more ways to derail a comment-thread than by pie-fighting. Some are coincidental, while others are intentional...and are always initiated by idiots or the self-loathing
4. For those comments that were off topic, a plurality were antagonistic, with the remainder falling into several ranges of entertaining or "other stupid."
5. Comments that tended to be antagonistic also tended to lack entertainment value, while those that were merely stupid tended to contain intrinsic entertainment value and were thereby redeemed.
6. Overt pie-fight bait tended to draw little actual response. This comment type crosses solidly into the "other stupid" category.
7. Contrariwise, discussion about previous pie-fight grievances tended to start new pie-fights. On the whole, these sections of comment string were the most sad and useless.
8. Formatting tables in HTML sucks and troubleshooting HTML issues is pointless.
9. No-one actually knows how many levels there are in Viva Pinata. But you can get Pinata Ponies at higher levels, which may prove immensely satisfying to some.
And so, it is with much humility that I acknowledge the extent to which I have been unwittingly and heartily duped. You see, it is participation in meta-conversations about prior pie-fights which is primarily responsible for most contemporary pie-fights. In fact, it is possible that further analysis will verify that there are no truly original pie-fights at all. Rather, these pie-fights likely all originate at a common Founding Fight somewhere in the Kosolithic past. My money is on a Dean/Clark primary diary. I may have even participated. I have a RLUID, after all.
I realize it is possible that this meta-analysis will activate a chain reaction, rendering dKos incapable of sustaining any type of comment-thread, other than comment threads about other comment threads. Alas, I will publish this diary anyway, because it is just that important that you read it and I am just that marvelous. I daresay epic. I apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause. It cannot be helped. Seriously.
I welcome your additional thoughts, especially if you chose to acknowledge how amazing this diary is. If, on the other hand, you have the temerity to critique this work, you are heartily encouraged to suck it.
Regards,
SK