The other week, I wrote a diary called Please Stop Driving the Lamborghini to the Corner Store, the gist of which was imploring Kossacks to be more circumspect when it comes to recommending diaries. I pointed out how the DKos Recommended list has a limited number of slots, and so is not at all like an email inbox, which can receive almost unlimited communiques.
Because of that limitation, reccing a diary is something very, very different from sharing something on Facebook or forwarding a funny email. Of course, I've been saying these things for years and have even taken them so far as to suggest a change to site functionality. In light of the events of this past weekend, it seems like a good time to revisit this theme and the suggested functionality change. I hope you will follow me below the squiggeldy-doo for the metaexploration, but if you haven't the time, here's the takeaway: we need a new name for the comment recommend function, and we, as a community, need to be less personality-oriented.
The idea being revisited today is that we need a clearer distinction between recommending a diary and recommending (or tipping) a comment, for all of these reasons:
By recommending a diary, you are not simply saying, "I liked this" or "This was cool" or "Totally worth reading!" Per the FAQ, to recommend a diary means you think others should read it -- not that others "would enjoy" it or "will appreciate" it or even "would find it interesting."
To recommend a diary means that it is newsworthy/important/timely/significant, etc. enough that others should it, and therefore warrants or requires broad exposure.
Be honest with yourself: it simply is not the case, nor is it even possible, that every single diary you read and enjoy merits that kind of attention. No matter how delightful/moving/intriguing some comic relief/personal anecdote/confessional diary may be, it doesn't have to be on the rec list just because it's "awesome." In fact, I would never in a million years recommend some of the diaries I have enjoyed the most here. To wit: nothing but nothing is more fun than a good and active troll diary. They collect the best comments; I've laughed so hard I couldn't breathe. But tickling the fancy is not a reason, in itself, to rec a diary.
To recommend a diary is basically an editorial decision on what will be presented to others to read.
Making the rec list is a numbers game: diaries with the most recs end up there. Recommending a diary is, in essence, making choices for others. You are deciding that a given diary should occupy one of the twelve spots on the Rec List, i.e., which diaries warrant that kind of exposure.
By recommending a diary, you are not just expressing approval of said diary.
That is what tip jars and comment sections are for. Give tip jars and other comments recs. Better yet, leave comments yourself extolling the virtues of the diary's amusing charm, informative nature, etc. But simply being a good read does not mean a diary should be read by others.
Which brings us to my suggested change to site functionality: the comment buttons should be "Mojo" and "Hide," instead of "Recommend" and "Hide." I think giving the two functions different names would help things tremendously. Bestowing comment Mojo is a way to say you enjoyed and appreciate this diary, whereas recommending a diary would be reserved for pieces that
should be read more widely. Please vote in the poll below.
Now we move into the real meta, which, imHo, was deeply informed by the happenings of this weekend. This site is about electing more and better dems, winning majorities so we can enact good policy. Personal narratives, no matter how compelling, do almost nothing to further that goal.
This is not to denigrate the importance of community; I get that it's completely important. But the choice is not as binary as political versus community. We absolutely need both, but it's a question of balance and what we choose to exalt, or feed. And here's the thing about that: personal narratives don't need to be on the rec list, i.e., a primary focus, in order to serve their purpose, comfort those hurting, or build community.
We have a wide variety of established diary series (J-Town, Cheers and Jeers, New Day, Pooties, various open threads, etc.) that are all about building community. Please ask yourself right now the last time you remember any of those established community diaries staying on the rec list as long as any one of the recent Nephew saga diaries. So this is clearly not action and elections being pitted against "community."
What I am talking about is contrasting diaries that feed this site's purpose with those that foster community and with those that are strictly personal. They are three different creatures entirely. For example, the GUS diaries represent strong community building and a supportive environment for Kossacks trying to quit smoking. The Nephew, on the other hand, was nothing but personal narratives and drama at every turn, and the community chose to feed it.
We could go 'round and 'round about who should have said/done what when and where and how maybe things would be different now if only, but when you cut right through all of that, it boils down to what we choose to feed here, what we decide, as a community, to exalt. In this case, the unfortunate decision to exalt a compelling personal narrative has wrought untold damage on this community. We still don't know the extent of it.
If one were to ask me, I say the whole sordid saga stands as testament to the idea that we would be best served by focusing on this site's stated purpose and not elevating personal dramas to center stage. If we had simply supported The Nephew and been comforting without propelling him to the rec list like clockwork, this would probably have all been avoided. People seeking attention tend to lose interest when they don't get it.
It's kind of the converse of if you build it, they will come. If you don't feed it, it goes away. So let's feed the aspects of this blog that build community and that strengthen our activism!