Monday, March 1, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Litfo Links
- An OK Corral of Thoughts
- Carrion Call
- Cat Oars
- Charles George Taylor
- Dark And Stormy Night
- Encoda
- Hey Gaboo
- Iva the Citizen Journalist
- Lust Lacker
- Meme In Motion
- Old Mack's Tales
- Onyx Supersonics
- Princess's Playground
- Rodger Jacobs
- The Great Wake
- Today's News Flash Fiction
- Toylit
- Train Whistle
- Trularin's Blog
- Warehouse For Idle Words
The tally's is in as of 12 pm today.
ReplyDeletebased on r value
1)Rytis "Wedding Elephants" +55 -1
2)Lust Lacker "Fishin" +47
3)_asyl_m "drawing apples"+33
Two that clicked:
ReplyDeleteArtists Like Me by corrida_de_toros
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/forums/?ID=152779705
_ asyl_m by DrawingApples
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/forums/?ID=152896672
I have to take issue with Angus's method.
ReplyDeleteI set aside whether points awarded is a valid measure of a post's worthiness for 'best of' recognition
His tally is based on adding every point from every part of a multi-post composition. This is most certainly an invalid measure. Do I need to explain why?
re: meme
ReplyDeleteCombine sum of green and red points in the entire thread. The total indicates overall level of knee jerk 'affect'. However, some of the best threads are still buried, pointless.
I don't know about the value of judging what should or shouldn't be promoted here. It takes two to tango after all: one to submit the comps and another to promote them. I think this process is self-regulating. The crits are fine--I think they help. At the same time, so are the promotions. The whole point is that we are not even a mote in Google's eye. If lots of people like a comp, those people will promote it. 4 sets of +5 in theory means 4 people promoting a piece. If they don't, well, then it goes to show that that the points were an easy way of showing appreciation.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, if you feel there are other posts worthy of merit, then nobody is stopping you from posting them either. I promised I wouldn't interfere w/ this page. You can promote anyone from litfo from here--even people I despise.
There are two types of code (in the broadest sense of the word): elegant code, like computer code--logical and axiom based with simplicity and effectiveness being the highest goals. The second sort of code is evolutionary. The law, DNA; these codes only add and don't subtract. Fripperies are ignored and useful traits are promoted. It's the same w/ memes. Good memes replicate. Bad memes don't. The 'elegant' code principle works in a small, controllable environment like CL, but fails in an uncontrollable environment, like the www. Therefore, it makes sense to use 'evolutionary' code: that is, add anything that someone else might possibly see as having merit; as opposed to only promoting the very finest writing. Even the most mediocre writers on CL are still at least as worthy of promotion as the mediocre writers in standard lit mags. I might judge the litfo by my maximum aesthetic, but in the world of readers--they make the decisions, not us.
Perhaps it could be called something more appropratie than best of. Any suggestions? I think it should be kept if under a more sutable title.
ReplyDeleteBecause:
The r+ system is already in place and provides a structure for rating a post. Also by adding totals and displaying a weekly total adds a layer and a dynamic for giving out ratings. I agree with you that there are some good posts that are not even on the radar. If there is something good and you believe it deserves merit then it will be up to the one who believes it deserves some level of merit to add point,reply to the post and or reply.
That is what will give more value to the rating.
A potential weakness will be poeple who abuse there rating points. It seems a more respectable crowd then that.
Nope. I'm not changing the name. If the best isn't that good, oh well. I am highly skeptical of points and always have been. If someone is prepared to allocate green points, but no effort to promoting the piece, then that shows how much such advocacy is worth.
ReplyDeleteAlso, Litfo's been chicken for too long. The impetus for posting there is to get noticed, but nobody gets noticed there in any meaningful way. Maybe deservedly. Can't say. I can say that they aren't plugged into the internet in a meaningful way and as a result of that, have no ability to gauge how popular or unpopular their writing really is. Maybe shedding light will get people to raise their own game. Maybe people on litfo will start hustling a bit as a result. Maybe they'll actually ditch their obsolete visions of being a great 'discovered' writer and realize that publishing houses are too chicken to take a risk on any writer who isn't 'process-tested.' Since the industry is failing and since the profit centers and margins are there, I must conjecture that the readers are there but the writers are not. The sooner litfo realizes that it can't hide from the internet in a little corner of craigslist, the better. Then they'll see that nobody is going to save them from ignominaty and that they'll have to hustle for themselves if they want to be read. And that's a good thing. That is this page's purpose--to provide a tool for people to do that.
I say any writing that can't incite someone to take an act on its behalf, isn't succeeding. If you can't persuade a reader to pay for the writing or at the very least spend a few minutes promoting it--then I say you've failed as a writer. Not because you didn't strong-arm an act out of them, but because the writing wasn't moving enough to incite action.
So in short: fuck rating points. All power to the reader. That's the whole reason I've taken this publishing route: the tastemakers have failed. Let the readers decide. Why cater to a publishing house when they cater to the reader? Cut out the middleman. 'Ought,' is irrelevant. There is only 'is,' and that's the reader.
-KW
Don't get this entirely. Wouldn't I need the author's permission to copy his work and put it here?
ReplyDeletePS: I have a new blog here, called En Coda.
Swann, but ah, the point is to only promote the work w/ a link--not to actually repost it. That would be 'swiping' their content and trying to pirate some traffic off it. The point here is to only provide a link/info clearinghouse of pages worthy of a reader's attention. Obviously, the best way to do that is to maintain one's own page.
ReplyDeleteabout the renaming:
ReplyDeleteI took that as how the stats were presented on the actual CL post, not the website.
swan,where can one find the link?