Note: I’d be excited to frontpage and curate a post similar-to-this. This particular post feels a bit too embedded in a live conflict for that to feel right to me.
I recognize that it’s pretty hard to write a post like this without examples and the best examples will often necessarily involve recent conflict / live-politics / be-a-bit-aiming-to-persuade. I’m sure shipping this out the door was already a sizeable chunk of effort. But I think there could be a hypothetically idealized split-into-two posts version, where one post simply outlined the model, and the other post applied it to recent events.
I had sent this in PM to Aella yesterday. For the benefit of Gwillen and others curious about frontpage standards, here are some thoughts:
I haven’t actually talked to other LW mods about the post yet so this is mostly my off-the-cuff guesses rather than dedicated LW-site-ruling. But some things about the post that made me hesitant to frontpage:
it seemed like there were at least 3 references to Leverage-specifically (or, pretty closeby. One link to Geoff Anders tweet, two Zoe quotes, which in context feels like it’s positioning this post to relate to the overall Leverage debate)
there was also the reference to Aubrey de Gray (not exactly a currently live conflict but neither is it long forgotten)
the end of the post stakes out a fairly explicit conflicty-frame (i.e, “this is war”), which makes the previous examples feel even more like ammunition in the conflict than they might have been.
The frontpage rules are a bit vague here, but the way I think about them is that frontpage posts should be more about giving people models, and posts that are aiming to engage in a political fight stay on personal blog (partly because they are drama magnets generally, but moreover because while often it’s important to have political fights, it’s better if the people who actually have context on those fights are the ones participating in them).
(note that all the previous Leverage-related threads haven’t been frontpaged)
I do think it’s possible to edit the post a bit to address those issues, but before asking you to go off and do that work I’d want to get some opinions from other mods [who have so far been busy].
I’m slightly confused, because (unless I’m missing one) only one of my examples given was in reference to the live conflict. Unless maybe you mean the generalized timing of the post as a whole, or the other examples given for other events/people unrelated to the community but still ongoing? I am probably not down to post another two separate posts, as writing this was a lot of effort, and I’d probably feel sad if someone else did it for me. Would it just make more sense for me to unlink or remove the one example?
Note: I’d be excited to frontpage and curate a post similar-to-this. This particular post feels a bit too embedded in a live conflict for that to feel right to me.
I recognize that it’s pretty hard to write a post like this without examples and the best examples will often necessarily involve recent conflict / live-politics / be-a-bit-aiming-to-persuade. I’m sure shipping this out the door was already a sizeable chunk of effort. But I think there could be a hypothetically idealized split-into-two posts version, where one post simply outlined the model, and the other post applied it to recent events.
I had sent this in PM to Aella yesterday. For the benefit of Gwillen and others curious about frontpage standards, here are some thoughts:
I haven’t actually talked to other LW mods about the post yet so this is mostly my off-the-cuff guesses rather than dedicated LW-site-ruling. But some things about the post that made me hesitant to frontpage:
it seemed like there were at least 3 references to Leverage-specifically (or, pretty closeby. One link to Geoff Anders tweet, two Zoe quotes, which in context feels like it’s positioning this post to relate to the overall Leverage debate)
there was also the reference to Aubrey de Gray (not exactly a currently live conflict but neither is it long forgotten)
the end of the post stakes out a fairly explicit conflicty-frame (i.e, “this is war”), which makes the previous examples feel even more like ammunition in the conflict than they might have been.
The frontpage rules are a bit vague here, but the way I think about them is that frontpage posts should be more about giving people models, and posts that are aiming to engage in a political fight stay on personal blog (partly because they are drama magnets generally, but moreover because while often it’s important to have political fights, it’s better if the people who actually have context on those fights are the ones participating in them).
(note that all the previous Leverage-related threads haven’t been frontpaged)
I do think it’s possible to edit the post a bit to address those issues, but before asking you to go off and do that work I’d want to get some opinions from other mods [who have so far been busy].
I feel like this is clearly frontpage material, so I would second Aella’s questions about what changes would make that make sense.
I’m slightly confused, because (unless I’m missing one) only one of my examples given was in reference to the live conflict. Unless maybe you mean the generalized timing of the post as a whole, or the other examples given for other events/people unrelated to the community but still ongoing? I am probably not down to post another two separate posts, as writing this was a lot of effort, and I’d probably feel sad if someone else did it for me. Would it just make more sense for me to unlink or remove the one example?