An inconvenient question: Why do we need a Greatest page in the first place?

[CTyankee]

I dunno, it just seems to me that when I go on DU I scan the discussions where I have an interest. I want to run down the list and make the decision to participate or not in a discussion thread. I never go beyond a glance, if that, at the Greatest listing. I truly don't care who votes for what. My vote is whether I consider the discussion something I want to spend time on, respond to, learn from, or just avoid. That's it!

Am I missing something vital here on DU?

[BlooInBloo]

1. (shrug) I don't use it, but apparently a lot of people do. I don't begrudge them that.

[CTyankee]

2. Well, we've wasted lots of time we could have been spending thinking hard on

the burning political questions of the day instead of wrangling over a popularity contest. I guess I just don't get it...

[dorkulon]

30. Stop thinking about it. /nt

[roguevalley]

12. I work during the day when I have computer access the easiest

and it helps me see what the big questions of the day are and what might be breaking in the news. Its always been terribly convenient.

[BlooInBloo]

15. And that's as it should be. I recognize that different folks have different surfing flows than I do.

[enigmatic]

3. I don't think we do

I've said before if it were replaced w/ a Hottest Topics/Threads page that was based on the number of replies it would be fine w/ me.

[Hepburn]

5. I like your idea a great deal. n/t

[Horse with no Name]

4. I think it was initially designed for busy DU'ers who just had time to pop in

and read the most important stuff of the day without a lot of fluff.
However, the greatest page DID turn into fluff pages. I never look at it because I love swimming through the muck and mire.

[checks-n-balances]

19. Normally I'm one of those who doesn't have time to sift through

the Latest threads (a mix of different categories). I like think when I choose threads off the Greatest page, I'm sort of reading a "best of the day" page. It may not always consist of that and there may be some fluff there, but if the alternative is spending hours looking through the Latest, then the Greatest serves a good purpose.

[masuki bance]

6. Why? It's a way for people to get validation, approval

and a strong feeling of self-importance. Without the GP, many people would suffer great harm to their self image.

That's why I believe all posts should be on the greatest page. Who has the right to judge whether something is not great?

[Oeditpus Rex]

13. ...

:thumbsup:

[Myrina]

18. Best post of the day!

:applause: :applause:

[CTyankee]

34. Well, I was going to say that, but...nt

[Crabby Appleton]

44. Exactly - nt

[BlueJazz]

7. In order to make the lousy posters (such as myself) feel Inferior.

:) :)

[LWolf]

8. That's a good question.

In the best of worlds, the greatest would be a place to highlight the most important discussions of substantive issues.

That's not really the case, and the new "unrec" filter works to make sure that some important topics stay OFF the greatest.

Meanwhile, there are still less substantive things appearing there. For example,

"To All Lurking Freepers - thank you!" has 108 votes.

What I have used the greatest page for is this:

I don't often have time to hang out and filter through several pages of discussions in several forums to find topics of substance that interest me. When time is short, I look on the greatest for what SHOULD be the most substantive.

Not all the most substantive make it there, but I can always find some. I still can with the new "unrec" feature; the topics will just be more narrow. I'm not likely to find, for example, much that dissents from the mainstream party line.

I can do without the "greatest." :shrug:

[HamdenRice]

9. Randi Rhodes, KO, and Rachel

Back in the good old days, there was a cool dynamic between Air America and KO and DU.

Stuff that got on the GP was sometimes mentioned by Randi, KO or Rachel or other AA hosts. It was obvious that they were reading.

The GP quickly and efficiently selected the best stuff for them.

Those days are long over. The constant Obama bashing and Democrat bashing -- bashing with stuff that made no sense, like predictions about how Obama was a failure or what he wouldn't do, Trotskyite rubbish, all completely dominating the entire GP -- made DU an embarrassment and useless for the actual progressive media cycle.

Maybe it will return.

[defendandprotect]

17. This is nonsense . .. as though DU leads -- in fact, major criticism is coming from those hosts . .

major criticism of both Obama and Dems --

Obviously, you're also tuning that out.

But, NO . . . DU doesn't lead opinion, it is reporting it --

and progressives/liberals are not satisfied with Dems or Obama --

It is the DLC and the center-right Dem who wants the ability to block info.

Especially criticism of Dems and Obama.

[HamdenRice]

22. Who said DU leads?

Oh, this guy





I said that it was obvious that they were finding good stuff here, mentioning it on the air.

Not every day. Not leading the news.

It was also obvious that they weren't poring through all the forums but looking for the occasional juicy tidbit from the GP.

[defendandprotect]

26. Here's what you said: "Obama/Dem bashing was making DU an embarrassment" . . .

Those days are long over.

The constant Obama bashing and Democrat bashing -- bashing with stuff that made no sense, like predictions about how Obama was a failure or what he wouldn't do, Trotskyite rubbish, all completely dominating the entire GP -- made DU an embarrassment and useless for the actual progressive media cycle.

AGAIN . . . criticism of Obama/Dems doesn't begin at DU -- it is worldwide -- and it is coming

from every liberal host and every liberal blogger.

It is only the DLC and right-wing center of DU which needs to block that reality.


AND, of course, it makes very clear why this new hatchet tool is so prized by the center-right here.

[HamdenRice]

29. I don't think "bashing" is coming from "every liberal blogger"

I think thoughtful criticism is. The examples I gave -- the kind of thing that made the GP useless -- was irrational bashing. For examples, no one is interested in what some anonymous poster is absolutely sure Obama will do three years from now. No one can predict the future. That's what filled the GP and is now thankfully gone.

[defendandprotect]

31. Unfortunately, it is -- and justifiably so . . . and it is "thoughtful criticism" . . .

same as is often expressed here at DU but termed "bashing" --

I have no awareness of threads that have been "predicting" what Obama is going to do . . .
unless it was a comment based on an actual article reporting what he had just done . . .

Unfortunately, when we have Obama eloping with the poisonous DLC, it is easy to see what
the likelihood of positons might be. That's not "guessing" --

The DLC/corporate-wing exists to move the Dem Party to the right . . . that's no secret.

[bvar22]

48. Nailed It.

:patriot:
I find it very revealing that the conservative element at DU is that open about their agenda of Controlling the Message. The poster above freely admits it.
They were successful too.

[KharmaTrain]

46. "The Good Old Days"???

From my knowledge, KO was using DKos (where he has a membership) for leads...as did many others.

No knock on DU...I love this place, but it isn't the go-to resource other sites like DKos, Americablog, C & L, TPM and Buzzflash.

DU is great for following up on stories...or getting a heads up, but the real "meat" is on other sites.

I rarely use the "Greatest" other than a quick way to jump to other forums. A quick scan on the posts in each forum takes a few seconds...recommendations mean little to me...responses do (good and bad)...that's where the "discussion" in a discussion board is taking place.

IMO, the best posts on here aren't those who originate them, but in the comments.

[K8-EEE]

10. Because some of us like it?? Those who don't can not view it.

OMG all the drama on rec & unrec!!

[el_bryanto]

11. I don't know - i never pay attention to it either

Once in a blue moon i'll see something exciting, but just as likely I'll come directly here.

Bryant

[defendandprotect]

14. One reason, I think, is because info moves so rapidly here . . .

I think it's just a way to "pin" threads to hold them for others who might be interested.
And, it's the easiest way to find out if a story you just read about has made it to DU
and what others might be saying.

Agree that "Greatest" is a misnomer.

[truedelphi]

16. You live in CT. Therefore, on account of timing,

When you get aboard DU on a normal day, few have posted before you. SO you catch what is going on for most of the day.

By living on the West Coast, by the time I log on at my 11Am Or later coffee break, A lot of topics have been posted.

So to catch up with what has been posted between 6 Am and 2Pm on the East Coast, I can rely on the Greatest Page feature. Or at least I used to be able to rely on it.

I have the suspician for those on the West Coast it was a more important feature than for those on the East Coast.

[CTyankee]

33. OK, I can see that. Also, I have a lot more time as I am retired now.

But even when I was working full time, I never noticed the Greatest (or whatever it was called then) posting. But I take your point about the time difference and how posts could just pile up and you'd want to have a way to skim more quickly.

[truedelphi]

35. Believe me, I really appreciated it.

I look at the icon called "Latest" starting around 11Am PST. And if something catches my fancy, take the time to Rec or to comment.

But to have to scroll back three or even four pages of posts, to see what has transpired since
6 Am on the East Coast, that would take up too much time.

[cascadiance]

20. With the unrec feature, it might be nice to have a page to measure *number* of counts...

Not just the overall "rating", which might be missing from the greatest page or rather small but still on the greatest page when adding the two numbers together.

One would like to think that articles with a high overall rating are those that most people might agree we should be looking at. However those that tend to arouse controversy but still might be worth looking at for many (and not buried where they are hard to find) might be better served to find them on a page with a high overall rec count (whether the recs are recommends or unrecommends). Now you might get some garbage that is highly controversial too, but I think some might be willing to sift through those that aren't really deserving of attention to be able to find those controversial discussions that they might view are worthy of looking at.

So perhaps not just a "Greatest Page", but something like "Highly Examined" (or some other better description for highly recommended/unrecommended) page.

[Blue_In_AK]

21. I open to the Latest page

and don't even glance at Greatest.

[Froward69]

23. As I read more than just DU

I like the greatest page to skim and read without getting bogged down in misstatements and or just rumor.
Thus the greatest page offers me the opportunity to see what others deem important. saving loads of time.

Just the facts ma'am.

[Orsino]

24. Seems to me it's a nice way to invite passers-by to stop in.

My first stop is always the (old) lobby, so I rarely see what's Greatest. My wife, though, usually starts on the Greatest page before delving further.

I guess it has different utility for different viewers.

[intheflow]

25. The GP is my forum of choice.

Almost every forum is littered with piles and piles of stupid, sarcastic, insider joke, and one-liner posts. It's a pain in the ass to wade through it all, especially if one is interested in more than just GD: P or GLBT. The function of the GP to me, then, is it allows for the best reasoned and well-written pieces from all the public forums to be collected in one place. Do I miss some really kick-ass stuff that doesn't make it onto the GP? I'm sure I do. But I'll be the kick-ass stuff I'm missing is small compared to the mounds of bullshit I'd have to read through otherwise.

Edited for typos.

[inna]

27. many people use ONLY or primarily the GP and rarely or never go to individual forums.

individual forums are full of "static".

before the onset of the UNREC feature, the GP was the place where EVERY interesting thread (controversial or mainstream) was pretty much guaranteed to end up.


now, it is virtually guaranteed that controversial, non-mainstream threads or anything critical of Obama or Democratic party will never show up on the GP.


which makes it pretty useless, at least in terms of no longer reflecting the nature of this forum (i.e., the GP now is the Democratic Groupthink, not the Democratic UNDERGROUND).

[truedelphi]

43. I have started to use the "Latest"

Icon, which lists any and all material posted.

It is a bummer, as it means I have to scroll through six pages of article headers before even getting to stuff posted at 9Am on the East Coast.

But hey, who am I to argue with the Admins need to conform to DLC?

[rudy23]

50. Amen. nt

[jeff47]

28. Those of us with less time to spend on DU kinda like having it. (nt)

[timeforpeace]

32. Like people without teeth, who can't chew for themselves. Some people need thoughts and ideas sorted

out by others before they can wrap their minds around them.

[intheflow]

36. That is a unfair generalization.

Some of us just don't like or have the time to click through every OP, especially since at least 50% of all posts in any given forum are throw-aways or lame posts complaining about petty stuff. Meanwhile, I would probably never open a GD post entitled "An Offended Mother on the Topic of Blowjobs" unless it made the Greatest, but now that it's on the top of that forum I'm very glad my fellow DUers recommended I read it.

[flvegan]

37. DU moves too quickly.

It's really easy to miss a great topic and thread that was started 12 hours ago, but has fallen to Page 3. If one peruses the Greatest, it's easier to track the topics that folks are talking about of relative importance. Yeah, there's always going to be some flotsam, but overall for folks that don't spend all their time logged it, it can be quite beneficial.

[TexasObserver]

38. Your logic is faulty. It's not FOR you. It's designed for others.

Read Skinner's comments on this topic, and you'll know why the changes were made, what they did to the Greatest Page, and why Skinner likes those changes.

We need a Greatest Page because it's a place new visitors to the site can come to scope out the site's message board topics. It's a place where some regulars can come to start their day here. It's useful to those who need or use it. You are not among those people, so it doesn't matter to you directly. However, it does affect you. The site needs hits, page views and unique visitors. The more it gets, the more ad revenues it gets, and that pays for the site. A quality Greatest Page increases the chances of those good things happening.

[CTyankee]

39. Then maybe it should be a "greatest hits" page,meaning the highest number

of people responding...or just a "highlights" page where a random number of posts to a thread that has gotten a lot of responses is featured.

"Greatest" seems to suggest a contest where "best" (based on I don't know what) gets nominated...when it is no such thing really....

[TexasObserver]

40. Then maybe you should stop thinking your opinion matters more than it does.

Start your own board, and you can call the page whatever you want. Your quibbling is a waste of your time and mine.

[CTyankee]

42. I'm so sorry you find my post offensive.

I have this bad tendency to question lots of things...

[TexasObserver]

45. Sorry. I'll give myself a Flagrant One foul on that.

I was painting with too broad a brush.

Skinner created the Greatest Page (I assume) for marketing purposes. People take a look at the site, and decide which stories they want to look at. I suspect that Skinner thinks about that the way I do. I don't want to have threads shown there which have profanity in the title line. I don't want to see words that contain the letters "tard" in them. I don't want to see threads that are nothing more than someone calling out to a friend at DU they haven't seen in a while. I don't want to see threads about Freeper this, or Limbaugh that, or some idiotic personal rant, or some story about something cute someone's kid said.

The threads that get a healthy number of +Recommends NOW tend to be threads worth having on the Greatest Page. By exercising the Unrecommend feature, the DU population has done something I suspect Skinner has long wanted: the population weeding out the craptastic threads that were cluttering the Greatest Page and making it look at the work of angry semi-literate ranters.

[CTyankee]

47. The explanation you gave is great. The thing is: I still don't care.

I get your point about how much nicer it is to have better posts about things. I really do. But I don't care because I never consult the Greatest Page before I start to look around. I go through GD, GDP and Latest. Then I go to Editorial. I am so immersed in things I think I need to look at I never even think about Greatest.

So I am a loss here for your side :-(

But, carry on TO, and cheers to you! I in Connecticut salute you for your efforts. I am not being snarky. You are doing good work in this "vineyard."

[TexasObserver]

53. Everyone does it their own way.

My point is that the reason the Greatest Page matters is because the site owner wants it here, and wants it to serve the needs for the site he envisions. It is intended to showcase the site's best threads, in terms of content.

We all enjoy threads that are about absolutely nothing except argumentative people arguing incessantly, but who needs that crap on the Greatest Page?

[McCamy Taylor]

41. So we can all jump on the bandwagon, of course. Political consensus.

Remember, fashion is about being the first person to dress like everyone else.



I might get a die and roll it to decide whether I will rate up or down threads I read. I think that would be the Thomas Pynchon way to do it.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

49. We Need It Because The World Is Larger Than Your Interest Alone.

[applegrove]

51. I'll scan topics and skip the ones that are answered and try and find

the ones that are still open for opinion. I find the greatest page helps because as I quickly scan OPs, I often can miss something. When I get to the Greatest Page I take my time and open any OP that looks like it might be interesting to me.

[Rex]

52. Why have any feature? A lot of people wanted it.

[Senator]

54. In Defense Of The (formerly) "Greatest Page" (on the entire internet)

(yes, really)

Let me say at the start that while I might say things that could certainly be called complaints or problems regarding DU, I'm not of the opinion that any are necessarily caused, or more importantly possible to remedy, by the admins. I suspect "the ways DU has changed" is down to the changing nature of community members as a whole.

That said, let me reiterate that the GP was once the greatest page on the entire internet. Over the (gosh, that many?) years I've been here I have recommended it to countless people as the place to start with intenet politics/news.

I can confirm (fwiw) HamdenRice's comment (#9) about a "cool dynamic between Air America and KO and DU" and expand upon it to include many politicos whose names you know that found the DU GP to be an invaluable resource. But I would object to the suggestion that its main value was in feeding anyone's "media cycle." It was far more important than that.

And I would also object to KharmaTrain's (#46) suggestion that DU was not "the go-to resource other sites like DKos, Americablog, C & L, TPM and Buzzflash" and suggest that DU was simply not as visibly so, as in being linked to and/or mentioned. But I would certainly agree with the "IMO, the best posts on here aren't those who originate them, but in the comments" and add that there's a good reason for that.

The reason the DU GP could be "more important" while being "less visible" than pure blogs is that the GP was the only "bottom up" news filter that reflected the concerns of mainly rank-and-file outsider dems. The "underground" moniker drew in a community with those sensibilities. That was "the franchise" and it produced a "GP Product" that provided quick access to "what topics were resonating" with that invaluable "focus group," along with a shorthand display of "the pulse" (level of agreement, arguemnts pro/con, strategic ideas, talking points, etc...) of the issue.

So what happened? Things changed. Raw numbers made the focus group itself less representative because political junkies (like you and me) are not typical of rank-and-file dems. Even before the tsunami of Hillabamania, the franchise was being diluted. IMO GD-P outlasting the election cycle it was created for has done more harm than good. But really it's the success of both DU and our party has had the impact here.

So much for pathos.

Is the GP worthless now? I agree with those posting above (intheflow, inna) that there is still value there. And I'm just confused by those who opt not to simply tolerate it when they choose not to use it anyway -- though not suprised given the change in the overall level of tolerance.

As far as improvements or alternatives, I'd be interested to see a "combined votes" page as cascadiance recommended. I'm less optimitic about a "Hottest" (most posts) page as I've seen that criteria used elsewhere and it didn't impress.

On the unreccing issue, while I've been dubious about the wisdom of trying to "unite" the community by creating a new battle zone, I'm not ready to side with those who think that paid DLC staffers have manipulated DU into imminent oblivion. At least not yet.

So, no solution from me. Just defense. And the defense rests.

And while I don't think this is really attributable to Eleanor Roosevelt I offer it FWIW:

Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.

====