A Question for Those Lurking--What Do You Think About the Content Quality of the Discussions?
I have learned a few decent insults on here, that’s bout it.
Yes, in terms of insults this site has been pretty resourceful. I assume the lurkers would agree, though we may never get to know what they really think.
And now Jazz enters the postmodernist stage of his thread-starting.
@ Apursansar
:)
LOL @ jerry
Never offer lurkers input!:
I am concerned that I would lose my ‘lurker’ status by posting here. Is this some kind of trick? Surely if I am posting and in discussion then I risk losing my ‘lurker’ status. Can a ‘lurker’ also be a ‘poster’ at the same time? Does a ‘poster’ who is too tired (or at least too drunk) to join in the discussion change status to become a lurk? At what point does this happen? What happens if you shirk the lurk? Is a one person post a ghost? How to cook a pork roast?
Anyhow I have decided to stay a hardened lurker. I refuse to take the bait. Nope – not going to get me to contribute.
No sir.
active barking vs passive lurking, i’ll take the second one anyday :)
I think the intention of this thread is to get more people involved in the forum. And the question Jazz is essentially posing is, “how do we get you guys involved?”
This is a fair question and one I have wondered myself.
Flagged as meta.
<Specifically, I’m interested in knowing about the content quality of the discussion. In other words, do you find the discussions insightful, informative or helpful in some way?>
Yes :)
@Santino
And the question Jazz is essentially posing is, “how do we get you guys involved?”
Well, I’m interested in this question, too, but, honestly, that’s not the main reason I started the thread—although I hoped to engage with people who generally only read threads.
The main reason for starting the thread was to try to understand what people get out of reading threads without participating. Specifically, I wanted to know what they felt about the quality of the content. I’ve participated in online forums for a long time now, and initially I was excited about the potential for substantive discourse. But after years of being on various sites, I am far less enthusiastic. The desire to make a clever put-down often seem to be the focus, more than having a rational and substantive discussion on the issues. But I wanted to hear what others thought—especially those that mostly just read threads. What do they get out reading the threads? Maybe they find the bickering compelling; maybe the discussions are thought provoking and sometimes enlightening; or maybe it’s all of the above or something I didn’t mention. I was genuinely curious in hearing what people thought about these things.
Wouldn’t the nature of lurking prohibit you from getting answers, though?
. . . unless someone is already contemplating crossing over to the dark side.
I think it would be hard for me to read threads but not comment. But that’s just because I’m an obnovious loud mouth who thinks everyone wants to hear my brilliant opinions on topics I don’t know anything about..
Wouldn’t the nature of lurking prohibit you from getting answers, though?
Right, but for a one time type of event, I didn’t think the desire not to participate would be so strong that it would prevent people from putting in their two cents. I thought it was worth a shot, anyway.
Do you really have to ask why there are so many lurkers on mubi? This is one of the most intimidating sites on the net! Participating here means constantly having to defend your opinion against vigourous and sometimes downright nasty attacks, and I think most people can’t be bothered with that kind of atmosphere. I don’t blame them. I don’t post very much here because it’s usually not worth the potential grief. Any anti-auteurs or pro-canon talk round here is jumped on from a great height. Who needs that?
@Santino
I think it would be hard for me to read threads but not comment. But that’s just because I’m an obnovious loud mouth who thinks everyone wants to hear my brilliant opinions on topics I don’t know anything about.
This is why we get along. :)
@Yakult
Do you really have to ask why there are so many lurkers on mubi?
That’s not what I’m asking, though.
This is one of the most intimidating sites on the net!
I disagree with this. I’ve been to a lot worse; and let me say that I think things have gotten a lot better here. That doesn’t mean things don’t get nasty occasionally, but the civility has improved, imo. In any event, I’m asking something different in this thread.
“But after years of being on various sites, I am far less enthusiastic.”
^Wow, I am afraid to imagine Jazz in his heydays if this is less enthusiasm.
“I think the intention of this thread is to get more people involved in the forum. And the question Jazz is essentially posing is, “how do we get you guys involved?””
^start responding to other people’s threads, that’s what you got to do.
lol @ Jazz
“I disagree with this. "
Yeah, I do too. I’ve been posting here . . . after a period of lurking . . . for about three years now and, though there is the occasional grudge match and the usual collection of trolls, on the whole, things are downright orderly around here, despite even some drift in the sites apparent target demographic, etc.
I agree it’s usually not as intimidating as a lot of other sites that are full of people ready for a fistfight. I meant this place is intellectually intimidating. It’s kind of like a really competitive high school debate society ;)
I don’t really feel that way from the inside . . . although you’re probably right that it seems that way to someone coming in from the outside.
Wow, I am afraid to imagine Jazz in his heydays if this is less enthusiasm. – LOL
this board is intimidating, but being one of the few women here is more likely an advantage than the opposite as i used to think. so where all my females at?
I’m actually a girl.
HAHAHA i long suspected that, DFFOO
I would like more discussion on individual films- i know it takes more effort and thought. Threads on neglected films don’t get so many answers though, whereas of course ones on famous Hollywood films do. The Directors Cup write-ups on individual films are a high point but even they get surprisingly few replies
Well, yes, I agree the forums would benefit from more film specific discussion, but a certain amount of continual rehashing of first principles seems inevitable on the interwebs. I think if you’re going to do a film on a specific lesser-known film you sort of have to be OK with the idea that it may disappear and not be seen again for quite some time, but eventually someone will find it. It’s like planting seeds (or maybe landmines in some cases).
“I would like more discussion on individual films- i know it takes more effort and thought. Threads on neglected films don’t get so many answers though, whereas of course ones on famous Hollywood films do.”
Yes, I tend to agree. A couple weeks ago, I started a couple threads on individual titles (Michael and Into the Abyss) then I started a thread on Ron Howard versus Paul Haggis. You can guess which thread got the comments.
But as Matt said, if the films are lesser known or (in this case) so new they haven’t been released wide, I have to acknowledge the possibility that these threads will die. But hopefully they will get rediscovered later on by people after they’ve seen the film.
Jazzaloha
Threads that draw a lot of people, people I’ve never “seen” before, always take me aback (like the game started by PolarisDiB). Are these people just “passing by” or is there a large group of people who just read threads, rather than participate?
In this thread, I’d like to hear from these people—especially the regular readers. Specifically, I’m interested in knowing about the content quality of the discussion. In other words, do you find the discussions insightful, informative or helpful in some way? And if not, what interests you about the discussion? Do you enjoy reading about people bickering and arguing? Or is it something else? What keeps you coming here to read the threads?