Why is this board dying?

I don't blast a newb unless they come on and immediately start scolding us about stuff. Then I blast proudly.

 

OK, so some Pulitzer winner won't post on the Journalism board because "so's your face" appears on the Anything Goes board hundreds of times? Doubtful. And there are dozens of people who contribute to this board thoughtfully. The number of fine journalists who don't post here because of what's posted is much smaller than the number who just don't have time or who haven't heard of us.

But to your true point: I guarantee no one chased Whitlock away.

 

And to piggyback on dools' astute comment, those Pulitzer winners who stop in and deliver five posts from the mountain and then leave because somebody gets in a pissing match with somebody else? Didn't need them in the first place.

 

This reminds me of a seminar by a PhD in Statistics speaking to a bunch of print and online editors. He had more degrees than I have socks.
He had example after example of published false conclusions of population and demographic statistics. It was pretty eye-opening. And pretty interesting.
He stated: "There's more crap in the sewers. Doesn't mean people are crapping more, it simply means more people crapping."

 

The journalism board can't stay on topic. As noxious as the pol board can be, it manages to do that very well. I don't know if that's good or bad.

 

Dooley, my post had nothing to do with whitlock or the Anything Goes board.

 

Sometimes certain topics on this board go 15-20 pages deep, which, I think, is just as good as 10 threads that die after 8-10 posts.

I still think the Erin Andrews/Mike Nadel thread is relevant, if only because, well, I never found out who told the truth. Lest a wrath, I won't keep asking the question on that thread.

This board will be OK.

 

As he so often does, Frank makes a good point.

We all, for the most part, are just doing the basics and busywork of daily, sweatshop journalism -- more impelled and compelled to do so than ever by the minimalist but 24-7, hit-from-all-sides nature of things right now.

In other words, nothing special, nothing much worth noting or discussing further, even if we had the time.

MacDaddy, I would wager that this board has been more active this year than a couple of years ago in large part just because of the incessant and continuing layoffs, and all the resulting same-sounding, grief-stricken threads and all the gathering posters.

But that doesn't mean the board is more active, with more ideas, more topics, and more open, interesting discussion.

It's a lot of people going through the same things, and all saying/feeling the same things, and consoling and commiserating together over them.

Now, there is value -- great, and probably, sanity- and spirit-saving value -- in that for many of us, including me. But it doesn't add up to a more active or more vital board -- no matter what the pure numbers of threads or posters might imply.

Hopefully, as Frank, suggested, this is just a period we're in, both as an industry, and in terms of our own morale and interest. And, hopefully, we'll get through it and come out the other side at some point soon.

But right now, fishwrapper has a point as far as what I think he means by this thread topic.

 

This is exactly right, and one of the few worthwhile posts I've read here in a while.

 

Navel-gazing.

 

I think the election has a lot to do with it. People only have so much time to frolic here every day, and I think a lot of us are spending it on the election right now. I never used to leave the "Journalism Board," but the political board has drawn me away ... for now.

 

On top of all that, I don't think there are very many honest-too-goodnesss journalists on here any more.