As promised, here is a response to the great suggestions that you contributed over the past few days. The post is long, but its all important, so I didn’t insert a “continue reading” tab. Thanks again for reading.
——————————-
We started this blog last year, just a bunch of 1L’s who were looking for a place to speak our views on anything and everything. For most of us, this has been a first foray into the blogosphere. Clearly, we enjoy giving our perspectives on life and the law, and we hope to continue to do so for a long while to come. When we first started the blog, life was simple. We didn’t have many readers, so in a sense, we were all blogging to each other. Sure, every now and then a post would generate more traffic than others, but for the most part, it was us, and it was good.
But we knew that someday the time would come when we would expand and would increase our visibility both on the Internet generally, and as an online community for GW Law. Over the past few weeks, you may have noticed the steps we’ve taken to start that expansion. Flashy posters, some with weird jokes that no one understands, have been put up on all the bulletin boards. Two new bloggers have joined our ranks, Gordon and KT, and we initiated our first ever blog poll. With somewhat regular consistency, we have posted a morning reading list of fun and interesting things going on around the world. The changes have made a difference, as already, this has been our highest traffic month ever. This growth has not come without its fair share of mistakes and errors however. Let’s chalk these up to growing pains.
Last week, a commenter took a hard line on a post that I wrote because he thought it was a shoddy job and that it did not provide any meaningful analysis. He was right. In my haste to keep the blog fresh with new posts, I learned one very important lesson about blogging: quality over quantity. Authors have been criticized for being too defensive when someone takes a contrary position to them in the comments thread, and rightfully so. Its not as easy to accept criticism and debate from readers whom you don’t know at all. As I described above, we are no longer blogging merely for a small circle of friends, but have a larger audience that we trying to reach. We, the authors, understand that now better than we did before.
There has also been criticism in recent weeks about editorial censorship, principally about deleted comments that the editor does not agree with. Let me reiterate what I said yesterday: we do not delete any posts merely because we don’t agree with the commenter. Here’s a great example: In a post on March 20, 2008, Ms. Westbrook discussed the big hullabaloo over Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama. We received a comment from someone unaffiliated with GW Law encouraging readers to visit his site to get the real truth about Rev. Wright. He then went on in a subsequent comment to refer snidely to Ms. Westbrook as “darling” and call her an anti-Semite because she disagreed with him. The comment stayed up, even though it bothered a great number of us because we felt as if one of our own had been unfairly attacked. The only comment that has ever been deleted, as far as I know, was one that was deleted earlier in the week by me. A commenter used an email address with a name that belonged to a contributor of this site, purporting to pass of his comment as someone else’s. That’s it.
On the issue of comments, it should also be said that we on the site have been the targets of a fair number of “attacks” ourselves. The point was made yesterday in the comments thread that last year, the 1L class was criticized for not being more active in school activities. Members of this site reacted strongly, perhaps too strongly (see discussion above – we are learning) and asked for some type of proof to support the commenter’s assertion. Rather than do that, the commenter criticized the authors for being too defensive. That’s not ok. If proof was offered to support the commenter’s assertion, and our authors still remained obstinate, then we would be guilty of being closed minded and too defensive. That wasn’t the case though. We really and truly want this site to be a great online community, principally for GW Law, but also for the world as well. We hope that, as the authors learn to live with criticisms and adapt to a great audience, so too can our commenters be civil and reasoned in their discourse.
Having said all of that, there are several changes that have been made to this site that I wanted everyone to be made aware of.
- We will no longer be “Sua Sponte: A Blog by GW Law Students” but instead “Sua Sponte: Just Some GW Law Students Getting Their Blog On” The reason for the change is that we do not speak for the entire student body, but instead are just a collection of students who enjoy blogging and this new title better reflects that. (If you have a better tag line suggestion, please share)
- A new comments policy will be initiated and posted under the “Policies” tab at the top of the page. Here is the gist: The editor always reserve the right to delete any comment that is deemed to be offensive, crude, or inappropriate. However, that is a right that we hope will have to never be used. Our goal is to promote reasoned discource, and as such, comments should reflect the “cocktail party” rule. If you wouldn’t say your comment aloud at a cocktail party, it probably shouldn’t be said here as well. That’s a very loose idea, but I think it conveys the gist of our policy going forward. If you ever feel that a comment has been removed unfairly, please contact the editor.
- A new policy for guest and anonymous posts will be initiated and posted under the “Policies” tab at the top of the page. We always encourage those who wish to write with us to do so, but we
also recognize that there are occasions where using one’s own voice in an online forum is uncomfortable. We welcome the contributions of those who want to blog and respect the wishes of those who must do so anonymously. If you feel that you must post something anonymously, you need to explain that to the editor, so that we can decide if the post will be published.
I think that the blog needs more stories like this:
One time, when I was in college, I went to this party where there were strippers. I think it was someone\’s birthday. Anyway, the party was kind of awkward because, you know, it was a party with strippers and somehow they had invited all of their friends (male and female) to come to this party. So the strippers are doing their thing, and someone finds out that one of the strippers has a special skill. They convince some kid (who looked like he probably wasn\’t going to get any without paying for it, if you know what I mean) to lie on his back in the middle of the floor. Then, they put a greenback on his face over his nose and mouth. The stripper was standing over him dancing and out of nowhere she drops it like its hot and \”snatched\” the bill right off his face! This was so incredible that the other people at the party must have spent $20 for her to pick up dollar bills with her lady business off this same kids face! If you think about it, though, it would actually be pretty nasty to have that happen to you 20 times. To do this day, I don\’t know how she did it. Was it like a crab pincher or did the bill just stick? Maybe sua sponte can do a series.
dear oneL,
wow that was so funny. that was the funniest thing i’ve ever read on this site. no, that was the funniest thing i’ve ever read anywhere. in fact, i can die happy now that i’ve read that story. i’m so glad you stuck to your guns and made hamilton publish your comment because now that i’ve read it i can’t imagine my life without it. if i worked for comedy central i would give you your own prime time show because you are just that funny. if i were graduating i’d want you to speak to my class because funny stories like this can’t help but inspire others. if i were on the nobel peace prize committee i would nominate you because everyone knows nothing brings peace like laughter.
love,
your biggest fan.
I will truly never understand the addiction some people have to negative attention. Some of us take Sua Sponte seriously and are very grateful to have this community, this dialogue, and some of us spend our nights alone…or with strippers. (Same thing philosophically, no?)
Ms. W –
So women who are strippers are not people to you? Of all people on this blog to devalue the choices of certain women…
Just teasin’ 😛
I think that the changes will make an already great blog, even greater!
Keep up the good work, guys. I am looking forward to participating in some interesting bloggersations.