Within the subject matter of this forum – broad-ranging social and political debate - how important is it? How significant are the articles that it publishes or the views and debate entertained here?


I’m constantly trying to weigh up the significance of OLO, both in my life and in the shaping of our collective future in Australia. It is certainly a large part of my life, but I don’t know if it is time well spent or whether I’ll come to regret spending so many hours a week on it over a period of who knows how many years.

Is it really very insignificant as Samsung suggests? http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1954#41826

OLO does appear quite prominently in google searches, which is surely a good sign. It has a good range of highly qualified article-writers and there are plenty of knowledgeable posters, among a wide range of contributors.

But still, what is it really worth?

Personally I find OLO a better type of forum than others I have used. I found the one on Yahoo attracted too many trolls. Most users of this forum post sensible comments and not the rubbish I've seen on other forums. I also like www.news.com.au for the opinions, however these will be checked before being included and it can take up to 3 hours for a comment to be included. (There is an amusing character named Kevin of Double Bay on this site. His comments are quite funny. I would like to see him start some threads on OLO for comic relief).
I think it's important to understand the diverse range of opinions people have on a variety of topics. It's good to listen to other peoples' ideas even if we don't agree with them. It's a good way of understanding the complexities of the society we live in.

hahaha.

Kevin of Double Bay is a classic.

But wouldn't he be considered a troll. Man he winds some people up.

Steel Mann It's a good way of understanding the complexities of the society we live in."

or become more bewildered by it!

Ludwig, alot of the stuff I do is in isolation to the values I might hold. I find it worthwhile, like SM said "It's good to listen to other peoples' ideas even if we don't agree with them."

Further, I find making myself articulate on a subject here helps me focus on it and question why I hold certain values, more so than if I did not post.

OLO is an invaluable forum to glean practical understanding of a subject - the facts and information and the opportunity for ongoing debate to obtain knowledge. Many contributors to OLO are gifted at imparting that knowledge to others.

However, the usually high standard of OLO is diminished when one reads of posters attacking a certain section of this forum. I am disappointed in Samsung and RStuart, who seemingly place themselves above others where, in another thread, they have seen fit to attack posters they regard as intellectually inferior:

"And like all "opinion" sites, it attracts the usual collection of freaks, nut cases, extremists, wheelbarrow pushers and others who simply have too much time on their hands and who live their lives through internet chat/opinion rooms."

And:

"The biggest offenders seem to (sic) the animal rights people, and if anything leaving carcasses around seemed to whip them up into even a bigger frenzy. (While there is an element of truth to this I couldn't resist the pun - sorry.)"

Very funny. May I remind RStuart that the discerning heart seeks wisdom but the mouth of the fool feeds on folly for I have silently witnessed many more "carcasses" on Islamic and/or religious threads where the "frenzied" abuse is constantly and flagrantly directed at Christians who participate on OLO.

Despite the abuse, we have many bravehearts on OLO who remain impervious to the few bullies who like to pick on "inferior" mortals or attack those who wish only to defend the defenceless.

On-line Opinion, I believe, can be quite addictive.

And fortunately, with the variety of topics on OLO, Samsung and RStuart need not condescend to engage with "animal rights' people, freaks, nut cases, extremists and........ wheelbarrow pushers?"

"Wheelbarrow pushers??"

That's odd? I'll swear I've seen them pushing one.

Dickie baby, you have 'conveniently' neglected to also quote this in your post,

"Opinions drive freedom. Everybody should be allowed to express an opinion, whether or not that opinion is right or wrong, crazy or sane, approved of or not approved of and anybody should have the right to express an opinion on any opinion."

Which was written by me on the same topic, beneath the post you 'chose' to quote.

For you, I, or anyone else, being upset or disapproving of any opinion is the price of FREEDOM. You'll always find opinions you don't like on an opinion forum. You're more than welcome to write your opinions on those other peoples' opinions. That's FREEDOM in action.

Ludwig, Graham published the results of some research a while ago regarding OLO usage. One thing that stuck out was that the readership was a lot larger than the number of those who post on the site.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3901

That may answer some of your questions.

Col, thanks for your post, you summed it up for me particularly regarding the impact on my own views.

R0bert

Dear Ludwig,

Of course OLO is addictive.

Look at me - prime example.

It's such a big part of my life.

Yes, I do have a life outside of OLO,
although some wouldn't believe it.

To me, OLO is where I go for different points
of view. OLO makes me think - re-evaluate my
opinions, learn, grow, laugh, get mad (when
the right buttons are pushed),discuss,
and in general
have fun.

And it is fun. I love the inter-action.
And the vast variety of opinions.
What makes it special - are the people.
I've not encountered anyone really
mean-spirited or nasty.

Sure there have been some emotive moments -
but they pass - and we all move on.
It's actually the emotive moments that
are the biggest challenges - and the ones
that cause the most soul-searching.

I often lie in bed at night - going over
different aspects of a discussion in my
mind.

And that can't be said about too many Forums.
OLO to me at least is very significant and
relevant.

It has wisedom and a heart -
Thanks to the people that are so
much a vital part of it.

OLO makes us think,improves our verbosity and sentence structure.Aside form this,we get to read ideas/opinions that aren't even entertained in the mainstream media.OLO in China for example, would spend it's time in a gulag being re-educated.

It is the freedom of thought which made the West so great in the past,let's hope that the Chinese/Indians and Russians are not slow learners.

Deceitful people like Melinda Tankard Reist use the articles section to spread their extreme messages under a pretense of moderation, by concealing their allegiances (for example, MTR conceals her membership of Right-to-life organisations and extreme Catholic sympathies, while pretending to be only a feminist). The most active there seem to be matched in in real life - those who seek the greatest government power over us and want to increase and expand it's control of us.

I've spent a deal of time recently on the forum, but I don't see my presence continuing with this intensity, as in some ways it's true that it is pointless. People who regard freedom and liberty highly have better things to do quite frankly. Those who hate the most, who desire the most power, will never rest (these are the religious-both islam and christians are united here, the sexist feminists who pretend to be reasonable while in fact being extremely authoritarian, and those who want to socially engineer us) who both incidentally receive a lot of funding and government grants for all this activism and propaganda. Normal people can't compete with such machines and don't care to. It shouldn't be expected of them either.

Foxy, I've always enjoyed reading your comments because your warmth, honesty and friendly disposition really shine here.

I come to OLO for a variety of reasons. One of my main motivators was to work on critical reasoning and spotting fallacies.

It's easy to see those who aren't actually interested in engaging, and are only here to push their own agendas.
Granted, we all do that to an extent, but it's those who are simply broken records that bother me. I don't mind people with opposing views, it's those who make the same statements over and over, and when pressed, just revert back to the same lines while refusing to deal with complexities or challenging material.

I guess I'm of the view that the most harmful beliefs are those that are extreme, or fundamentalist.
I'm also of the view that these can only be maintained by refusing to cede the slightest bit of ground to other points of view, as sensible people do invariably accept that there are other ways of viewing the issue and these other ways may have merit.

Which in turn lead me to be interested in how people maintain these hostile attitudes in the face of other opinions.
It's rare when you can actually pinpoint a precise point where someone with an extreme point of view actually has to reset their logic and simply ignore the contrary evidence, but it happens. HRS was a fine case in point, when he was simultaneously stating that a) anyone who considers themselves a feminist is a feminist, b) people who just believe in equal rights for both genders could call themselves feminists, or people who argue against violence against women c) all feminists are evil and d) this isn't misogyny.

It was a rare occasion, as most of the time this 'reset' point of logic can only be reached in debates about religion. Nevertheless, it was something he couldn't counter, as he has extreme views of feminism (I'm not saying aspects can't be criticised, but surely the other posters can see these assertions can't be held simultaneously).

Cont'd.

I'm aware that those who disagree with me can try and make this same argument against me, but the fact is I'm always willing to try and back up what I say, and if I did encounter a 'reset' point I'd analyse why and have the courage to re-evaluate my position.
Funnily enough, I think my debates on OLO have made me a little less left-wing and brought me closer to the centre, though I suppose considering onesself a centrist is a common conceit - my moniker was chosen as a way of saying I think the fringe of either political spectra is folly.

So why do I do this? Well, obviously I find it interesting, which comes back to the reason why most people here do it. But I also find it improves my own reasoning skills, plus I genuinely believe that if we can find ways to make the most extreme among us re-evaluate their positions, well, that's something worth discovering, even if it is, by-and-large, an impossible pursuit.

Ludwink.....

how important is OLO ?

hmm interesting question.

I'd say that until it has the possibility of video, it will remain a bit of an ideological backwater.

Consider this. On Youtube (and its clones) you can make a video that portrays your ideas in visual as well as print media. You can add in many effects which add to the impact of the message.

Here is an example of a young girl who used a video to address some racism.. it has had 340,000+ views.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivkw27k9J0c&feature=user

Just do the math and consider how many 'views' or 'reads' your (or my) posts get from here?

Ludwig

My intentions are to enhance, refine thinking both mine and that of others not intentionally to push a personal Wheelbarrow or convert anyone. It is enough to raise expanded perspectives ( nothing is as simple as many would think have us believe) or unknown/ignored facts.

I do little patience for hidden agendas, extreme bias and or personal attacks/ridicule. As there are better means of expressing an opinion.

OLO IS important! Simply put that while conversations remain dialectic (as opposed to didactic) on this or other sites then I am confident to say that there IS hope for Humanity.(AS IMPORTANT AS THAT)

Usual Suspect,

Kevin of Double Bay is a troll, but he is a very good one and very funny. I think that's why news.com.au publish his comments. I think he has a few other characters too like Charles Godworth of Vaucluse, and he has also attracted some copycats. (But none of those are as good as Kevin).

On this site Gibo gives me a good laugh. Unlike Kevin of Double Bay, Gibo is serious about what he has to say. He's gone quiet lately. I think he's having a good sulk at having his posts deleted where he was attacking me.

Like many, I'm addicted to this site. Things are quiet at work at the moment so I have more time on my hands. When business picks up, I won't be seen too often here.

I first started looking at OLO when a family member was reading and writing for it (using a nom-de-plume). I was quite impressed with the general standard of articles and the majority of posts.

Now three or four years on I decided to have a go myself. My eyes may be deceiving me, but I reckon the standard has dropped noticeably. Only one or two articles each day are worth reading, and many are abysmally weak. Sometimes I wonder whether the editor is a tutor in an undergraduate course and is using her student's essays as an easy way to plump up the volume. Quite frankly, some OLO articles wouldn't get a run anywhere else.

It's in OLO's interests to go for volume rather than quality. Remember it makes money from selling advertising.

I'll still keep looking at OLO every morning but it's going to be more and more important to be discerning about what to buy into. There are better things to do with my life.

R0bert, yes I remember that article by Graham.

It is interesting that there seem to be many more readers than contributors. I find that hard to imagine, as I just couldn’t be a regular reader of something like OLO without being contributor.

However, I have a friend who has been an avid (obsessive?) reader of OLO for years but refuses to contribute, despite my strong urgings that he put his opinions out there instead of earbashing only me with them all the time!

.
Yes Foxy, it is addictive isn’t it. Strange thing that (:>|

.
I find that OLO really does sharpen your written communication skills, especially your ability to communicate with those that appear to have silly views or nasty dispositions. I was a bit ragged with that sort of stuff early on. I’d like to think that I’m a lot better at it now.

You got it PolyBoaz, I’m an old winker from way back!

Hey yes, wouldn’t a video facility be great on OLO!

That’s an excellent Youtube.

Dear Steel,

Thank You for your kind words.

I'm not sure that I deserve them - but it
was comforting to get such a warm hug
from an unexpected source on a cold winter's day. :)

Personally I wonder what's happened to our other
OLO contributors, people like - Vanilla, David Boaz,
Romany, Ginx? Just to name a few.
I miss them very much and keep hoping that they'll
be back soon.

We do need their strong voices.

I too used to be a avid reader and contributor to OLO, but now I can go days at a time without clicking the OLO "bookmark" at all.

What happened? Two things in reality. One was frustration, caused in part by the fact that so many people appear to be out to hurt the feelings of others and I've been guilty of it too on the rare occasion. The other is that I've become more focused on educating people on the advent of Peak Oil and the population explosion caused by our addiction to once plentiful and cheap fossil fuels, so I tend to stick to sites dealing with those issues and there's plenty to keep me busy.

Also in relation to frustration, I couldn't begin to describe the frustration I feel when someone touts the benefits of the soon to emerge "hydrogen economy." I've gone to great lengths at times to explain just why the hydrogen economy simply isn't possible, only to find the same person/poster over and over again making statements about how great the emerging hydrogen economy will be and how it will allow humanity to keep going with "business as usual." In the end, I decided to stop banging my head against the brick wall and ceased being an OLO contributor. I feel much the same way about the Christian fundamentalists who appear on this site. I don't hate religion, but attempting to argue the logic of religion with fundamentalists is another 'head banging' exercise.

Another factor I found was that there's plenty of well educated posters at OLO and they say it much better than ever I could, so I feel I have nothing of significance to offer on most subjects.

So yes, I'll continue to look in on OLO every now and then, but no longer have the same fire and passion I once had to become involved in discussions.
Aime.

Ludwig

OLO has enough relevance to keep me tuning in - although I don't have the time to spend as much as I'd like.

There are certainly some magnificent contributors here, who have taught me a lot. And then there are others for whom a picture speaks volumes (or, in this case a cartoon):

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/nq/2008/nq080731.gif

In conclusion, does OLO have any significance or relevance?

We will know the answer to that by the end of this decade...

PS

Foxy, dear, Polycarp IS Boaz - therefore, you need not miss his inimitable posts.

;-D

Spikey,
You do begin to sound like a cracked record I have to say! But I thought I would help you out on a couple of points.
Publishing six articles each day offers readers a choice of material and I would doubt that many people would get through them all. But it does allow us to offer a range and depth of opinions, which after all is what we are about.
I don't have another job as a tutor or anything else. So no padding with students' essays I am afraid.
And if you (or anyone else) would like to take a gander at what OLO was doing a few years ago you can find them here: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://onlineopinion.com.au/. Happy reminiscing.
To everyone else, I am delighted to read how relevant and significant OLO is to you.
Susan Prior - editor

SusanP

Who's a tad defensive, then? Let's change the needle and see if that helps you out.

Publishing six articles each day 'offers readers a choice of material'. Yes, I agree, especially if every now and then one is of high quality.

Offering six articles each day offers 'a range and depth of opinions'. Well yes to range, but decidedly no to depth. Two different concepts, Susan.

Re my tutor jibe, I'm surprised you are so literal-minded. But really, some essays I wouldn't give more than a bare pass to in my courses.

'No padding'? Well come on, Susan, you know some of the articles are written by people with no particular expertise and no more understanding of the issues than the average person on the street. I'd love you to be a more more selective as to quality of argument and prose style.

I know I should be more grateful Susan, but they're not always pearls you cast - free of charge - among us swine. I'm sure you're much happier to hear nice music from 'everyone else'. Most people don't like discord, even if it's true.

Now, I'll go out and buy an iPod. Anyone want some old scratchy 78s?

Samsung pointed out that in a population of 20 million plus, OLO is a drop in the bucket (I gather that was refering to both readers/lurkers and commenters) so it's not worth working up a sweat over. Put that way, it's not terribly significant.

Roughly what percentage of Australians are interested enough in current affairs to look for info online? Would 30-40% be about right? Of those, large numbers stick with mainstream media, so we'd be down to about, what, 10-20%? Of those, most will lurk without commenting, so we're down around 5-10%. Some are of the one-track-mind variety and only comment on climate change for example. Some won't ever come across OLO at all. Old hands here will also know that people come and go, sometimes never to return. So optimistically, we're down around the 1-5% mark at a real stretch.

All things considered, I think OLO is quite significant in the online discussion of current affairs stakes.

It doesn't mean as much to me personally as it does in the sense that having somewhere people can discuss things is a public good. I have a sense of loyalty to it on that basis, but it's not a strong enough loyalty to make me read the articles. If I wanted to read biased opinion dressed up to look like an objective essay I'd buy The Australian.

I stick to the General Forum these days because what my ordinary fellow human beings think matters more to me than what some paid public commentator thinks.

Like you Ludwig, I sometimes wonder whether I spend too much time reading the articles and comments! There are times when I make a promise to ONLY read and not post. But then somebody says something so stupid or profound that I can't help myself and before I know it I've clicked on the 'New Post' button.

Steel Man and CoLR expressed my opinion very well.

<Further, I find making myself articulate on a subject here helps me focus on it and question why I hold certain values, more so than if I did not post.> ColR. Exactly.

This forum is so stimulating because there is such a wide range of opinions here. I've been on some blogs which attract a lot of similar thinking people. Deadly boring.

As for trolls or posters who flame. I have to confess that on occasion it can be quite irresistable to throw a little flame at somebody who pushes one of my very, very few buttons ;).

Ludwig, I think this forum important on a personal level, developing my own values and coming to the grudging realisation that not everyone who holds contrary opinions to my own is a complete retard. It is also great to come across articulate intelligent beings who I find myself in complete agreement with.

“…you know some of the articles are written by people with no particular expertise and no more understanding of the issues than the average person on the street. I'd love you to be a [bit] more selective as to quality of argument and prose style.”

Spikey, the important thing is that anyone who can write an article to a pretty basic standard can do so for OLO (as far as I know). Not all the articles need to come from highly qualified experts.

I think that for OLO to demand higher quality articles (I’m not sure exactly what you mean by ‘quality’) would be counterproductive. Graham and Susan should certainly be seeking out highly researched, referenced and well-written pieces from all sorts of experts, but this avenue for expression also needs to be open to the little old plebs as well.
.
Susan, I would welcome some feedback on the ‘Suggestions for OLO’ thread http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1954

Ludwig,

You say: "...I’m not sure exactly what you mean by ‘quality’". Your own clear formulation would do me Ludwig: "highly researched, referenced and well-written pieces from all sorts of experts". That would be great!

So your other thought that for OLO "...to demand higher quality articles...would be counterproductive" is curious. Surely you don't mean to advocate that OLO should give us under-researched, unreferenced and poorly-written pieces? So, in what sense would my plea (and yours) for quality articles be 'counterproductive'?

I'm quite happy as an OLO consumer to have what you call "the little old plebs" initiating Forum debates and discussion. I often find them very interesting - yet sometimes some of them are just a gigantic pooling of ignorance where those with the least to say say it most often.

But in my view the daily articles should be the up to the very best standard of opinion pieces found in the quality press (and your definition of 'quality' will do me here too). Otherwise I might as well read The Age or The Guardian.

Ludwig,
In answer to your request for feedback. I like to encourage new authors and young authors who have something to say to have a go at submitting something to us. By no means do all articles get accepted and some authors will persevere to get an article in OLO. Unfortunately we are not all instant experts and brilliant writers but we can all have opinions. We have had quite a few opinon writers start writing in OLO who have then gone on to become recognised commentators in their field. And of course we also publish the experts and the the "old hands". OLO is an egalitarian space where everyone can stand an equal chance of getting a "go".
It is important to note that we don't have the luxury of paying authors for articles. I rely heavily on the goodwill of authors when I ask them for submissions on a topic. And for this goodwill I am very grateful.
OLO is a lot more than just six articles a day. It is a community of individuals who want to share and debate ideas and opinions.
Susan Prior - editor

Good evening to all you good people...

I too enjoy OLO, but my writing skills are not quite up with most of the correspondents herein. In my previous vocation, most of us wrote in a language heavily laden with jargon, patter and argot.

Even constructing syntax is more or less formalised and generally strictly adhered to.

I must admit also, that I've learnt a lot from many of you in terms of writing skills, sentence construction et al. Moreover, I've also been introduced to many, many, new ways of looking at things, from another perception and differing opinion/s.

Previously, I guess I was a little opinionated and peremptory with some specific issues. Which I reckoned that I was the sole and irrevocable authority, and the vessel of all knowledge and erudition on the subject. Most contributors to OLO have shown me (very convincingly) that I'm certainly NOT the repository of all knowledge. Far from it !

Finally, as an older bloke I have few friends now that I've left work. So to me, OLO gives me a sort of broad 'friendship' with others, albeit anonymously. I sincerely thank all of you for that.

Dear Fractelle,

Is Polycarp really David Boaz?

Wow! :)

Spikey

“… in my view the daily articles should be the up to the very best standard of opinion pieces found in the quality press”

I think that the article section should be a mix of high quality articles from professors, politicians and all manner of experts and articles from relatively unqualified ordinary people.

Of course a certain level of quality would be required. I think Susan and Graham have got it about right now from what I can tell.

I reckon it is important to have this avenue open to people with no formal qualifications who are passionate about a particular issue, such as the coordinator of a small non-government organisation or the spokesperson for an action group or even someone just sitting at home and putting together pieces that are of interest to them and to OLO readers.

I hope that I can contribute articles one of these days, on the wide variety of subjects that I partake in discussion on OLO. I’m not formally qualified or professionally experienced in most of them, but I still think that I could put together good pieces on various environmental issues, road safety and law in particular, as well as my professional field of botany, ecology and geomorphology….although these don’t fit easily into the subject parameters of OLO.

It could be counterproductive if OLO demanded that only the highest quality articles be accepted. It may turn a lot of potential contributors away.

The subject matter is more important than rigorous professional standards. Short simple articles with no references and no statistics are probably more widely read than long articles full of links and statistical data. I think we need both, and everything in between.

Anyway, articles that are not up to scratch get some pretty heavy responses. An author very quickly gets the message that they need to do better next time.

Spikey, your desire to have only high quality articles is fine. And I think my desire to have an articles section that is accessible by non experts is also valid.

So I wonder what other posters think about this?

Well Ludwig, I'd put my own two bob in, but I think you just summed up my view perfectly.

Thanks Susan

“OLO is an egalitarian space where everyone can stand an equal chance of getting a ‘go’ “.

I fully support that.

But I was actually seeking some feedback on the other current OLO thread (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1954), which has been going for four weeks with no input from the OLO management team.

Good thread Ludwig, and some good responses to it.

OLO is an unusual site (not in a bad way) and is testament to how it is run. We all have opinions (some more so than others) and I have certainly learned a great deal from others input ... whether we agree or disagree.

It is obvious that so many of our personal thoughts and musings are encapsulated in our OLO histories ... a veritable diary of at times a significant part of our lives - who owns copyright? No doubt Graham or some enterprising sociologist could have the makings of a very good book or research topic.

Most of you know where I devote my energies, but that is not to say I don't look at the many other article threads and general discussion topics. I just feel I can't devote anymore time to OLO without severely impacting my professional life and those that I hold most dear.

So, I will be giving OLO a break for a while (I can hear the cheering from here) ... indeed, my "swan-song" posts can be found here, starting half-way through the thread;

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=7669#119580

In a sense, many of us have become a cyberspace family ... is this the real value of the internet? Of course, I can't divulge to you who I really am (sorry Col), suffice to say I am just a grumpy old fart nearing retiring age that knows something about a particular science.

It's a shame that some people are happy with mediocrity - and even worse, actually advocate it.

Ah well! I suppose that's why some people read the Sun-Herald and listen to shock-jocks.

One last comment: there is no disconnect between high quality articles and well-written ones. The best writers know their audience and create simple direct prose. Just because an article is hard to read doesn't make it erudite.

Dear Q & A,

All The Best...

You shall be missed on OLO,
I for one hope that eventually
you will come back to posting,
even occasionally - would be good.

Anyway, here's wishing you and yours,
everything that's beautiful in life.

Take care,

OLO is certainly an interesting place. If the articles and comments were placed in a time capsule and opened in the Year 2070 how would our thoughts and opinions stand up to the test of time.

The topics that are controversial or divided now may all be old hat in 2070. Would we know the absolute truth about AGW/GW, GM food etc. Did we revert to renewable energy and say NO to more fossil fuelled power?

Do we spend too much time on OLO at the risk of losing quality time in the real world, or is the Internet one part of the modern real world and a different way to interact. I am not sure about that one yet. Dealing and interacting with people face to face is important to our social wellbeing.

Reading the opinions of people and why they think the way they do can be enlightening and there are a number of posters who have mae me stop and think about various issues.

The only thing that I don't like about OLO is it is very anti-female at times but I guess that can be ignored. It is sad to see some people so affected by their own personal circumstances that they cannot see the wood for the trees or have empathy for a different group of people or other's experiences. But that is life I guess. We all bring different experiences and ideas to OLO and that is what makes it so interesting.

Very interesting Pelican. What WILL people make of OLO in fifty or so years time? I wonder.

It raises another concern – just how permanent is the OLO archive? Will it all still be around for viewing in a few decades?

If OLO was to fold for whatever reason, would it all be lost into the ether?

Susan, can you shed any light on this?

Toodle pip Q&A

And thank you for your words of wisdom. They've been a valuable source of information to many.

As for the "deny and delay" brigade, well, "let them eat cake!"

See ya in the spring!

Hasta la vista.

My guess Ludwig, would be that were OLO to fold, it would be stored on the pandora archives if it isn't already.

http://pandora.nla.gov.au/

A great thing about OLO is that it gives a good opportunity to anybody to raise issues of importance to them that they often don't get the opportunity to put in everyday life. To that end, the anonymity OLO provides is a godsend. Can you imagine raising some very intensely political issue in everyday suburban life? I know many ordinary people who are very clued up and wise in their own lives (borne out of their own experiences), but who have little opportunity to make their views known to others. Blogs like OLO start to bridge that gap.

Another great thing, is the chance to challenge prevailing orthodoxies, shoot the odd sacred cow or fill some ideas space that others generally haven't before. What are some alternative ways of thinking that bypass problems before they occur, for example?

Good ideas will be absorbed and eventually expanded on, bad ideas will either be ignored or hung, dried and quartered and in-between ideas will have the good bits extracted from them and kept, the bad bits being discarded. Any way you look at it, it's good. This occurs only because of the forum's greatest strength: its genuine diversity of opinion.

Finally, blogs like this are necessary as they are the forerunners of more general and widespread community debates I hope we will be having in future.

A thought on the comments about the "quality" of articles.

Perhaps yet another tab for articles by developing authors. Maybe one where authors could be identified by an OLO alias's rather than requiring a real name. The General page gives opportunity to raise issues but the word limits on the opening post preclude putting up an article unless it's done in installments as was Gibo's life story.

A lower level of writing skill could be accepted on the "Developing Authors" tab subject to the author committing to take part in the ensuing discussion, and attempting to take on board constructive feedback on their writing etc. Some posters have pet topics(wheelbarrows) which are never really explained and which the posters lack the confidence to to write an article for the main articles section.

R0bert

The main "relevance" problem for OLO is the tiny, tiny amount of "contribution" traffic the forums receive.

This forum is definitely relevant.....but the truth may hurt, it's only relevant for those who participate. It's not healthy to spend too much time on internet discussion forums. There's many hundreds of thousands of them in cyberspace. It's the "new addiction", for which some people are seeking treatment.

If relevance is measured by size, my gut feeling is OLO's readership is small compared to the more traditional news outlets and so OLO isn't particularly relevant. I rather like it that way. Its small size means there isn't that much competition in the editorial queue. Anybody who has got something to say can say it. This means the quality of the articles is uneven, but in exchange you see a very broad range of views so you get to hear from every die hard conservative, not just Andrew Bolt, and from every liberal greenie - not just the most extreme. If OLO makes it, it will bigger. Its popularity will draw more established writers, and it won't be the soapbox for the common man any more. Pity.

Which raises the question how is OLO going. They is a fair on the users page.

Here are the users that:
- joined (posted this year but not last year),
- % change on people who joined last year,
- left (posted during the year, but not at the end),
- % changed on people who left last year,
- Active (posted in Nov & Dec)
- % change on people who were active last year.

2004 Joined:0208,100% Left:0119,100% Active:0208,100%
2005 Joined:1810,+88% Left:1362,+91% Active:1899,+89%
2006 Joined:2083,+13% Left:1906,+29% Active:2620,+27%
2007 Joined:1878,-11% Left:1955,+03% Active:2592,-01%
2008 Joined:0901,-99% Left:1007,-95% Active:1538,-68%

This doesn't tell us how many people read OLO, but assuming it tracks people posted the a comment the number seems stable right now.

The turnover in posters is large. Of 6884 people registered 901 posted this year and only 531 posted this month. After the initial inrush it appears only 10% of new posters hang around. So we opinionated blow-hards are a small minority, but I guess we all knew that.

Most posts in total:
5604 BOAZ_David
2414 Yabby
2390 Col Rouge
2252 R0bert
2174 Pericles

Most posts in 2008:
1032 BOAZ_David
980 Foxy
817 CJ Morgan
776 People Against Live Exports & Intensive Farming
767 Col Rouge
711 Yabby
..
446 R0bert (14th)
...
420 Perciles (17th)

You are a remarkably consistent lot.

A lot of people here seem to be happy with simply discussion of opinions, rather than finding out the truth of our situation and how it's exploited by corrupt groups.....fair enough. But for those who care about society a little more than that, I want to say that opinions are decidedly not equal when it comes to truth or accuracy.

Some might like to read this because a lot of people suffer from this disorder to pretend they are morally superior:

-=-==-=-=
http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whycentrism

""Centrism" is the tendency to see two different beliefs and attempt to split the difference between them. The reason why it's a bad idea should be obvious: truth is independent of our beliefs, no less than any other partisans, centrists ignore evidence in favor of their predetermined ideology.

So what's the attraction? First, it requires little thought: arguing for a specific position requires collecting evidence and arguing for it. Centrism, simply requires repeating some of what A is saying and some of what B is saying and mixing them together. Centrists often don't even seem to care if the bits they take contradict each other."

-=-==-=

This is a rather large problem in all societies obviously. Here in Australia we aren't helped by our corrupt media and our politicians who can't or won't lead due to personal cowardice and/or the personal profit in being a populist amongst an expanding base of people who think centrism is a solution. it is anything but a solution...however, this does not mean you go back to being a partisan on the traditional political spectrum supporting the two centrist, populist parties we have that are identical and who share terrible agendas.

What is the significance or relevance of OLO?

What, are you trying to gain an estimate of how important you are by reflection? It's a small backwater of the internet frequented by cooks. Nothing more nothing less.

You lot make me laugh. How important are my comments? Who's listening? Am I at the most important forum site, or is there a better one? How can I measure how important the site I frequent is?

'I’m constantly trying to weigh up the significance of OLO, both in my life and in the shaping of our collective future in Australia.'

Delusions of Grandeur!

But, US, precisely the same comment can be made about reflections on any human endeavour. By extension, one could argue that any reflection is worthless.

Sounds like a spiral of postmodernist guff to me.

dickie: "I am disappointed in Samsung and RStuart, who seemingly place themselves above others"

Seemingly would be the correct word I think. I hope others (ie non animal rights activists) don't see my words in the same light. Certainly it wasn't how they were intended.

I made the statement based on what I saw - not because of some dislike for animal rights activists. They really do display the most extreme behaviour of all posters here. It is admittedly a bit hard to gauge as there is no comment deletion history, but nonetheless I think its accurate characterisation.

You probably don't believe me dickie, so I here is a single indecent which I think is unique and illustrates my point. Wendy (an animal rights activist) paid for membership of this site. The membership was paid via PALE. Wendy/PALE or someone (it's hard to figure out because PALE has several people posting under the same identity) then got banned. I don't know why, but they seemed to get banned fairly regularly at one stage. Its not surprising as at one point they had to be warned not to threaten to sue posters for deformation. Their response tell the bank they paid money to be allowed to post to the forum, and asked for the payment to be reversed since they were not getting the service they paid for.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=64#8000
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1667#33661

pelican> "the forum is anti-women"

Anti-feminist would be an accurate portrayal, if any were to be made. This desire to play the misogynist card is deceitful and dishonest and those spreading such notions are equally deceitful and dishonest.

However, many feminists are anti-female, if that is what you meant as they want to control other women through exercise of government power.

Your post is exactly what I was referring to Steel. If you are going to quote someone do it with integrity. The whole quote was:

"The only thing that I don't like about OLO is it is very anti-female at times but I guess that can be ignored."

Saying the Forum is anti-female at times is not saying the Forum is anti-female only some of the posters, some of the time.

And you have the nerve to sprout off about deceitfulness and dishonesty. Good grief. You need to take a good honest look in the mirror.

We women are so powerful and dominating; that explains why there are so many female politicians and CEOs (NOT)

rstuart

Thanks for that very interesting tally.

I don't suppose it's possible to tally the breakdown of posters by sex because of the use of aliases. But would it be possible to do a breakdown of article authors by sex?

I for one really love OLO. I enjoy reading other people's point of view and can honestly say I have learned a great deal about all sorts of things thanks to the interaction on this site.

OLO can also be great fun and provides many a laugh. So, does it really matter about the relevance or significance of OLO? The fact that it continues as strongly as ever answers that question.

So Polycarp is Boazy?

Just out of curiosity- why do people change their contributer name on OLO? Isn't it a bit redundant if everyone already knows who it is?

Yair thanks for the figures rstuart.

Phew, I’m not in the top five most obsessive nutcases on OLO! That’s a relief!

I think I come in at no.6! ( :>/

.
TammyJo, yes OLO can be entertaining. But for a serious social and environmental debater like me, it’s also got to be meaningful and significant in the bigger picture. I think it is.

I’ll have to disagree with US who thinks that it is of very little significance or that it isn’t worth the effort of trying to assess just what its worth really is or what the value is of the time that you put into it.

.
I wish that there was a bit more colour, different fonts, different text size, italics and bold options…and the potential to use a wide variety of emoticons and even illustrations! All of this sort of stuff would really add to the attractiveness and entertainment value with out detracting from the professional presentation of the forum....wouldn’t it?

TammyJo "why do people change their contributer name on OLO" - If you'd posted some of the things Boazy has over the years wouldn't you want to try and distance yourself from them?

I've not paid a lot of attention to Polycarp's postings but the writing style is close enough to Boazy's for that to make sense.

Robert

Spikey,

Its not of much interest to me, it may be hard to do as OLO's article list is broken right now, and I am lously at picking the gender of the writer. That said, I could possibly generate a list of author names and articles and dates. If you are interested then:

- You would have to determine their gender yourself.
- I will email the list to you. You will need to post an email address here. Just a temporary one, such as a hotmail address. If you have a preferred format (eg csv, spreadsheet) then say what it is.
- You must promise to post any results you get here.

rstuart

Thanks for the offer. I appreciate it. However, I have to decline. Last time the identity of a family member was given away or guessed on OLO they were sent hate mail and threats.

They complained to Graham Young and asked for a new pseudonym but he just brushed it off - he pointed to 'technical difficulties'.

I'd love to have what you are offering but I dare not.

Spikey,

Not that I am unhappy with you saying no - it saves me work, but I notice a good deal of concern about anonymity here, or more to the point of loosing it.

Firstly, it is not hard to change your nym here. I presume changing the email address on your account to a temporary one, then create a new nym with your old email address work work.

Secondly, a temporary email address reveals nothing about you whatsoever unless you SEND an email from it. If you do send you have to be careful. But in this case I was the one sending to you.

Thirdly, when people guess identifies, I suspect its not via some magical ability to extract information from the internet. Its from little snippets of information in they see in the posts of their target. In one post its a job description, in another its a location, in another its a hobby, and of course there is always the politics. When you combine those snippets you it isolates the person fairly well. I have no doubt that if there are people here who know me personally, they know who is behind my nym.

Fourthly, and possibly worst from your point of view, I think Scott McNealy (CEO of Sun) hit the nail on the head when he said something along the lines of "privacy is history, get over it". This was more of a prediction at the time, but its remarkable how true it has become. And it will only become more so as time goes on. We have had articles here on OLO pointing out this is a cultural thing - the kids nowadays seem to regard the wrinkles view of privacy as "quaint".

Its also remarkable how wrong George Orwell was in his picture of a world without privacy. I guess his downfall was in not understanding it works both ways. Yes someone could pursue you. But imagine how damaging it is to them if everyone knows they are pursuing you, and like to engage in that behaviour.

Hi all

I think OLO is a great opportunity for people who may not be accomplished writers or journalists to get their views out there and get discussion growing. Such is democracy, and the rich "tapestry of life".

Even though I am no doubt regarded as one of those appalling "animal rights extremists", I have appreciated the debate and learned a lot as well.

I thought I read somewhere that PALE got its money refunded through lodging a credit card dispute or something similar, but I might be wrong.

Cheers
Nicky

Foxy & dickie,

Thank you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7IiRYhWN6A

Bye

Ludwig,

Could it be that one aspect of OLO's significance is that of its being a sounding board of the demographic that reads/uses it?

Could it even be that OLO could be functioning as a 'mood indicator', or even as a 'mood setter', for the community at large? Don't ask me exactly what I mean by 'mood', because I am not sure. I note, however, that Graham Young refers to 'mood' in his recent topic "Are Public Opinion Polls Accurate Anymore?" as something such polls may be measuring in lieu of voting intention.

Good points regarding the availability of bold, coloured, and italic script, and emoticons and such like!

Tammyjo and RObert,

There may be a technical reason why, if it is true (as from literary style it is believable) that BOAZ_David is now posting under the name Polycarp, that he has changed his forum identity.

Back in May I encountered a problem posting on OLO. I was not subject to any ban, nor had I exceeded the limit of posts I could make within any given time. My email address had not changed, nor had my OLO password. I had not attempted to post under any other name. I simply could not post.

I was seemingly able to use the feedback button to inform OLO of this problem, but the problem did not immediately resolve itself. Curiously, I was able to submit a new topic for discussion whilst otherwise unable to post, and did so as a way of communicating with OLO regarding this posting problem. Graham and I exchanged emails on the matter. Shortly after the problem resolved itself without any changes having been made at my end.

I still don't know what prevented me posting, but I did contemplate setting up a new user under my Linux OS and registering a new userID on OLO just to get around the problem, not to circumvent OLO rules re multiple IDs.

Perhaps B_D ran into a similar problem, and actually adopted a like strategy. B_D has not posted since Polycarp's arrival.

I don't see the problem with people changing their moniker. I did it for a couple of reasons.

I felt my original name was too revealing and restricted how open I could be. Some personal attacks against me referencing my family and twisting previous information I may have given alerted me to this problem.

Once changing I saw it as an interesting experiment to see if I was responded to differently, without the pejudice of people knowing my politics or life philospohies or background. Also to see if people could easily pick me out from my style or opinions, and the absence of my other moniker, which took longer than I thought actually.

Probably BOAZ is polycarp, but I don't see the problem with that. Why is it important? Why must he confirm or deny this? I chose to confirm people's suspicions, but I think it's funny if polycarp never admits to being BOAZ. I'm a bit sus about Gibo and BOAZ and under one god being all the same person. Why does it matter?

Usual Suspect it is fun to be able to put the odd link to some of Boazy's more telling comments in when responding to pious dribble on his part. He's very fond of running down others who don't share his beliefs but has left a few skeletons around in his time.

R0bert

Robert,

Fair enough. I think I approach this site differently to a lot of people. I'd never be bothered researching someone's past posts.

Actually it amazes me the effort some people put in to arguing with posters who, by looking at the lack of logic in their original posting, obviously aren't going to respond logically to a strenuously detailed analysis of the arguments they've made.

I fly off the handle and use the wrong half of my brain in arguments too often, but usually people start to ignore me when that happens.

A lot of OLO reminds me of that Monty Python sketch about paying for an argument...

M: (Knock)
A: Come in.
M: Ah, Is this the right room for an argument?
A: I told you once.
M: No you haven't.
A: Yes I have.
M: When?
A: Just now.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: You didn't
A: I did!
M: You didn't!
A: I'm telling you I did!
M: You did not!!
A: Oh, I'm sorry, just one moment. Is this a five minute argument or the full half hour?
M: Oh, just the five minutes.
A: Ah, thank you. Anyway, I did.
M: You most certainly did not.
A: Look, let's get this thing clear; I quite definitely told you.
M: No you did not.
A: Yes I did.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: You didn't.
A: Did.
M: Oh look, this isn't an argument.
A: Yes it is.
M: No it isn't. It's just contradiction.
A: No it isn't.
M: It is!
A: It is not.
M: Look, you just contradicted me.
A: I did not.
M: Oh you did!!
A: No, no, no.
M: You did just then.
A: Nonsense!
M: Oh, this is futile!
A: No it isn't.
M: I came here for a good argument.
A: No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.

http://www.mindspring.com/~mfpatton/sketch.htm

I agree with Usual Suspect. What's important is the message, not who says it. That is what should be debated and ultimately judged.

I think the OLO forum is much better for having the option to write under an alias as it protects the author from attacks outside the bounds of the forum.

RobP, I completely agree about the alaiases and the message part but do think when someone has already demonstrated an inconsistancy with what they are currently claiming it's relevant. Not necessary but sometimes fun and sometimes a useful way of pointing out deceit.

Usual Suspect, I take the time with some some posters mostly because they sometimes give opportunity to expound on important ideas and they are not the only readers. A case in point being the recent discussion about abstenance only vs comprehensive sex education. The abstenance only view is held by more than just a tiny fringe group and has serious ramifications but I suspect that many who hold it have never checked into how effective it is either at creating abstenance or in preventing unwanted pregnancies or STD's. Worth spending time on even though it was clear that HRS was very unlikely to be swayed by my arguments.

R0bert

Alright, what on earth is going on??

The 'Suggestions for OLO' thread has DISAPPEARED!!

Usual Suspect,

Changing one's moniker shouldn't matter, should it?

The only reason it could matter to OLO is that the sustenance of multiple identities could conceivably be used to circumvent Forum posting limits, or to create an illusion of interest in a topic where in fact there may be little genuine response occurring.

Changing one's moniker may matter a lot to some other posters, however, for some posters may have invested a lot of time and effort in 'labelling' some other poster who has incurred their ire. Their approach of playing the man rather than the ball is threatened with negation by a change of OLO userID on the part of any poster who may have been perceived as successfully delivering any 'message' they (the man-players) don't like.

Perhaps, returning more directly to addressing Ludwig's opening post, a major significance of OLO is the opportunity it gives for ventilating subjects that, by seeming consensus, are censored out of mainstream media coverage. In this context, the prospect of OLO identities being able to submit articles under their nom-de-plume has great merit.

Some informed, articulate and challenging posts on OLO may threaten to open politically taboo subjects up to wider discussion. Not all within the community may want this to happen, and some may resort to ad hominem arguments to lower the quality of discussion. If the site is as well visited as the Google search ratings suggest, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that some interests may actually attempt technical interference with the operation of the OLO site to the same end.

"I think it's funny if polycarp never admits to being BOAZ."

Should it be that posting difficulties similar to those I encountered figured in B_D choosing an alternative userID, he may feel that if he was to admit to having taken out a new userID he would be admitting to having violated Forum rules, when, acting in accord with the spirit of those rules, he was in reality merely overcoming a technical problem not of his making.

.Ludwig,

"Suggestions for OLO" is still there. Its just over one month old now, and so doesn't get displayed in the index if you use the default settings.

Forrest Gumpp,

I can't find the link quickly, but GrahamY has said explicitly in his posts he doesn't care about people changing their nym's. As you surmised, I don't think he would even care if you have multiple nym's provided he could guarantee you followed the forum rules - ie the nym's don't meet each other on the same thread, and they didn't collectively post more than 5 times a day. The one issue he would have with it is having multiple nym's makes it impossible to police those limits automatically. In fact I'd go so far as to say if the software let you create several nym's that were linked to the one identity so those limits could be policed, the restriction would go away entirely.

R0bert,

Your view matches mine I think. This forum isn't a bad way to test a viewpoint - put it out there and see what objections come up. It would be an excellent way to test a viewpoint if more people addressed the issue instead of the person. But even when they don't it can be illuminating. Sure the parlaying responses can be like playing tennis against a wall, but the random variation can make you think on occasion.

As for US not understanding why somebody would dig through someone's comment history - well it boils down to trying to empathise with them. I find myself wondering "how can they possibly think that...", and so go through their comment history to try and understand where they are coming from. Often if you want to my them understand your point of view, you first have to understand theirs so you can put your viewpoint in terms they can accept.

Ah yes, the other OLO thread is now over a month old, so it has dropped off the end of the default list. Well, if a seasoned OLO operator like Ludwig can get totally caught out like this, I’d suggest that it is something that needs to be changed.

It is still a current thread. The last post was two days ago at the time it dropped off the default list. I think that current threads MUST stay visible.

Forrest, yes OLO is a valuable sounding board for the general community. Politicians and researchers of all sorts can get a very good indication of the ‘mood’ on various subjects.

It is certainly much better than polls, with simple questions and no room for any explanation of reasons for voting one way or the other. It’s a whole lot better than letters or quick comments in newspapers. And it is at least as good as talk-back radio.