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.