Cover It Live Blog and Chats: Let's Have It Out...A Rope of Sand
What do you guys think of the chats so far? I really don't mean to invite a debate between CIL and Halosan, because the latter is really unappealing in so, so many ways that adding the layer of editing and commentary makes sense and gives some order. I re-read parts of the Miami and Utah games, as well as the ND game which I modded and found that they aren't especially great as they are still decidedly sprawling and feature multitudes of folks with different internet experiences trying to co-exist. A lack of an established culture between the great mass of readers and the much smaller community of regulars/WLAers/whathaveyou has resulted in some assorted misunderstandings that have left some with bad feelings and others perhaps overly ignorant thereof, or that's how I'd nerdily describe it.
Whatever the case, let's talk it out.
September 16th, 2008 at 9:25 PM ^
Live blogs are not meant to be chat rooms. Nor are they really conducive to it. A live blog is simply meant to dissemate the opinion of the blogger. Now, just because Cover it live allows multiple producers and auto approved commentators, doesn't mean it's an effective medium for chatting.
It's best use is as a tool to gain extra insight (from Gsimms) or read funny comments, or for play by play if you can't watch it. What it IS NOT, is a forum to share your views on everything. This is what a chatroom or your own blog is for. For obvious reasons, a 2000 person chat room is freaking impossible. So if you expect anything else, it's just too bad.
And by "you" I don't mean you Colin.
September 16th, 2008 at 9:30 PM ^
that the open threads on HaloScan were a lot more fun than the cover it live - but I like how with cover it live 20+ people saying "Touchdown" can be eliminated.
My personal feeling is that as long as GSims is involved it is a good chat/live blog/open thread/whatever.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:14 PM ^
September 16th, 2008 at 11:37 PM ^
like it when 20 people say 'TOUCHDOWN!!" It makes the game more fun, like getting a virtual high five. Live blog sucks as an open thread. too much moderation. If brian were doing it and it was 70% brian's writing with some associated comments, that would be one thing. But with the jokers at the WLA running it, it feels like a high school clique.
I've been hanging out over at the justintv chat rooms during games and it's much more fun (would be more fun if the streams were more stable). Yes its chaos, but its a good kind of chaos. And you still need to have the ability to set rules and give people timeouts or boot them altogether. It works. Maybe with 2000 people you'd be getting a pretty fast scroll rate, but if you make the window taller vertically it's not much of a problem.
The random comments give you a better sense of the game.
Especially when the feed stalls and I can't see what happened. For example: here's what liveblog might say about a play, "Short pass complete, broken tackle, missed tackle by brown 60 yard gain."
And here's what the chat room would say, "
WTF Brown?
Make the goddam tackle!
YOU IDIOT!
Warren was out of position too!
How can you miss that?
sh!t 60 yarder
Ezeh and Brown BOTH missed tackles!!
At least warren got him in the end
C'mon defense, we can't afford this!!
Can you blame it on the rain?
No, brown took a bad angle,
(random troll who has previously been blocked has a blocked message)
We're doomed.
"
Now, maybe the wine and cheese eating bourgeoisie thinks that most of those comments don't add anything, but to me they add emotion. And really, emotion is why I watch the damn game in the first place.
Yeah, it might be over the top, it might not jive with your viewpoint, it doesn't really fit into someone's blogging perspective, but it's more real, and it's more fun.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:37 PM ^
I have stayed away from the live blogs. They are what we in the business call a "clusterfuck."
Yes, I'm in the business of clusterfucking.
It's actually much more relaxing to sit there, take in the game, and then write a blog entry afterward.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:38 PM ^
September 16th, 2008 at 10:48 PM ^
September 16th, 2008 at 10:55 PM ^
September 16th, 2008 at 11:46 PM ^
I'm usually out of the house on gameday, so I can't compare last year's threads with CIL, except from what I saw when I'd go back and read through the Haloscan threads (no life).
That being said, I really enjoyed the liveblog of Shav's game last week on CIL. There were still plenty of hilarious comments and good structure. It may be tougher with the larger attendance of a Michigan game, but I liked how it went last Thursday.
Also, any pro-Zoltan comments should be approved.
September 17th, 2008 at 9:32 AM ^
And that's the root of the problem here. Some people don't want to participate in a moderated chat, and would prefer the chaos of an unmoderated thread like HaloScan. Yelling at the moderators is simply the easiest way for these people to express their displeasure, but it's extremely misguided- it's not how it's moderated that bothers them, it's that it is moderated that pisses them off.
To those people who don't like a moderated liveblog, I will simply remind you that it was NOT the Wolverine Liberation Army that "forced" this moderation on MGoBlog. That decision was not ours to make.
September 17th, 2008 at 5:57 PM ^
I realize that the WLA members moderate the liveblog/livechat thing, but doesn't WLA have haloscan?
Couldn't a game thread on WLA with haloscan also be set up for those who like the haloscan way? There probably are enough people watching while computer chatting in order to have both. But obviously the WLA members still moderate the livechat on WLA/MGoBlog.
May even increase WLA's traffic, for good or bad.
September 17th, 2008 at 6:34 PM ^
Well we don't want to take traffic away from MGoBlog and Brian, so we won't back that idea, but we do offer a post-game chat via wonderful Haloscan on our site. We do suggest for those that aren't happy with the current live blog situation to create a game day thread on the MGoBoard. That way they stay on MGoBlog, and it gives a chance for people to participate in either or both, if they wish. 3 games in with 2 losses, there's still a lot of work to do with the live blog format. All we ask for is patience.
I'm not sure if the biggest complaints are about the moderation in general or who's doing the moderation. I have no beef with you people, yet I get lumped in as a bad guy/joker/high school clique member because I write for the WLA. I've moderated on all of the games, and if you ask me, having moderaters is necessary. For what it's worth.
September 17th, 2008 at 7:05 PM ^
I certainly understand that you don't want to take traffic away from Brian, but clearly there is a significant minority (I think) that really prefer haloscan/uneditied for what ever reason.
The people that like the haloscan method is because it is more emotional with quick blurbs, kind of like the stadium experience (but without all of the good stuff). But this way, whomever wants it, they CAN be heard if they chose to participate in the haloscan thread (are you pro-choice?).
I don't think Brian would have a problem with this, as I know Brian personally not at all. But it seems that a lot of people get shut out of the live chat thread, and this doesn't have to be.
We (and by we, I mean the WLA and not me) can do both (and I don't do these threads during the game - remote in one hand, beer in the other, can't type with any of my 3 other extremities).
As for your efforts in the moderation, I do agree with you, that in the format livechat format it is necessary. But think of it, due to the different formats, each (the livechat and holoscan) would provide an very different kind of experience. Besides, give the people choice. It very well may be a win-win if you think about it.
And finally, I have read much of your stuff on WLA, and you are all terrific writers and I appreciate your efforts.
September 17th, 2008 at 7:01 PM ^
Not included in my above blabberfest, the people who want to be heard posting "Stevie Brown sucks" "Touchdown" "OMG we are never going to win ever again" etc., by being totally blocked out (as it sounds from the posts), Brian is going to lose those people anyway.
Better they go to WLA than wherever else.
September 17th, 2008 at 10:26 PM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 9:52 AM ^
All I want to say is that the moderators are really, honestly, trying to make this fun for as many people as possible.
The volume and frequency of posts, combined with the fact the game isn't going to stop moving along or slow down just for the blog, makes it difficult at times to keep things organized and flowing.
We really have no problem with a respectful, constructive discussion on how to make it better. But sending emails to Brian or us and whining that your particular comment about X didn't make it through isn't going to help the situation.
Some people want the unmoderated chaotic chat, others don't. That's fine. Nobody is forcing anyone to participate in either. All I ask is that if you do decide to participate in the moderated version, understand it is moderated and that not everything is going to make it through. And that it is never a personal vendetta that causes your comments not to go through. We make a dedicated effort to ensure other viewpoints besides our own are represented throughout the game. But if you make a couple comments that don't get in, sending multiple insulting messages to the moderators and complaining about the fact you aren't being approved isn't going to make it more likely that you are. I think that's reasonable to understand.
September 17th, 2008 at 10:32 AM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 10:36 AM ^
Anyone can join in spirit.
We always are accepting reader contributions at the blog email address - wolverineliberation at gmail dot com.
September 17th, 2008 at 12:55 PM ^
There were two main reasons I decided to change up the open threads this year:
- The new site's commenting is very heavy. Refresh requires reloading the entire page. Comments are kind of bulky, and the threaded nature of them makes little sense for a liveblog. Having a thousand people hitting F5 would be bad, and 20 pages of comments would also be bad.
- Towards the end of last year the open threads were complete f-ing chaos with flamers and fighting and all that. It was basically West Virginia the day after Rodrdiguez left.
#1 is a technical issue that is high on my list of priorities to fix this offseason. It will not be fixed this season because I'm busy, unsurprisingly. So just regular old comment threads aren't going to cut it. Also, the CIL software is easy to use and has some nice features but isn't very configurable. I could go look for an alternative but, again, busy. If someone knew of something else that might fit our needs better, I'll check it out.
#2... well, some might like it but I wasn't a big fan. Haloscan's ease of use produced a ton of noise but not very much signal. If there's a groundswell of support for UTTER CHAOS I'll consider re-implementing that. I'll put up a poll about it.
As far as the cliquishness goes: yeah, I'm trying to work with the WLA to cut down on that. We're all new to this and I advocate patience.
September 17th, 2008 at 1:46 PM ^
"But with the jokers at the WLA running it, it feels like a high school clique."
With all due respect to the WLA guys, I have to agree.
edit: was doing something else, hadn't refreshed in a while and didn't realize Brian had already addressed this. didn't mean to pile on.
September 17th, 2008 at 7:24 PM ^
I disagree that the members of the WLA are jokers, they are very intelligent, humorous writers, but their comments section/haloscan is where they can really turn people off.
Rather than a clique, and with all due respect to the members of WLA (and I have expressed this a number of times) I have thought of the WLA comments section as more of a circle-jerk.
September 17th, 2008 at 7:45 PM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 11:43 PM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 7:51 PM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 7:54 PM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 10:29 PM ^
September 19th, 2008 at 11:15 AM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 10:35 PM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 7:58 PM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 8:07 PM ^
You shouldn't have to defend the comment section - you guys put in a lot of effort to set up the WLA and you should be able to enjoy all of your efforts, along with all of the financial rewards!!!!
But, your blog is a little different because there is a link/connection to your blog and Brian's. I also recognize that you guys do a unique service on the comment theads here on this blog. I don't know, kind of like round-up.
But like with round-up sometimes the wrong stuff gets squirted. You just can't help it, its the cost of using it.
September 17th, 2008 at 8:08 PM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 10:25 PM ^
One thing I think people don't realize is that we're too busy looking at actual comments to check names and see who actually wrote it.
Secondly, we're giving up a certain level of enjoyment so people can participate. During the Utah game I never got to see back to back plays.
September 17th, 2008 at 10:31 PM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 11:07 PM ^
September 17th, 2008 at 11:22 PM ^
During the Utah game I never got to see back to back plays.
Lucky you.
September 18th, 2008 at 12:06 AM ^
September 18th, 2008 at 4:29 AM ^
That's true. If anyone really sits back and thinks about it, we're all outrageous assholes- we've given more than ample evidence of that here. And yet we've been polite, shiny and happy for the majority of the time on the Live Blogs out of respect for the process and for Brian. I think we deserve a medal. Or a cookie.
@JHS: HA! Yeah, you'd think so, but I also forgot to DVR it and didn't really know what happened, how we looked or why we lost. I'd waited 9 months for that game, and ended up staring at a bunch of "OMG WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!!!!!!!11" on my computer screen instead.
So really, come to think of it, if people are bummed about not having their comments posted, fuck 'em. I'm volunteering my time and part of the gameday enjoyment of one of my favorite things in the world attempting to help them have an enjoyable experience; if they aren't maybe they shouldn't show up, or make a thread on the message board discussing the game. Or maybe, just maybe, they should learn how to suck less.
September 18th, 2008 at 10:56 AM ^
And yet we've been polite, shiny and happy for the majority of the time on the Live Blogs out of respect for the process and for Brian. I think we deserve a medal.
Agreed. I don't participate in the chats during the game because I would, well, rather watch the damn game. You guys probably miss more of the game than are able to watch!
If people are bummed about not having their comments posted...
But think of it, these people are the ones that tie you guys up. Would the workload for the moderaters (WLA) be reduced if these people were on a different, Haloscan thread? The moderaters would have less work to do (and can actually WATCH the game!) if the people who prefer haloscan were there on a different thread.
I may be wrong, but I think having the two seperate threads would make both the WLA and the readership as a whole better off.
I will do everyone a favor here and comment no more on this idea.
September 18th, 2008 at 9:58 AM ^
OMG, what the hell is the problem? It's a moderated chat, a LOT of people are putting in comments, and we can't approve them all. Why is this hard for some people to accept?
Here is the LiveBlog guideline post. If you have any questions about how the LiveBlog is handled, please click here. If you're wondering why some of your comments didn't get posted, please click here. If you have any other questions about the LiveBlog, please click here. Click here. Click here. Click here. Oh and by the way, click here for the LiveBlog guideline post.
Jesus.
September 18th, 2008 at 10:28 AM ^
September 18th, 2008 at 5:53 PM ^
September 19th, 2008 at 8:32 AM ^
it was just a pun. you know, a play on words. click click click click clique. i know, not funny at all...sorry
but for the record, i've never actually participated in CIL or Haloscan (whatever that is). i did read through the ND CIL a few days later to try to get some info but there was no play by play
September 19th, 2008 at 2:11 AM ^
September 18th, 2008 at 9:09 PM ^
after 'participating' in the cil chat, i don't think i'll bother in the future. just personal preference - my two cents is that moderated chat blows. i'll take the lower signal-to-noise ratio in exchange for the free flowing exuberance that is unmoderated commenting.
haloscan still suxxors tho
September 18th, 2008 at 11:28 PM ^
September 18th, 2008 at 11:29 PM ^
September 19th, 2008 at 8:34 AM ^
September 19th, 2008 at 6:58 PM ^
September 19th, 2008 at 6:21 PM ^
Yeah seriously, any time I actually put forth a tiny smidge of effort and made a funny or observant post, it got through. I even got a throwaway "I approve of Sam McGuffie" post through under the handle "David Duke," so it's not too hard.
If people really want to see what it's like, I wonder if it's possible to turn off moderation for a second after a TD or a bad play or whatever just to see how god damn awful it would be to read that all game.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:31 PM ^