My opinion

[spicedogs]

 

For months now, I have witnessed the emergence on many of my flists journals, of a statistical tool that shows off how often their flist members comment in that particular journal. I know that by posting this entry, I will stir emotions and someone might get mad at me. Please understand that I am only expressing an opinion. And as a citizen of a country that prides itself for allowing freedom of speech, I have a right to express my discontent for the statistical tool.

 

In my opinion, this tool, which originally was a cute idea, serves a purpose of subtlety incite members to compete and to make a concerted effort to post in that particular post. No one wants to appear to look like a “bad” friend for not posting. The question is whether you are or are not a bad friend.

 

First and foremost, we should answer these two questions that I am about to pose:

 

(1) Should we read every entry of every member of our flist?

 

(2) Once we read the entry, should we comment to those entries?

 

If the ansyour is yes to both of these questions, and you fail to do them consistently, then you are a bad friend. Is that really realistic? If you have 30 active friends, work full time, and have a life other than LJ, is it realistic to expect you to read every entry, regardless of length, regardless whether you are interested in the subject or even have an opinion on the subject, should you post an answer? Because if you don’t post an anwer, the statistical tool will shove you to a lower bracket. Of course, then there are the threaded conversations. One of you may be one of the flist members who does read every entry, does not formulate many, if any, replies, and go about your business after reading the post. Now comes “Joe,” who hardly answers, reads only two or three entries, but engages in numerous heavily threaded conversations. “Joe” now climbs to the top. Joe becomes number 3 on the statistical ladder. You who were a good friend who read all the entries and formulated your opinion, now find yourself in the number 27 position. You are really ashamed. “Oh my I’m only 27. At least I made it. Phew. Mental note: I will come by this journal more often. I just don’t want to be seen as a “bad” friend.”

 

From my perspective all this tool accomplishes is to make sure that replies will be posted in a person’s journal (otherwise Mr. Statistical Tool will show everyone the truth). Do we really need to beg for replies?

 

Moreover, folks, I find these silly statistical tool as a harmful device that hurts people’s feelings. This tools is akin to those tagging-type memes. You know which ones I mean: “Post these 32 questions in your journal, answer them, and then tag 8 friends to do the same.” I have hurt some flist members with the tagging game. I made a mental note not to tag anybody. But just a month ago, I could’ve have kicked myself. I tagged some people. In fact, in my opinion, the tagging games are even worse, because you are damned if you tag, and you are damned if you don’t. Either way, someone will get hurt.

 

Off my soap box.

PS.: Don't feel that I meant you, whoever you are when I am posting about the Stastical Tool. This week alone, I've had 7 f-list members post them. So the shoe fits a lot of you, but it is meant as a general post. I am not pointing fingers.


 

Comments

[venckman.livejournal.com]

Liked the essay. To me, it's a pretty useless application, as I have a small flist, my posts don't generate much by way of replies, and I myself am a steady but not voluminous commenter. Like anything it can be abused by people wanting to use it inappropriately to browbeat others, but they are few. On the other side of the coin, there are always people looking for some reason to take personally that which is not personal, so I can see the other side of the argument also. Both sides exist and are valid in this case, I think.