I recently met with some of our volunteer moderators and contributors while in the Bay Area, and they provided some valuable suggestions on WUWT and its place in the climate debate.
Of course, I haven’t asked WUWT readers on this topic , so here’s an opportunity to weigh in.
First, I’d like to point out that I don’t know that I will make any changes. I’ve heard some interesting ideas, but have not decided on any course of action. I’d like to hear from readers what they think.
Some topics that I’d like input on:
Format and style: too busy or easy to read and use?
Content: too much/too little/too narrow/too broad?
Content: too much news/not enough news?
Moderation: too heavy/too light? Too troll tolerant/not tolerant enough?
Features: (no I can’t make comment preview work, see this) what would you like to see?
Guest authors: good/bad/ugly?
Ideas for regular weekly features
How do you most use WUWT? Reference, portal, news, commentary, bird cages?
What could we do better?
At the same time, I’d like to mention that a part of WUWT’s success is owed to linkages…and I’ve noticed many readers not taking advantage of the ability to spread the word. It would be enormously helpful if you would use other blogs, Twitter, and Facebook to announce WUWT posts of interest. Some web ranking services now figure these in. Even if you don’t retweet, simply signing up as a Twitter follower improves WUWT’s ranking in some venues.
For example, the Wikio Sciences blog rating we have in the upper right sidebar depends on retweets to some degree, they write in FAQs:
The position of a blog in the Wikio ranking depends on the number and weight of the incoming links from other blogs. Our algorithm accords a greater value to links from blogs placed higher up in the ranking.
A blog linking another blog is only counted once a month i.e. if blog A links to blog B 10 times in a given month, it is only counted as having linked to that blog once that month. The weight of any link decreases over time. Also, if a blog always links to the same blog, the weight of these links is decreased.
Only links found in RSS feeds are counted. Blogrolls are not taken into account.
In December 2010, retweets were added as an additional factor to the ranking algorithm. For each twitter account, only one backlink per blog is taken into account each month.
So, links to WUWT are important, retweets are important. If you haven’t joined up with Twitter and Facebook, I understand, it took me awhile to overcome some of my personal objections to this form of social networking, but once I did, I never looked back.
Thanks for your consideration – Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
ferd berple says:
February 20, 2011 at 3:22 pm
One thing I would recomend is a spelll chek and edit function.
Well, yeah, but …
Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.
Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.
As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
Its rare lea ever wrong.
Eye have run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.
I wouldn’t change anything. I think you have the best blog out there on this subject…just keep on keeping on would be my humble suggestion. If it ain’t broke…don’t fix it!
What I like about WUWT is the variety of topics covered and the comments the threads generate . I have learned as much from the comments as I have from the articles – for the most part . Sure , some comments aren’t particularly germane to the topic , but they’re often interesting , even enlightening – some are downright funny . As in any discussion , sometimes the comments wander off topic but it’s rare that the entire thread gets hijacked – the mods don’t let things get out of hand . So , like I said above WUWT is fine the way it is . Thanks , Anthony .
The comments above are to long to read. However, I know this was mentioned before.
A new page (a reference page) where papers of interest are shown. Do it in a standard format with the latest at the top. It would be invaluable for the folks with a general interest, all the way through to individuals within the various scientific fields.
Just to scan the various journals for topical papers is a major head ache …. there are so many out there……
Even the BS ones are useful in there own way.
Hey Anthony,
I’ve been following your exploits since the halcyon days of posting at Roger Pielke Srs. climate blog. That was back in the nascent days of the surface stations project. I have been very happy for your success and wouldn’t change anything, though minor tweaks in format and content are expected over time. A couple of thoughts to add:
(1) Someone mentioned reducing the political content in some of the stories. Unfortunately, that’s not possible anymore – the CAGW crowd has taken climate science from science to politics already (witness Hansen’s recent screed in a Chinese newspaper claiming we’re gonna die from global warming if the Chinese don’t help…yikes!). Stories on the political decisions being made around the world in the name of global warming are, in fact, some of the most useful and interesting that I read at WUWT.
(2) David L. Hagen said: February 20, 2011 at 1:06 pm
“…I would strongly encourage asking participants to work towards more meaningful important comments and leave of the fluff, chatter and foolishness.”
OK. In principal I agree, but sometimes you can’t help but laugh at some of the manic CAGW press releases. Making pointed jokes about them is a great way to let off some steam and make others smile (unless you’re from RC).
(3) Give “Smokey” his own guest-post from time to time. I really appreciate his candid comments when a troll eruption occurs.
cheers,
Frank K.
All in all, best science/AGW-countering site going.
Admin stuff: some kind of numbering system.
(Suggestion for those trying to navigate nested sites: use Ctrl-F page find to locate today’s (or most recent unread) date. Then F3 or arrow button to jump thru. Not perfect, but much better than scrolling/scanning.)
Troll control: recent tightening has it about right. Note to the “wide open” recommenders: don’t underestimate the power of a halfway articulate troll to “thread highjack” — turn the thread into a repetitious argument focused on the troll, and whatever non-sequiturs etc. they’re flogging.
I’m in awe of the work required to keep the site up. If I win a big lottery, I’ll personally fund WUWT heavily!
Anthony–You are my favorite website, and I check it out at least 3-4 times a day, sometimes more. I don’t do facebook or twitter, but I do tell everyone with whom I discuss this subject about your website. I usually start out “You can go to my favorite website…”
Having said all that, I would like a way to save or print articles without all the comments. To be sure, many comments add real facts to the discussion, and many are amusing and entertaining, but I really want to be able to capture articles and graphs and have the full referencing available.
Otherwise, this is a terrific place–I like all the reference pages, and the highly technical articles and the not-so technical articles. I learn so much here.
I think your web site is awesome.
However, if I could have a wish, I would wish for this:
I often encounter people who question my skepticism. I would like to tell those people to check out WUWT where they can read about the issues in more detail than I can provide. However, someone who arrives for the first time at your home page, would only see the latest articles which are good but are more relevant on some days than others. And the oldies but goodies are buried. I would like your home page to provide a summary of basics of all the best points that your website has made. For example problems with location of the weather stations, problems with averaging missing data over the poles, problems with the missing minus signs, lack of sun spots, and problems with other scientists not sharing data, etc, and links to those full articles. The intent is that someone who has not been following your blog for a long time can catch-up and not be turned off by having to dig through old posts to know what is going on.
For example:
These are a few of the issues we have covered on WUWT:
Weather station location – link
Averaging missing data over the poles – link
The missing minus signs – link
Cherry picking tree rings – link
Etc…
And for a full list of articles see this –link.
I know it would be hard to edit the list down to the most important ones. But in my opinion it would be very useful as an introduction.
Suggestion to old engineer, re pre-composing in a word processor: they often send thru formatting codes which don’t work on blogs. Straight text only. An alternative: get the ClipMate package, and use the New Clip option to pre-compose. It then can paste directly into whatever location you want. As a bonus (!!) the package saves every “copy” action you do, anywhere, and there are both temp and perm folders for you to play with. IMO, the most powerful and useful surfing/composing utility anywhere.
PS at my suggestion, your web address is included in class reading material at the University of Kansas School of Law.
I’m a recent visitor, and rare poster to this site (I think this is my second post) so please take this with a pinch of salt, but: it all seems to work. You seem pretty quick to report news, the analyses are worth reading even if I can’t always understand everything, nor instantly agree with everything I do understand, and we can read or not read the comments (along with the inevitable thread drift) at our leisure.
If I were you, I wouldn’t change a thing. Not because it’s perfect as it is – it almost certainly isn’t – but because by changing it you might break it. Better a slightly imperfect model that works, than spoiling it by trying to make it perfect.
Just my UKP0.02.
Derek
A selection of some of comments I agree with most:
oebele bruinsma says:
February 20, 2011 at 10:37 am
Dear Anthony,
What can I say in view of one the most interesting places on the Internet.
Viv Evans says:
February 20, 2011 at 10:38 am
Having comments numbered is a good idea.
PJP says:
February 20, 2011 at 10:07 am
Moderation – seems about right to me.
Larry Sheldon says:
February 20, 2011 at 10:22 am
If I may:
Moderation: too heavy/too light? Too troll tolerant/not tolerant enough?I penetrate it some, it is probably about right.
Features: (no I can’t make comment preview work, see this) what would you like to see? How about after-posting edit?
Murray Duffin says:
February 20, 2011 at 10:56 am
Format is good, but it would be nice to have threaded replies like on TOD.
Content is excellent, and reader inputs very important. Moderation would be better if it cut out the extreme conservative political crap.
On that last point, I understand that freedom of expression is a good thing, but the CAGW skeptic movement – in which I count myself a proud member – hurts itself by promulgating the self portrait of political extremism reflected in some comments.
Personally, I like the site the way it is. The search feature actually works, and as long as I have half a clue as to what I’m after, I can locate it. I’ve searched out the Livingston-Penn data on several occasions and it’s always right there where I last saw it.
As for linkages… I do when appropriate. But I won’t touch Twitter, Facebook, Myspace with a ten foot pole. I’m a self imposed Luddite in that respect, and I know and appreciate the value of privacy. Data mining, both commercial and via anybody linked to In-Q-Tel’s investments, can pack sand.
Numbered comments would be easier to reference back to when the number of comments gets high. Scrolling back to a numbered location would be quicker.
I am quite happy with the site as it is. I would seriously question making changes for the sake of them. The site is very popular the way it is, and any sort of major change will likely take away from the success it enjoys. I would not suggest doing anything drastic. As you have already stated, if spreading the word is to become more of driving force for the site, encouraging users to use the existing features is a very good idea. Some will argue that a more “moderate” view be taken, and I would caution against such a move. Great care should be taken to avoid a “jumping the shark” type of change. I think allowing the site to continue growing in the organic way it has is the best approach. It’s your site Mr Watts, to do with as you please. So far that has worked very, very well.
Thanks for asking!
**Features: (no I can’t make comment preview work, see this) what would you like to see?
I believe some WP themes use nested comments, like ClimateAudit, and I think that would be a good thing here, as others have suggested previously.
**Guest authors: good/bad/ugly?
I like the variety and I think it’s one of the things that puts this site head and shoulders above the others. Kudos and do what you can to keep it up.
**How do you most use WUWT? Reference, portal, news, commentary, bird cages?
Reference & news & commentary.
**What could we do better?
You should clone yourself and a couple of the moderators, to lighten the work load.
================
As for the remarks on the RSS feed, the feed works fine. I have it on a google homepage with various other feeds. Every time a new post is made on any of those sites I can click right to it. Heck, sometimes I even manage to do that before any comments are shown (though there are probably 30 in the Queue.)
People can set up a google account here: https://www.google.com/accounts/ and make their own homepage with however many feeds they want. It’s pretty robust, if you put RC and WUWT feeds on the same page, right next to each other, the page won’t explode. 😉
Your twitter link is pretty obvious, maybe your own RSS feed link should be equally so?
Wordpress.com has an email widget so people can subscribe by email and keep up that way, though I don’t know if they want that much extra email…
“I too would like to have the ability to reply to someone just underneath where they make the original comment. I see some comments here that this is bad. Would someone explain to me what is bad about it as I can’t see it.”
I’ve read all the comments, then did some chores, came back and refreshed.
I then continued reading the new comments where I left off.
If comments were nested, I’d have to reread ALL the comments again if I wanted to catch all the new ones.
And on politics: I never gave 2 sheets about global warming until they introduced “crap & tax”. Now I want to know all the latest news about what they (EPA, etc.) are up to. I like the science posts (particularly solar), but also the political posts.
And on fluff: It adds to the entertainment value. Many commenters are quite clever and humorous. I read a clever sarcastic comment from “90% warmist” Gates that made me chuckle. Anthony missed the humor and gave him a time-out.
Over-all: I can’t think of any improvements to this site. Don’t mess with success.
Hi Anthony & Mods
Pretty good the way it is and any changes will have plusses and minusses (e.g. nested threads vs current chronological comment order).
I use WUWT as a portal to get to other websites, too.
Would be great to get more pro-CAGW/AGW guest posts, but I understand that this is not completely within your control.
When you have followed WUWT for a while, one can identify the characteristics of the various regular commenters – the spontaneous, off-the-top-of-the-head commenters; the well-reasoned commenters; those who have been pro-CAGW from the start and haven’t changed their mind at all; those who have a bee in their bonnet about nuclear/thorium/wind power/solar/whatever; those who like to write one-liners; those who are argumentative on just about any point; etc, etc. Just like living in the real world!
Thank you for your efforts.
Dear Anthony (aka Santa Claus):
You know that you could not provide one millionth of what has been requested, right?
Take it eas(ier),
Theo
I’ll leave a couple basic comments. I enjoy the site and use it daily after having discovered the site several years ago. In my opinion, it’s a good mix of science and commentary.
The format of newest story appearing at the top works for me and similarly with the non-nested comments. I prefer this setup to the way Climate Audit works or the column newsletter format of Icecap.us.
Content: Too Much/Too Little. Oddly it can be both as I know I can’t read all the comments all the time and yet still feel like some stories or items are missed. As silly as it sounds, the tips and notes pages often contain important stories that maybe don’t deserve the spotlight of an entire post, but perhaps could receive the penlight of attention under a “best of weekly links that we just couldn’t get to” thread accompanied by a short synopsis of what the various articles are about without analysis.
Policy vs. Science debate: The trouble is that both are connected and it’s important that both are covered. Many of the articles touch on one or the other, few connect the two together. The site needs both.
Tone: This is one of the reasons why I believe the site is as successful as it is. There are other sites that cover science or policy but few that do it with the ability to simplify complex subjects and engage with the public in a humorous and optimistic way. It’s not only reflected in the content but the images too.
Moderation: Generally, I have no problems with the human moderation, but I do lose comments in the Notes and Tips area to the spam filter.
Friday Funnies: You should hook up Josh with the xtranormal.com website to see if he could put together anything like this video linked below. Anyway, great site and have found it to be enjoyable and instructive.
I wouldn’t change anything, but if I *must* make a suggestion then it would be to add numbers to the comments. The site is pretty well perfect.
Well, I *have* lost one or two comments in moderation over the years…
First time commenter,everyday reader.Aint broke dont fix it.There are often links to your site from the Lightning Round forum topic” the great global warming swindle”@ur momisugly pcperspective forums. Appreciation to your family on the amount of time this takes you as it is INVALUABLE.
Anthony,
This is one of the most important science blogs world-wide. I wish to raise a different type of blog to operate in parallel with what you are now doing.
It involves difficult concepts of confidentiality and copyright. (You were caught out despite copyright of your surface stations project, with prior publication by another, so stop me if I’m teaching you to suck eggs).
In the adventuresome world of the blog, like the Wild West, virtually anything goes except what you snip. It is hard to correct this freedom, even if you wanted to. In legal challenges, there can be a problem even with determining which country’s laws shall apply.
There is a real challenge to create a form of blog where people with genuinely interesting and novel concepts can turn when their ideas run into a dead end. This type of blog, which for ease we shall call “Thinking Post”, needs to have strong protection, so that a person with a novel idea does not have it stolen from him by rogues (and rogues are plentiful).
Like with inventions, one can get an initial form of protection from a formal provisional patent. In the Thinking Post, one would float a new idea under prescribed terms that would offer protection. At this stage, the only protection that I can suggest is that only certain, selected people known from their history and relevance with WUWT would be allowed to see the protected post; and to blog on it. They would be taken on trust, but they would also sign an e-document specifying confidentiality.
A minor example: I suspect that some MMTS housings read wrong when snow builds up underneath and gives extra reflection onto the thermistor. I have an idea I can do nothing with, but we don’t get snow here. I run a thread under Thinking Post. Bloggers tell me if the experimental work has already been done, and outline the results. Some bloggers do first principles calculations. With this feedback, I engineer a a work-around, test it, patent it and sell it to a manufacturer. Then I write to the open WUWT suggesting that certain papers have an error needing correction.
Another example: I’m only so-so at computing, but I’m using a Taylor’s expansion to many terms and I do not know if I am conflicting with the bit length of the computer words. I have to describe my work in progress for context, but it’s too early for the world to see its application. So I post on Thinking Post and the combined grey cells out there provide the answer without stealing the concept, which one day I submit for publication.
Reward? Help in return. It’s like an expert, no strings attached pre-review of a paper ready for submission to a Journal.
My thoughts are in early stages and there could be a fatal flaw. But the suggestion, I hope, might create a new paradigm (how I hate that word) in blogging, so I raise it here hoping that better minds can improve it. Over to the top guns.
what you have here is what makes this one of the very few must read websites the only thing that could make it better is more Willis.
NOT MY OWN: repeated here as I read it!
“Normal people believe that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
Engineers believe if it ain’t broke it doesn’t have enough features yet!”
I say, Anthony don’t try becoming an engineer, just remain normal!