Introspection is always a good thing, and with that in mind, the suggested topic today – what could we do better at WUWT? Some background first.
I get lots of requests to change things, do things differently, or if you listen to some people, just shut down altogether; because they simply can’t tolerate an opinion contrary to their own views that gets as much attention as WUWT does.
One of the great things (or not so great depending on your viewpoint) about running a successful enterprise like this is that it now has other blogs dedicated solely to taunting that success, much like Obama has invoked taunting more than half of the citizens of the United States who have a different view from him on climate change. I see such blog spawn ( I need to update that page as there are more now) as a measure of success; flak, target, and all that.
A few caveats about things I can’t change right now that I often get asked about:
1. I can’t offer comment editing post facto, to do that I either need to spend $500/month to use the WordPress Enterprise feature (which I tried on invitation and decided it was not worth the price tag) or run on a self-hosted server. Since I don’t have time to chase down script kiddies and bot attacks like Lucia does, staying on WordPress.com is the only real option.
2. I can’t do research for people. Every day I get emails asking me to do research for questions, or go to some blog/newspaper/magazine and offer commentary to counter somebody in comments. I simply don’t have the time, I’m sorry.
3. I can’t change what ads popup on WUWT. They are entirely controlled by wordpress.com. That said, they are also contextually based on your browsing behavior. If you are getting ads that you think you should not be, chances are you’ve been pigeonholed for some reason. Clearing your browser cache/cookies always helps. That said, there was a rogue advertiser this past week that attempted to do re-directs. Alert readers alerted me, and I alerted the wordpress management who booted the advertiser.
4. Climategate 3 file dump: lots of people have looked at it, searched it, and scoured the output – there was nothing new there of any value.
Now that I’m asking you to air your opinions and ideas about what we could do better at WUWT, I’m going to air mine about those of you who comment here.
What I’d like to see different about readers and commenters on WUWT:
1. Saying “off topic” and then posting an off topic comment doesn’t actually make it OK. We have Tips and Notes (see menu below the header) for that.
2. I’d like to see less cryptic comments (like from Mosher) and more in-depth comments.
3. I’d like less name calling. The temptation is great, and I myself sometimes fall victim to that temptation. I’ll do better to lead by example in any comments I make.
4. I’d like to see less trolling and more constructive commentary. One way to acheive that is to pay attention
5. I’d like to see more click-throughs on science articles. I note that articles that discuss papers sometimes don’t get as many click-throughs as articles that discuss the latest climate inanity. While such things can be entertaining, bear in mind it is important to keep up with the science too.
So, tell me, what could we do better, do different, add, or remove from WUWT?
Please be thoughtful and respectful in such comments.
Thanks for your consideration – Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Hi Richard Courtney!
I noted that someone on this thread had suggested that WordPress should allow emoticons. Perhaps I should second that as, if I’d had the use of them you would maybe have noticed I meant no ‘snark’. However, I did think that you had not understood the nature of the problem. When I was designing (user) systems I always had it in mind that one should ask, from the user’s POV: ‘What’s in it for me?’ and that means, not expecting the user to ‘know’ how to use extraneous features to achieve an end result. Like: ‘How do I get to the bottom of this huge list of comments?’
Anthony, you know a significant story / breakthrough event when you see it. I would like to suggest a chronological timeline reference point of *truly significant* stories in one place.
eg the latest ‘lousy data’ story, where they’ve admitted their models are rubbish. That is dynamite.
Arctic ice rebound
Antarctic ice extent at record satellite extent.
CO2 sensitivity dropping like a rock.
IPCC model failures – 111 of 114 running too hot.
18 years, 9 months of NO warming, and so on.
There has been so many that collectively they drive a coach and horses through AGW theory, but at present they’re scattered all over the place under different headings, making finding some of the really significant articles a bit of a time-consuming exercise. Run it chronologically, allowing the latest items to be viewed first at the top of the page. Then add the biggest, most influential or significant events as they occur, to create a must-see reference resource.
A few thoughts for you.
Perhaps when a guest post is provided, we could have an attended conversation by the author in comments or alternate media if applicable. There have been some instances of such, but they are random and not scheduled. For instance, if you post an article, perhaps there could be a set time that the author would be on board to reply to comments and questions on the article.
Piggybacking on the above, it would be pretty cool to use some of the assets available like Google Hangout (like NASA did with respect to solar flares last month,,,, available on Youtube if interested in seeing what I am talking about. Search> NASA hangout: All Eyes on the Sun) and have a panel of folks discussing a given topic with an interactive audience.
I for one would love to have a verticle scroll bar in my mobile browser. ASUS had one in their OEM browser with the Transformer tablet, but I have not been successful in finding another compatible with my note pro. They probably have a patent on it. I sometimes feel like I am on a treadmill scrolling to the bottom of comments on my phone or tablet.
Lastly, that 15 minute weekly interview thing we discussed would be pretty cool too 🙂
Thanks for what you do Anthony and Mods. It is appreciated.
Happy Fathers Day to all also!
I would like to see more emphasis on the political solutions and less science. It is not and has never been about the science. The science is solidly on the skeptic’s side and nobody can change that. What is needed is a much more vocal and organized political response and which is not populated with lightning rods such as Senator Inhofe. There needs to be a reasoned political response by credible authors to this kind of story: http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/04/15/climate-change-skeptics-don-deserve-veto/NsUEz1Epj9SjQchg2GIqoN/story.html
Mark Stoval (@MarkStoval) says:
June 15, 2014 at 8:48 am
Mark, your comment about CO2 greenhouse theory. Don’t be blind to the likelyhood that its effect is counteracted by natural negative feedbacks. In admittedly simple terms, it gets hotter, more evaporation and convection to high altitudes occurs where it is emitted to space, plus the increased albedo of clouds. A pot of water on the stove with a lid on it boils faster. If you take the lid off, it takes longer to boil because of heat loss due to evap and convecting of the hot steam away. It isn’t scientific in viewing a complex system to say an effect isn’t real because it may not show up (strongly) in the real world. We often criticize CAGW proponents for linear thinking. Let’s not be guilty of the same thing.
Anthony,
This is an excellent forum and any changes need to be evaluated carefully, which I know you will do.
Some thoughts for consideration:
If possible, cut off the side discussions that hijack the thread such as the recent arguments about the value of Common Core. It virtually killed a topic that I was interested in following.
Possibly add a section where one can ask a “technical” question and have answers provided by some of the experts on your site. Often such questions get lost in a thread. Questions like where can I find data, etc. might be helpful for the more novice amongst us (like me on some topics).
Finally on a more complicated subject/thread where many conflicting opinions/data are presented, it would be helpful if the author provided a summary of the discussion at some point. I realize this might be difficult.
Keep up the great effort, It is greatly appreciated. I often reference your information on other professional venues and I know for a fact that your effort has had a significant impact on clarifying and providing facts on a number of important weather and climate issues.
Thanks so much.
Don
Re: “5. I’d like to see more click-throughs on science articles.”
Although I can probably understand the abstract of a paper, I’m probably going to get lost in the details, because I’m not a scientist, don’t play on t.v., and I didn’t even stay at a Holiday Inn last night. But I do have plenty of opportunities to contest assertions made in pro-AGW articles. I don’t contest them for the sake of the author of the article — nothing is going to change their mind — but for the sake of other readers/posters. I’ve been able to do this because of what I have learned here from you, Bob Tisdale, and Joe Bastardi. So, thank you. I found a meteorology tutorial at the University of Illinois website that is basic but incomplete simply because it was built in 1999 and never updated. Anything I can get my hands on to help me understand more of what is in those papers is helpful.
As for “3. I’d like less name calling,” some of it is actually quite good, for example of Obama, “He is a pyromaniac in a field of straw men,” is funny and dead-on accurate. His speech at the commencement ceremony for UC Riverside June 15, 2014 at Angel’s Stadium was the Burning Man of rhetorical pretentiousness. So the shoe fits.
By the way, I composed this post in Word, which enabled me to check my spelling, grammar, and even run a couple of words through the thesaurus. I even compose my tweets in Word. I’ve saved myself some embarrassment that way.
Sometimes a commenter will spout the standard CAGW diatribe and is rapidly eviscerated in comments.
There’s always one or two commenters who adopt a kinder tone and attempt to educate and plant a seed of scepticism in this, probably young, “useful idiot”.(Jimbo and Pamela come to mind)
He is a victim to be assisted by WUWT, commenters shouldn’t infuriate him in a dogma war that will never sway him to scepticism because he’s angry.
I have been one of the eviscerators, but not anymore.
WUWT community should welcome some “trolls” and bring them to the flock.
Seeking to learn the facts is why I first came here.
Mr Watts, you don’t need to change a thing. Thanks for WUWT
When the ‘blog spawn’ like Hot Whopper make valid objections to WUWT, either engage them in debate, or admit they make some valid points. They are not always the enemy. Similarly with the CAGW advocates like Skeptical Science – don’t make fun of them, engage them in debate. Both sides (or both ends of the spectrum) can learn from each other, if they stop seeing each other as the enemy.
[Reply: Problem is, they will not debate in a fair, moderated forum. ~mod.]
You can’t beat the present system the way it is….leave it alone
…it’s fun, entertaining, and educational
People have personalities…let them play
I find comments are not conducive to back and forth debate. There is no option to reply to an existing comment and so no ‘thread’ facility showing point-counterpoint argument structure.
It would be really nice if comments could have more features:
– Ability to ‘reply’ with visual cues to indicated post/response/response.
– Ability to vote on comments and to have low ranked comments to collapsed to remove the noise.
The simplest way to do this would be to switch to Disqus comments which have many additional features as well. There may be other WordPress plugins that do the job to, but I think it would be hard to do better than Disqus.
My only gripe is aimed at wordpress rather than wuwt specifically. I don’t know if it was linked to possible problems on my computer, but every now and then wordpress would have a hissy fit and keep telling me that I was commenting too quickly.
if other commenting systems not allowed can the bbcode visuals be added to the comment box?
some of us know how to manually type
but others don’t.
============================================================
“Everybody is ignorant…only on different subjects.” – Will Rogers
Holding down the CTRL key then hitting the “F” key brings up a search window good for any page you’re looking at. I learned about that here on WUWT. (And I also have been working with and around computers for comparable period of time.) If what he offered as a helpful suggestion was something you already knew, so what? Do you fault his intent to help? Don’t you think it might have been helpful to someone else?
Some of greatest advocates for climate realism will be converted former advocates for climate alarmism. To that end, I wouldn’t mind seeing an occasional post summarizing why we believe what we do, and what discussion points are effective.
1. When the site is first opened or refreshed the number of comments shows up at the bottom of each post. If possible it would be nice if it also showed the date and time of the last comment.
2. Again, if possible, it would be nice to be able search for a screen name across post.
Otherwise, you already have a winner whether you can do those or not.
Gunga Din: Thanks for your comment. But I think you miss my point (do you use a tablet or a PC?).
I like to think I probably know more about keyboard short-cuts (on PCs) than I should – but I bet there are still tons I still do not know: I’m happy to know my limitations. But the thing is, a tablet is not a keyboard-oriented device. It is designed for screen-tapping/gestures. As such, blogs designed for keyboard-driven machines are not well-suited to tablet devices. And that is where I am trying to find info and experience form other users. If you know of a way of easily driving the blog comments without a keyboard I’d be happy to hear of it.
Cheers.
Might want to keep in mind, that first time visitors could be overwhelmed by the amount, and depth of the information being presented.
Gunga Din: We cross-posted. After I posted I saw your second comment about numbering comments. And thereby hangs a possible solution for my Tablet problem: if WordPress ‘knows’ the number of comments in a post then a ‘button’ at the top of the post would be able to contain the command to let the user ‘touch’ it and go to the bottom of the stack. And similar, though inverse, for going back to the top. Any good, you think?
Overall, WUWT does a fine job. Some thoughts in the spirit of the day …
1. Professional: Stay professional, minimize (eliminate if possible) the petty comments and personal putdowns directed at the CAGW group. All that does is make them look more professional, odd as that may seem.
2. Science: Emphasize the scientific developments … maximize their transparency and understandability for those who do not live their lives in climate’s technical jargon.
3. Truth vs. Bullyism: The CAGW crowds’ Achilles Heel is their inability to rely upon the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, combined with their well-demonstrated reliance upon bully tactics to shut up those they don’t want heard. When presenting science based arguments, use their weaknesses against them. Be fully and factually transparent, point out bully tactics, and never depart from the truth, even when it may seem to hurt.
4. Language: The CAGW crowd has done an effective job of manipulating the media and public via emotional terminology. Perhaps assistance from highly skilled communicators sympathetic to the truth might improve WUWT’s ability to effectively present its case while neutralizing the manipulative language we’re otherwise exposed to virtually every day.
And remember, WUWT is performing a very important public service. It is incumbent upon all of us to recognize and take steps to counter what’s been going on in the so-called CAGW “science community” and its faithful in the media, neither of whom is serving the public well. Thus, let’s not be cheap; contribute to WUWT. Having more money to work with certainly will help.
Pedro
Steve O says:
June 15, 2014 at 11:05 am
Some of greatest advocates for climate realism …
——-
Steve O’s term “climate realism” has a nice ring to it. Perhaps WUWT can embrace and support it. It’s not an extreme sounding term, communicates effectively what WUWT is all about, and projects a professional image.
1. You’re doing a fantastic job.
2. I agree with Paul Matthews not to change, except perhaps to moderate more strongly.
3. I don’t think you should move to nested comments, because that would change the character of WUWT. (Worth noting I also advocated for Judith Curry to keep her levels of nesting as they were. She reduced to one, ignoring me (it happens!), and has since come back to two levels, nearer to where she started. Nesting changes the character of a blog. I like the variety across climate blogs because over time it becomes an experiment, if the host doesn’t chop and change.)
4. See 1.
I love that you allow those humorous one liners, two liners, sarcasm and the cartoons by Josh. Sometimes you just need that to get through a tough day. They make this a truly human site
Richard, I don’t read comments on Judith’s blog….because of the nesting
I 2nd Harry Passfield’s June 15, 2014 at 8:56 am request for …. a screen “tab/button” that allows the user to “1 click” navigate to the bottom of a comment thread.
And ps to ….richardscourtney, …. I see no “tabs/buttons” for going to Responses to ………or at the bottom of the article for “jumping” to Leave a Reply.
And right you are, Harry, when you said this in your above post …..
“and that means, not expecting the user to ‘know’ how to use extraneous features to achieve an end result”.
Those who ASSUME their design is “user friendly” makes a really serious mistake.