Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-09-2015, 05:37 PM   #1 (permalink)
Administrator
 
markstevenson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6
Default VolandoBajo's comments and my reply

Here's VolandoBajo's original comment on a post that's been taken down. I will reply to it shortly.

Quote:
Yes, it seems like TTAC was in a rush to post info about the VW offer, like an old school newspaper anxious to avoid being scooped.

But while busy trying to decipher the registration process, there was no attempt to discover if there was a quid pro quo (which was almost a certainty) or what it might be.

Similarly, at times it seems as if we have been treated to the story of the hour on the new UAW contract. I will suggest that in cases like the above two, it might be better to consolidate all the news of the day on that item, once a day, even if it means having to provide multiple bylines. It would seem to be preferable to splitting information and discussion on the topic between several threads.

After all, the B&B are unlikely to comment on data elements on a registration screen, or the vote of a segment of a single plantís voting numbers, compared to commenting on what VW is offering and what it is demanding in return, or what the news of the day, not the hour, might happen to be with contract ratification.

I look forward to reading TTAC almost every day, but sometimes it seems like it is offering quantity in place of quality, to its detriment.

In addition, on Jackís blog, another commenter noted that their first and foremost attraction was the forum-like nature of the comments of the B&B, with most of the articles being secondary.

To the extent that pushing out multiple articles in short time spans fragments the interaction of the B&B, that would make that practice detrimental in the long run to the daily attendance of its audience.

Excuses of overwork only work for a while, although they do merit some consideration. But when and if that becomes the chronic state of TTAC, something will have shifted in a bad way.

Better a bit less wordcount/day, and a bit more of condensed and consolidation facts at the end of the day.

And please, Mark, consider discouraging some writers from sharp-edged political similes, unless they are essential to the central theme of the article, or they are made by someone qualified to handle sharp objects. Otherwise such comments are distracting at best, or viewed as clickbait, if persistent.

You canít and shouldnít try to discourage that sort of things from the peanut gallery, but when it is offered up as being supposedly germane to the subject of an article, it seems a bit over the top.

I offer the Libertarian comment as a case in point.

TTAC is still a good product, but it needs to be careful not to start down the slippery slope, as such an approach almost always ends in increasing acceleration. Not a good thing outside of mostly four-wheeled vehicles.
markstevenson is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-09-2015, 07:54 PM   #2 (permalink)
Administrator
 
markstevenson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6
Default

Quote:
Yes, it seems like TTAC was in a rush to post info about the VW offer, like an old school newspaper anxious to avoid being scooped.
If you aren't first, you're last. However, getting across the line first while we're rolling over and on fire probably isn't how we want to do it. The coverage was a bit too granular, I'll admit. We will cut down the noise in the future.

Quote:
But while busy trying to decipher the registration process, there was no attempt to discover if there was a quid pro quo (which was almost a certainty) or what it might be.
We did. There was no information available at the time we went through the registration process. All the links were dead. We reported that.

Quote:
Similarly, at times it seems as if we have been treated to the story of the hour on the new UAW contract. I will suggest that in cases like the above two, it might be better to consolidate all the news of the day on that item, once a day, even if it means having to provide multiple bylines. It would seem to be preferable to splitting information and discussion on the topic between several threads.
I think our UAW coverage is in line with our competition. However, the Volkswagen coverage was too granular.

The mechanics of doing multiple bylines adds another layer of complexity.

Quote:
I look forward to reading TTAC almost every day, but sometimes it seems like it is offering quantity in place of quality, to its detriment.
Noted. There are commercial realities at play, however, and I do try to strike a balance between news and features. One of those commercial realities is that we have an incredibly small budget compared to our competitors. Hopefully that will change soon. We will see.

Quote:
In addition, on Jackís blog, another commenter noted that their first and foremost attraction was the forum-like nature of the comments of the B&B, with most of the articles being secondary.
However, without the articles, there is no discussion. We have had a relaunched forum that's been available for a few months. It doesn't seem like the B&B is interested in it.

Quote:
To the extent that pushing out multiple articles in short time spans fragments the interaction of the B&B, that would make that practice detrimental in the long run to the daily attendance of its audience.

Excuses of overwork only work for a while, although they do merit some consideration. But when and if that becomes the chronic state of TTAC, something will have shifted in a bad way.

Better a bit less wordcount/day, and a bit more of condensed and consolidation facts at the end of the day.
I'm trying to find that balance. We keep experimenting to see what works best. Today didn't. That's the lesson we can learn. Or, rather, that I can learn.

Quote:
And please, Mark, consider discouraging some writers from sharp-edged political similes, unless they are essential to the central theme of the article, or they are made by someone qualified to handle sharp objects. Otherwise such comments are distracting at best, or viewed as clickbait, if persistent.
When it comes to editorials, of which I consider car reviews, I let my writers have a bit more freedom in their words. News not so much. I believe the purpose of the Libertarian mention was that of a humorous nature and nothing more.

In addition to that, when it comes to American politics, I have zero invested interest. I hold no loyalties and don't put myself anywhere on the American political spectrum. If a political mention is obviously a joke, I will let it slide. If it's meant to hurt or demean, that's a different story.
markstevenson is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Forum - The Truth About Cars forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.