Greg Laden makes a simple analysis of what triggers comments on Pharyngula: it turns out the least interesting subject is me (my self-esteem is being battered lately), with science close on my heels, but that you love to chatter about creationists and godlessness.
Now I wonder how strong the response will be if I say this post is about none of those things: it’s about you.
Me? Well here is something you may not know about me… I was People Magazine’s person of the year for 2007.
Cheeto
Hey, you got tons of comments on the Blank Post… How is that classified?
I wish to correct you PZ: The least interesting topic is not “PZ Myers,” per se, but self deprecation of PZ Myers.
Maybe you should go easier on yourself…
(Probably a bad idea, though, could go badly wrong.)
Coturnix: “Hey, you got tons of comments on the Blank Post… How is that classified?”
Holy crap, I missed that. Yes, this says something important. But I think I’ll leave it unsaid…..
Maybe its not so much what people are interested in but what people feel confortable responding to.
Most of the scientific papers and finds PZ posts really don’t require much comment.
“Wow, thats cool” or “So thats how that works” need really only be said once.
Where as posts on creationists and ID inspire much debate as they are usually topics people feel they have something worth saying. “Ken Ham puts up new museum” is something even a novice evo-creation debator can say something about and not seem like a total fool.
I’ve got a troll who seems to think my blog is about him. (Though he has been providing me with source material for my Doggerel series, lately.)
I expect we’re also seeing the Matthew Effect — the rich get richer — thanks to the “Top Five / Most Active” sidebar.
I honestly think “you love to chatter about creationists and godlessness” could easily be rephrased as “arguing is what people like to do on the internet.”
Do we get a pretty magazine cover with a shiny mirrorlike panel in the middle of it too?
I’d just like to say that I think Fox1 is completely wrong about this arguing business.
I came here for a conversation.
Buy me a beer, and I’ll tell you everything about me worth knowing! }:-0
I was People Magazine’s person of the year for 2007.
Well! I was SPIN magazine’s Artist of the Year for 2006! (And so were you… and you… and you, and you!)
I think Ryan Kitchel hit the nail on head. I enjoy reading the science posts the most (the Marathon Man post was got me reading this blog in the first place), but I usually don’t have any worthwhile comments to write about those.
I’d rather be talking about the use of godless Angelina Jolie in religious imagery.
The science posts generally don’t really call for too much comment, except to pat you on the back at reasonable intervals for doing such an impressive job of summarizing and explaining.
So we’d love to chatter the MOST about godless creationists. Be nice and go find some for us…
Actually, when I think about it, those Deepok Chopra rants probably fit the bill. He was attacking evolution from the holistic “It’s-not-a-God-it’s-Cosmic-Consciousness” perspective. As I recall, there was chatter.
People already has a person of the year for 2007?
I was offered Time’s Man of the Year for 2006, but I turned it down. Was worried I’d have to start hanging out with Ted Turner.
About the science posts: Pharnygula is an opportunity to avoid work. Reading science is work! (Also, like other commenters, I’m much less willing to shoot my mouth off when talking about science.)
Bronzedog, did you see this?
http://pharyngulatopics.blogspot.com/
Apparently your troll is none other than A Good Christian Man. Not that he would have the time to troll under ten different names of course…
Now I’m wondering how many of these people have a real boner for Pharyngula or if it’s just one or two obsessed people. There seem to be a lot of anti-PZ blogs out there.
Threads where I am commenting are typically the most populated.
Coincidence?
I think not, my friends. I think not.
Mena:
Bronzedog, did you see this?
http://pharyngulatopics.blogspot.com/
Apparently your troll is none other than A Good Christian Man
How cool is that… having an entire blog-o-spot dedicated to hating you.
I expect we’re also seeing the Matthew Effect — the rich get richer — thanks to the “Top Five / Most Active” sidebar.
Maybe the powers-that-be at seed should change it to activity/usual activity, so posts that are unusually active for any blog appear
Posting about us, eh? I see you’ve taken the Time cop out. An interesting gambit, Dr. Myers, but not interesting enough!
BOOOOORRRRRIIIIINNNNGGGGGG!!!!
Let’s get back to atheism and creationism.
How many religionists does it take to screw in a light bulb?
GWW – you’re asking the wrong question. The right one is “How many prayers does it take before a light bulb is miraculously screwed in?”.
Bob
Wouldn’t it be better for Jesus to return and bring the old lightbulb back to life?
My favorite was always the one where PZ was “sex posed”, but it seems that even Jason has now grown bored and given up.
me? hell, i can talk about me for… minutes!
Atheist Creationists? There’s always the Raelians.
It is simple why this is. It’s a lot easier to write political rants than scientific essays, since political rants need no relation to reality or even logical coherence.
Same goes for comments.
It’s sweet of PZ to say that this blog is about me, but having been named Time’s Man of the Year for 2006, I’m already top-heavy with honors.
“Good Christian Man”–why is that the people who are noisiest about being Christian are the least likely to behave like Christ? Mind, volunteering to be crucified would be a nice start.
Very clever, PZ. We all hop over to Greg’s site, where we read this:
“I am fairly new to this blogging thing, and I have to say that as I try to learn the ropes, I am in awe of PZ Myers Pharyngula.”
This post is not about US, it’s about YOU! YOU YOU YOU.
Very clever, PZ. We all hop over to Greg’s site, where we read this:
“I am fairly new to this blogging thing, and I have to say that as I try to learn the ropes, I am in awe of PZ Myers Pharyngula.”
This post is not about US, it’s about YOU! YOU YOU YOU.
…. as the so-called “Greg Laden” reaches to his neck and pulls off the very handsome and debonair rubber mask revealing himself to be none other than ….
Zeno said:
“I came here for a conversation.”
It might just be me, but I find blog sites are more intersecting dialogues than conversations.
I really could have used that. I have this f-ing reindeer my wife likes me to put in the lawn every December, and it has one blown bulb, so the antlers don’t light up.
Where is He when I need Him?
About me?? Is it a slow news day or something?
Me? Very interesting choice of subject, if I do say so myself. Did you know I once shook hands with Dame Margot Fonteyn?
::raises hand::
I like your science posts. You put enough phylogeny in everything to keep my interest even in you mol-bio posts. I suspect the reason why people don’t comment is because most people (including myself) aren’t biologists and most of your science posts are pretty bio-heavy. (I try to have input when you talk about geology or paleontology, though!)
Oh, right, an addendum: and you don’t get trolls and the ensuing troll-mocking when you post about myosin. Trolls don’t like having to read up on topics before posting.
I’m sure part of it is a positive feedback loop (am I using that correctly? x.x) kind of effect. I know I certainly tend to pay more attention to the comments section of posts that already have quite a few…and tend to start rhetorical barfights… ^.^
The creationism posts have more comments because we keep feeding the trolls that pop up there.
PZ,
OT but If you don’t already know, Michael Bérubé is closing down his blog today – last post is up.
MikeM: Never a cop or a god around when you need one.
…it’s about you.
Finally, some attention.
I commented on a posting about The complete, perfect, and only review of Dawkins’ The God Delusion that anyone ever needs to read, and wrote the only Pharyngula post you ever need to read:
I guess I could have added:
Naturally we all want to comment on the stupid people out there — what better way to distinguish ourselves from them!
Have you seen this?
http://www.marriedtothesea.com/010807/dont-even-get-me-started-on-intelligent-design.gif
And we’re going to try to wiretap aliens.
http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3616600
Wonder if they’ll ask the NSA for help.
I really could have used that. I have this f-ing reindeer my wife likes me to put in the lawn every December, and it has one blown bulb, so the antlers don’t light up.
Where is He when I need Him?
Have you checked the obvious places?
http://bitsandpieces1.blogspot.com/2006/09/jesus-image-found-in-dogs-butt.html
This blog is a refreshing antidote to daily stupidity.
Listen, unless I’m an octopus or a creationist, I really don’t want to hear about it!
Well these results don’t surprise me at all. It’s the talk.origins syndrome at work. Comments get used nearly ten times as much when commenters are arguing with each other. When they’re all just responding to the main blog post, you don’t get nearly the same kind of levels of commenting.
Screw in a light bulb? It’s hard enough screwing in the back seat of a car!
In Simon Green’s latest Nightside book (Hell to Pay, the protagonist John Taylor briefly meets a new God Of Creationism. The meeting is brief because Taylor makes him disappear in a puff of logic. (He’s not really the religious sort…. ;-) )
PZ, I love your science posts, but not being a biologist, I don’t know enough to comment on them.
Recall that comments are a measure of emotional excitement – that’s why the PZ-vs-whomever slugfests get so many comments.
I’m interested in the science but I lack the requisite knowledge to understand most of the things you post here.
Sad, too, considering that I took AP Biology in high school and aced it. You’d think taking the skin of a cat would have taught me something.
I tune in for the cephalopods. I have always had an affection for them and to find a blogger with the same love of them is splendid. If I commented on those posts it would be to say “Nice cephalopods”. And it’s just stating the obvious, since everybody knows that cephalopods are amazing creatures.
I realized that I had forgotten what exactly a pharyngula is (if I ever knew) so I went looking….
Have you any idea how difficult it is to Google the word “pharyngula” and find a link that is not to, or in reference to, this blog? You OWN the term!
Cory: Have you any idea how difficult it is to Google the word “pharyngula” and find a link that is not to, or in reference to, this blog? You OWN the term!
I had a similar experience when I first tried to learn about the statistical programming language “r” … r is not what you want to Google.
Ditto Tanya and llewelly. I am not a scientist (nor will I ever be, not by the standards of this community) but I am a fan: a fan of science, of nature, of rational thought, of human curiosity and invention, of minds who use their light to dispell shadows , rather than to cast their own shadow upon others…. And of intelligent sea creatures, too, of course!
CYDE: Well these results don’t surprise me at all. It’s the talk.origins syndrome at work. Comments get used nearly ten times as much when commenters are arguing with each other. When they’re all just responding to the main blog post, you don’t get nearly the same kind of levels of commenting.
I’m sure you are absolutely correct. But in this particular case, I think we are passing 50 or so posts and it looks like we all totally agree with each other on everything so far.
If you’re still curious cory, there is a “pharyngula stage embryo” link on the upper left column of the blog. It leads to an article that is certainly information packed.
What amazes me is how popular this blog has become with a name like that!
Yea, but did you know that I once shook hands with PZ Myers …..
it looks like we all totally agree with each other on everything so far.
No it doesn’t. ;)
Is it really true Desert Donkey?
Great White Wonder says:it looks like we all totally agree with each other on everything so far.
No it doesn’t. ;)
Well, you are obviously some kind of troglodyte, go back into your cave!!!
And another thing …..
So what was this about a blind watch
maker?I’d put the blank post in the “atheism” category, since it was clearly intended as a post about God[lessness]. But, seriously, I prefer the science posts by a wide margin; they generate far more illumination than heat, which is the opposite of what the Atheism posts do, even if the latter garner more comments.
Idlemind: But, seriously, I prefer the science posts by a wide margin; they generate far more illumination than heat, which is the opposite of what the Atheism posts do, even if the latter garner more comments.
Perhaps what is needed is a button you can press indicating some kind of reaction to the science posts. Perhaps something like what we often see on “help” web sites ..
“what this information useful to you” or “did this information answer your question”
… but taylored to science posts. Any suggestions as to what that would entail?
Like …
Please check one of the following:
___ Yeah, I knew that
___ Interesting, but kind of boring too.
___ Wow, that’s cool but I’m not sure I believe you
___ Holy crap! I gotta tell somebody about this
___ Omygod you changed my life with this post,
I wanna have your baby
Interesting, but kind of boring too.
Heh! Gotta love that one:)
outeast: Heh! Gotta love that one:)
Well, this (interesting/boring) probably describes most important stuff in science.