Blogpost Project Entry? June 17, 2010 4:35 AM Subscribe
In the Post to Projects screen, it warns: "...so please try to keep it limited to launching new projects and please don't use the space to link to a blog entry or an essay you wrote."
First, this is absolutely nothing against the awesome ScoutingNY blog; I can see why the post was put up on the Blue. However, it originated from a Projects page. It strikes me as a very 'bloggy' Projects post, a bunch of images and minimal information, and hardly 'unveiling a new site' like the Projects page recommends. So, now my impression is that bloggy posts are OK if they are largely original content (essentially launching a 'one page' website) -- or do they just get a pass if they are sufficiently awesome enough?
First, this is absolutely nothing against the awesome ScoutingNY blog; I can see why the post was put up on the Blue. However, it originated from a Projects page. It strikes me as a very 'bloggy' Projects post, a bunch of images and minimal information, and hardly 'unveiling a new site' like the Projects page recommends. So, now my impression is that bloggy posts are OK if they are largely original content (essentially launching a 'one page' website) -- or do they just get a pass if they are sufficiently awesome enough?
I actually asked Cortex about this once when I was about to put up a complex diagramming exercise I'd done based on Kurosawa's Rashomon, and his extended explanation (which I'm sure he'll be along soon to provide) was along the lines of just because something happens to be posted in a blog, that doesn't make it the sort of "blog entry" they discourage.
So my mental filter is "if I saw this as a standalone, single-serving Web page, without any other context, would it be worth linking?" The ScoutingNY thing happened to be a blog entry, but had it been its own, standalone Web page on that building, I wouldn't think "this is kind of weak," I'd think "hey, this is pretty awesome."
posted by Shepherd at 5:25 AM on June 17, 2010
So my mental filter is "if I saw this as a standalone, single-serving Web page, without any other context, would it be worth linking?" The ScoutingNY thing happened to be a blog entry, but had it been its own, standalone Web page on that building, I wouldn't think "this is kind of weak," I'd think "hey, this is pretty awesome."
posted by Shepherd at 5:25 AM on June 17, 2010
ScoutingNY can put up almost every single post they make to projects if they want, because it is awesome.
posted by empath at 5:28 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by empath at 5:28 AM on June 17, 2010
I want to reiterate -- ScoutingNY is awesome, and that post is awesome. I was concerned that either they were breaking rules or I misunderstood the rules. I came here for policy clarification, not to snark at an awesome post.
posted by AzraelBrown at 5:36 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by AzraelBrown at 5:36 AM on June 17, 2010
Agree that it doesn't seem like what Projects was intended for. That's what that blog always posts.
posted by smackfu at 5:38 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by smackfu at 5:38 AM on June 17, 2010
Hmm, after re-reading the Projects guidelines I kind of see the point that it's not a "whole site" or something that took "a few months to design, create, and build". I still classify it as a photo gallery rather than a blog post though (interesting question: is a blog that photos photo galleries still just a blog, or a differently-formatted photo gallery, or both?), so I think it comes down to whether a photo gallery is a good fit for Projects or not.
posted by EndsOfInvention at 5:50 AM on June 17, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by EndsOfInvention at 5:50 AM on June 17, 2010 [1 favorite]
is a blog that photos photo galleries...
er, a blog that posts photo galleries...
posted by EndsOfInvention at 5:51 AM on June 17, 2010
er, a blog that posts photo galleries...
posted by EndsOfInvention at 5:51 AM on June 17, 2010
This post seems to better illustrate the point. I don't have a problem with it. I wish the guidelines said "significant content" or something like that.
posted by cjorgensen at 6:49 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by cjorgensen at 6:49 AM on June 17, 2010
Some of these comments seem to be missing the issue. No one's saying the link is mediocre. It's a question about what counts as a good post for Projects. I've done a lot of blog posts that I think are good enough that I imagine lots of people would enjoy reading them -- but I wouldn't post them to Projects. On just two occasions I've posted to Projects a major, long-term project from my blog that spanned many different posts and could have been a website unto itself. I figured the fact that I happened to host it on Blogger out of convenience was incidental to the content. But I don't generally feel like I'm free to post any old blog post to Projects as long as I think it's something that people would like to read. Am I wrong about this?
posted by Jaltcoh at 6:58 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by Jaltcoh at 6:58 AM on June 17, 2010
Projects is moderated, so presumably all have been vetted.
posted by cjorgensen at 7:00 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by cjorgensen at 7:00 AM on June 17, 2010
OK, that's good to know ... but we can still ask for clarification on the standards.
posted by Jaltcoh at 7:01 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by Jaltcoh at 7:01 AM on June 17, 2010
Yeah mathowie is the one who approves all the projects and I'm not totally sure what his metric in. Should be more than "yet another blog post" but I know that in cases where people are writers [like The Straightener] a long well researched article is certaily considered a project. I had somehow thought that scountingny already had an account here but basically one Projects post that is a combination "hey I wrote a terrific blog post, by the way this is my blog" is definitely okay.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:26 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:26 AM on June 17, 2010
I made the guideline and my thinking behind it when drafting it was I didn't want to see someone make a post once per month (which is the limit) linking to whatever latest blog post they have, in an attempt to get traffic to their blog. I wanted people to stop and think and only submit what they considered their best work.
The post on the NYC Scouting blog is definitely one of their best and I can understand why they posted it to projects. Lots of posts on that blog are cool, but the author found a truly rare thing that is covered nowhere else on the web, so I approved it.
They've only made two posts to Projects, so this isn't a pattern of posting every month I tried to prevent and it seemed like a truly special once-in-a-great-while kind of post from them.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 7:28 AM on June 17, 2010
The post on the NYC Scouting blog is definitely one of their best and I can understand why they posted it to projects. Lots of posts on that blog are cool, but the author found a truly rare thing that is covered nowhere else on the web, so I approved it.
They've only made two posts to Projects, so this isn't a pattern of posting every month I tried to prevent and it seemed like a truly special once-in-a-great-while kind of post from them.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 7:28 AM on June 17, 2010
Yeah, I think Matt's main intent with the language there is to discourage stuff that's not actually content on the web (so an amazon sales page for your new book isn't really a Project, but a nice little webpage with some actual content of its own would be okay) and stuff that's not very substantial at all (so "today I ate a cheese sandwich" is the sort of blog entry that doesn't fit the bill, whereas "here is a 2000 word entry on my blog that details my initial scientific inquiry into the optimal cheese sandwich; provolone, havarti, and pepper jack are considered..." would be great).
It needs to be actual web content, of some amount of substance, basically. It's okay if it is formally a blog entry, it just needs to rise above the level of "just a random entry in my blog". It should be something relatively exceptional—whether because it's a really unusually complex/substantial entry on an otherwise fairly joe-schmoe blog or because it's a representative entry on a really kick-ass blog is sort of immaterial in isolation.
And yeah, ultimately since Projects is moderated it's a given that someone (usually Matt) has taken a look at it and decided it was okay. Not to say you can't flag or let us know or start a metatalk if you think there's something weird about something that did get approved, etc., just as a point of fact that stuff that goes up has at least passed by someone's eyes.
We can take a look at the Projects posting page and see if that language bears a little updating now that the sites been around for a good long while and we've had a chance to develop a finer sense of what works and what doesn't. As far as I know, that may be what was originally there when it went live however many years ago.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:33 AM on June 17, 2010 [1 favorite]
It needs to be actual web content, of some amount of substance, basically. It's okay if it is formally a blog entry, it just needs to rise above the level of "just a random entry in my blog". It should be something relatively exceptional—whether because it's a really unusually complex/substantial entry on an otherwise fairly joe-schmoe blog or because it's a representative entry on a really kick-ass blog is sort of immaterial in isolation.
And yeah, ultimately since Projects is moderated it's a given that someone (usually Matt) has taken a look at it and decided it was okay. Not to say you can't flag or let us know or start a metatalk if you think there's something weird about something that did get approved, etc., just as a point of fact that stuff that goes up has at least passed by someone's eyes.
We can take a look at the Projects posting page and see if that language bears a little updating now that the sites been around for a good long while and we've had a chance to develop a finer sense of what works and what doesn't. As far as I know, that may be what was originally there when it went live however many years ago.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:33 AM on June 17, 2010 [1 favorite]
morning, guys
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:34 AM on June 17, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:34 AM on June 17, 2010 [2 favorites]
morning sam
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:35 AM on June 17, 2010 [10 favorites]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:35 AM on June 17, 2010 [10 favorites]
Cool, thanks for the explanations, jessamynmathowiecortex.
posted by Jaltcoh at 7:38 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by Jaltcoh at 7:38 AM on June 17, 2010
There are a few MeFite "entities" who have a constant flow of similarly fantastic projects that are hosted from the same source, and many are posted to projects as you can see from their project post history. Nothing to dominate the Projects list, but more than a one-off.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:09 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by filthy light thief at 10:09 AM on June 17, 2010
Yeah, I double checked with Jess to make sure my use of Projects was cool waaaaaay back when, and I've always thought it's extremely awesome that the mods are flexible and give case-by-case consideration with the guidelines so that people who aren't tech oriented can still have a space to submit their original content and creations.
posted by The Straightener at 10:51 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by The Straightener at 10:51 AM on June 17, 2010
I wasn't calling out your use, The Straightener, just pointing out that it fit the bill of what the OP was questioning. I figured if it wasn't allowed it wouldn't have been approved.
posted by cjorgensen at 11:00 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by cjorgensen at 11:00 AM on June 17, 2010
No sweat, just wanted to add because my sense was this stuff was all getting hammered out back when I first approached Jess about posting articles. The issue then, IIRC, was more about whether the entire article/photoset or whatever was available online and not behind some kind of paywall so much that it was not a web build type submission. So there's been a couple years worth of consideration into where the lines get drawn on what types of content submissions are okay. I actually thought there was a Meta about this previously but I guess not.
posted by The Straightener at 11:09 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by The Straightener at 11:09 AM on June 17, 2010
the author found a truly rare thing that is covered nowhere else on the web, so I approved it.
I hope this keeps happening (which I'm sure it will), it's one of the reasons why I'm here.
posted by shelleycat at 9:20 PM on June 17, 2010
I hope this keeps happening (which I'm sure it will), it's one of the reasons why I'm here.
posted by shelleycat at 9:20 PM on June 17, 2010
« Older G8/G20 - they few; we many [x2] | The Second Annual MetaFilter Interactive Contest:... Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by EndsOfInvention at 5:04 AM on June 17, 2010