Ignored Posts and Reading Strategies (was: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback)

[abigailnus]

Full disclosure: I am a list elf, and have been one for about two months.  I've 
also been a member of the Fantastic Posts writing group since June.  I'm 
writing this letter in my own personal capacity as a member of HPfGU.

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...> wrote:
> I think in an environment where posters feel 
> their posts are ignored (and I'm afraid I think HPFGU may be getting that 
> reputation) 

Sorry to snip so much, but this particular comment seems very important 
to me.  Is this your own personal impression, Shaun, or is it something 
you've noticed other people commenting about?  How about other people 
here?  Do you feel that your posts are being ignored?

I've been a member of HPfGU since December '01.  When you consider the 
length of that period, I'm not a very prolific poster - I posted my 100th post 
only a few days ago.  Some of my posts were ignored, and others created 
massive threads, albeit often spinning off in directions which I hadn't 
intended to discuss, and was often not interested in pursuing.  I never 
experienced the group as an everybody-knows-your-name kind of place the 
way some of the veteran posters did - there were already 4000 members 
when I joined, which may seem like a little now that we've passed 11,000, 
but it isn't.  Being a rather shy person, I never expected a response to most 
of my posts (although I hoped for it), and was often more surprised to get 
feedback, on or off-list.  So, I'm a little tickled by the perception that one is 
automatically entitled to a response on any thought one posts - if that is 
indeed what I'm seeing here.  However, here are a few thoughts on reading 
posts on HPfGU:

1. Don't assume that a message that hasn't been replied to hasn't been read.  
Before OOP came out, when membership was "only" 7000 strong, I worked 
out that in order to support the message volume as it was then, the list 
required only a few hundred active posters.  My calculations were posted on 
OTC, and anyone who looks them up can see that they are highly debatable 
- I assumed that my posting volume was an average one, which by no means 
a foregone conclusions.  I also didn't take into account the fact that posting 
volume changes - most HPfGU members start out posting large amounts of 
messages and then taper off.  For that matter, I didn't take into consideration 
the many members who leave the group without ever unsubscribing, thus 
artificially inflating the list's membership.  

Flawed as my calculations no doubt were, anyone reading the list can see that 
only a fraction of its membership actively contributes to discussions - this is 
as it has always been.  Periods of intense activity such as post-GoF or OOP and, 
to a lesser extent, following the release of the movies, are the exception rather 
then the rule.  What this means in essence is that, even though none of the 
relatively small group of posters felt like responding to your post, chances are 
good that a very large group of people read it.  Which brings me to...

2. Write Feedback.  If you've just read a great (or even just a good) post, and 
can't think of anything to add to, write to author off-list and say so.  As a 
recipient of feedback, I can't even begin to tell you how good it feels to know 
that someone took a few minutes out of their day to write me a few appreciative 
words.  Feedback keeps good posters posting, and inspires them to put more 
time and effort into their posts.  The feedback that I got on my Generational 
Parallels post back in August inspired me to write my Snape the Iconoclast post, 
which until that point had only been and idea buzzing in my mind.  

Another thing that feedback does is help to keep list volume down. Right now 
there are a lot of cases in which a response to a post won't say much more then 
'I think this is a really neat idea'.  Often these responses are couched in terms 
that place them more or less within the boundaries of posting guidelines, but 
they don't really add anything new to the discussion.  My general rule of thumb 
is that unless I have either a counter argument or additional canon, I don't post 
a response to the list.  I admit, I don't always write feedback when I should, but 
whenever a post truly catches my interest, I try to let the author know.

3. Shaun mentioned 'reading strategies', which came up in the OTC debate back 
in August.  A lot of veteran members admitted to skipping the messages of 
unfamiliar posters and concentrating on known quantities - people they knew 
from before publication who could be counted on to deliver good posts.  There 
was an understandably upset reaction from the newbies in that discussion.  I'd 
like to point out that while I myself often engage in this kind of behavior, it is 
more for finding exceptions to the rule then for determining exactly which posts 
I will read.  In other words, if I see a poster I recognize, I might read their post 
even if the subject line alone wouldn't necessarily prompt me to do so.  

When deciding whether to read a post, the most important factor for me is 
almost always  the subject line.  Quite apart from letting me know whether or 
not a topic is of interest to me (for example, I find discussions the time-travel 
mechanics in PoA rather wearying, and find Snape infinitely fascinating), the 
subject line is often a quick indicator of the kind of post one can expect to find 
when clicking through.  

I prefer subject lines to be descriptive and distinctive.  A subject line like 'Snape' 
tells me nothing about the post, but it does indicate to me that the poster might 
be a relative newbie, who is still making his way through a backlog of theories 
that I've already covered (this is not meant as a criticism of this hypothetical 
newbie.  I was a newbie once myself, and I also considered most of the topics 
that this newbie is now considering.  He or she should enjoy themselves, but I no 
longer feel a need to engage in that discussion).  A more elaborate subject line 
lets me know that I should give a post my attention, as the author's notions are 
now a little more structured, and there's a greater chance of my seeing 
something new.

Some posters try to make their subject lines enigmatic as a way of catching 
peoples' eye.  In general, I think this tactic backfires.  A few days ago, someone 
posted a message to the list with a subject line to the effect of 'A new theory 
about Snape'.  I debated with myself for a few minutes before opening that 
message, because the odds were against this theory being new to me.  As it 
turns out, it was a theory I had been unfamiliar with, but a subject line like 
'Snape and the DADA Jinx' would have had an easier time catching my interest. 

Finally, it's important to keep subject lines relevant to the discussion.  Threads 
often drift in various directions, and it's very helpful to change the subject line 
of any message that does this.  This allows your target audience to change with 
the discussion.  For example, a few weeks ago I posted a message about 
Dumbledore's leadership skills, but the discussion soon drifted towards Snape, 
without changing the subject line.  Making sure your subject lines stay current is 
actually in the posting guidelines, but it's a rule that people often ignore.

In general, I've found that HPfGU is, as Amanda wrote, self-correcting.  Posts 
that deserve attention will usually find it.  While it is unfortunate that some 
veteran posters don't frequent the list as often as they used to, and hence 
some newbies posters feel as if 'the establishment' is ignoring them, it is also 
to be expected.  Eventually, discussion topics are exhausted, and some 
members don't feel the need to keep up with the list as religiously as they used 
to.  In my experience, newer members who are also of high quality will tend to 
rise to the top in these older members' stead.  As long as there's always a 
sufficient contingent of veterans capable of instilling the HPfGU atmosphere in 
new members, the list will maintain its character even if its composition changes.

Abigail