jjoyce wrote:Mean Scenester wrote:I do, however, suspect that the Old Guard at Isthmus doesn't quite get the electronic publishing paradigm shift or have the slightest clue how best to leverage the free content submitted daily to this site.
It's possible to be contradictory here, however, as Bill Lueders' opinion piece (clearly labeled as such and running under his byline) doesn't represent any institutional opinion at all.
True. Unless, that is, you consider Lueders himself to be something of an institution in this town.
It's also fair that while people are not only allowed by encouraged to anonymously criticize pretty much anything they'd like to on these boards, it's okay for that act itself to be criticized.
Yeah, fair game. I guess I agree with your assessment in the related thread that Lueders was wasting his energy in this particular case. Also, by calling out A.V. as "one of those miserable cowards who post comments on websites using silly pseudonyms," Lueders is making a broad generalization which could easily be interpreted (perhaps misinterpreted) to apply to all those who post on message boards under pseudonyms. It's not difficult to read into his tone a certain disdain that I don't believe he would risk trotting out in reference to the print readership.
Just sayin'. I suspect there are plenty of people who spend far more time perusing the website than they do the paper and it might be best not to casually refer to them as silly cowards.
Mind you, I'm bored, this really isn't that big a deal and I hardly think it merits an apology to the forum community. Hell, I'd guess Lueders has taken enough anonymous flack that he earned his rebuttal. Just reads kind of silly, is all, as long as we're on the subject.
Your point is well taken regarding leveraging online content. I suppose it's a bit of a minefield. Clearly, as the last few days submissions have proven, you can't please everyone.