Borrowing a phrase from The Outlaw Josey Wales, I’m thinking of a metaphor… in terms of blogging… specifically, I’m thinking of comment boxes in blogs. What are comment boxes for? Are they just for looking at or are they there for a reason?
To me, interaction with readers is a significant part of blogging. Perhaps I should amend that definition and say that authors of blogs hope that what they write in posts will stimulate thoughtful commentary from readers, and perhaps lead to a meaningful exchange. Does this sum it up for most?
It just seems that if a blogger doesn’t want comments (as illustrated through the absence of responses to comments to blog posts), then wouldn’t a webpage be more appropriate? Then, noting the option in WordPress, blog posts without comment boxes are possible.
Just an observation after taking a look at a number of blogs recently.
Cenantua's Blog 
Harry Smeltzer
December 18, 2008
Sad day for Josey Wales fans – Sam Bottoms died today.
cenantua
December 18, 2008
Wow, ain’t that just a coincidence! I didn’t know that.
Harry Smeltzer
December 18, 2008
Anyway, I’m breaking this response up because I know you like lots of comments. I don’t think a blogger should feel any less of a blogger if he doesn’t anable comments. One famous/notorious CW blogger who does not enable comments argues that they turn the blog into something that is less personal, less controlled. Think about a web log, essentially an online diary. “Real” diaries and journals don’t have comment features. I say to each his own. I like comments. But if someone sees the blog format, successive postings arranged chronologically, as the best way to put their “stuff” out there, without employing the dynamic-altering comments, I see nothing wrong in that.
cenantua
December 19, 2008
I suppose this goes back to categories of blogging. Blogging takes on various forms, and I’m sure there are those who don’t want to relinquish any control to the reader in interacting with the posts. Yet, depending on the subject matter, I’d argue that the comments can make the discussion even more personal. The “control” part is something I think that a lot of historians have a problem letting go of anyway.
Yet, if the comment boxes are enabled, why do bloggers not interact with the readers in their comments? It just seems it would be easier turning the comment boxes off.
Harry Smeltzer
December 19, 2008
Yes, it seems to me that if you enable the comments, you are inviting comment and interaction, and the reader will have a reasonable expectation of response. I try to respond to each comment, if it invites a response (sometimes they don’t). I get a little irritated when commenters start discussing things with one another. I don’t want my blog to be a discussion board.
cenantua
December 19, 2008
Oh, now that’s another interesting topic. When you outright solicit feedback, do you find you actually get less? I have wondered if making the solicitation obvious turns readers off from commenting. Just a thought, but I think the looking over your shoulder thing is more effective. Making the reader more aware you are looking for an answer doesn’t have as much draw for comments.
I wish we had the thread option in WP.com like they do in WP.org. It would make a lot more sense in the comment boxes.
Harry Smeltzer
December 19, 2008
Yes, typically when I ask for comments I get none or few – though there have been exceptions.
According to the forums, comment threading is coming.
cenantua
December 19, 2008
Yipee! Glad to here threading is coming. Glad to know you also encounter similar situations when soliciting feedback. Sorta/kinda validates my thoughts on that.
caswain01
December 19, 2008
As an avid “reader” of blogs, I’ve noticed several tendencies.
1. Many people don’t comment as they feel intimidated. They don’t want to open their mouths so as to confirm their perceived limited knowledge of the subject.
2. Some people who do feel confident in the subject, often won’t respond simply because they don’t wish to be perceived as some “know it all” who responds to all posts.
3. Other people just flat don’t want to respond, even though they might have tons of things to say, because it would be the equivalent to “showing you their fishing holes.” Call it “you better read my book” attitude.
4. Others would just rather keep the correspondence in private. I actually get about two to three emails or phone calls a week regarding stuff on the blog or HMDB. Some people still like to be “personable” even with the technology.
My first foray into the blogging universe was about three years back. The format sucked, but it was free. After a few months, I dropped it out for some professional reasons.
My second attempt was tied to one of the major social networking sites. After a few posts, I’d garnered the attention of some nare-do-wells who just wanted to smear anything not in line with their views of the world. Every post was countered with a flurry of comments bashing the premise of the discussion.
This last version of my “blogging” is more hobby oriented from my perspective. I try to keep my posts less than “explosive,” but occasionally I go off on something (like Cedar Creek). I get less comments because of that perhaps. 135 comments against 141 posts. Twenty-five comments were simply pings. Maybe half of the remainder were my comments responding to folks.
Several ways to look at it. Either the subjects presented are covered in sufficient detail, and the writing is of such good quality, that people are in awe of the post, and just flat can’t add a single utterance. (That’s the “my ego is too big for my blog” response.) But since no book deal advances have arrived by mail, I doubt this is the case.
On the other hand, perhaps the content presented is so obscure and the text is so confusing that even the most learned scholars have difficulty reading through the trash. Why would they comment then?
More likely just simply that with hundreds of outlets for their Civil War fixes each day, my blog is much like the Chick-Fil-A next to the Monocacy Battlefield. People will stop on the way and grab something, but they aren’t going to compare it to the Catfish place at Shiloh!
I know, that last analogy is lame compared to Harry’s Budda and the Moon thing. But I’m some boiler room techie, and our imaginations are limited when that arts and literature stuff comes into play!
(And I purposely made this a long comment so as to make up for a lack of commenting earlier in the week!)
Craig “don’t drop my quota”
a.k.a. the Marker Guy.
cenantua
December 19, 2008
Wow! That’s a great list of why people don’t respond, but from the perspective of the blogger, if they don’t respond to comments, why do they bother having comment boxes?
And, of course, you can’t even stop at the Chic-Fil-A next to Monacacy on Sunday, so your blog has that beat hands-down. Can’t say as I know about the catfish place at Shiloh… haven’t made it out there yet.
Oh, and getting back to your list of why people don’t comment, maybe it is better that blog post are kept shorter. I can see how long posts would be intimidating.
R
caswain01
December 19, 2008
Robert,
You just lost 10 cool points. Every Civil War “Nut” has to make at least one trip to Shiloh, to include a meal at the Catfish place.
Harry called it stop #8 on his trip:
It has a name, but most of us just call it “That place at Shiloh.” All you can eat, with a view of the river, very close to Pittsburg Landing.
Craig
cenantua
December 19, 2008
Oh, man! 10 cool points!? I’m sure I can make the 10 points up in other ways. I’ll just have to think about it a bit.