To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (30562 ) 7/11/2009 4:53:32 AM From: axial Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 46821 The dynamics of websites and user participation...How to scan a cat and other subjects -Snip- "MetaFilter is terrifically simple in concept. Every day, members post two or three dozen entries to the site's front page, then gather round to discuss them. The posts attempt to gather the “best of the web,” though exactly what that means is the subject of endless debate. Last Monday's mix, for instance, included a roundup of online resources about California's disintegrating budget, a discussion of the death of Robert McNamara, an intriguing obituary from Cleveland, and an eye-opening introduction to the Giant Pacific Octopus (which turns out to be larger, smarter and nastier than you'd have thought). There's considerable pressure on posters to make their contributions good. Interesting entries get showered with praise; the dull, dated or irrelevant will draw complaints (or worse, a “meh”). The site plays out like a never-ending editorial meeting, with members hashing out the relevance of each new story as it comes up. MetaFilter's denizens have a penchant for overthinking, a penchant for being too clever by half, a penchant for the occasional in-joke. The prevailing sensibility leans toward the liberal and the smart-ass. But there's also a pervasive spirit of fair play. The discussion is usually free of the ad-hominem bickering, and MeFi has a way of drawing out personal connections. A discussion about the birds that brought Capt. Sullenberger's plane into the Hudson was enlivened by a lab-worker who studies bird-strikes. A debate about whether the Road Runner says “Meep meep” or “Beep beep” was settled by a family friend of the Looney Tunes' creators. It's all a bit utopian, in its way. In an age where websites are always hunting for the next great trick for keeping unruly commentors in line – voting mechanisms? User scores? Enforced real names? – MetaFilter seems to be held together by the sheer stubbornness of its culture. A crew of four moderators keeps an eye on things, pruning judiciously, but their presence is hardly noticeable. The site's rules are simple and loosely enforced. The moderators enforce a strict ban on posting self-promotional links, for instance, but many of the site's other mores are up for debate. (A separate discussion board is reserved for discussions of the MetaFilter itself, sparing casual readers the endless self-examination.) People who violate the site's spirit of civility have to worry more about irate locals than vengeful moderators. “MetaFilter has a very active immune system,” wrote Josh Millard, one of the site's moderators, when I e-mailed to ask how the site's civility had lasted a decade. “People on the site have long memories, a keen sense of the spirit of the site, and a willingness to speak up when they think something is wrong.” A few practical decisions helped along the way. Chief among them was managing the site's growth. Haughey kept a tight grip on new signups, even shutting them down altogether in some of the early years. Nowadays, to post links and comments on the site, members have to pay a one-time $5 fee. (A fee, in the spirit of disclosure, that I've paid myself.) It's not much, but a buy-in is a buy-in. It's also enough of a barrier to discourage those who would join on a whim, drop a stink-bomb, and leave. The influx of new members is kept to a manageable dozen or so every day – only a fraction of whom will become active contributors – and the result is an exercise in controlled assimilation."theglobeandmail.com Jim