Support moblog. Voice your opinion in the forum!!"
"To Gloucester. I enclose a sponge. Love, Joe"
Foolowing Steve's idea, here goes....
I don't understand this HL.
8th Jun 2007 23:12 edit delete Helen says:
I think I do.
8th Jun 2007 23:13 edit delete Puddlepuff says:
Me neither,.... I meen,... a picture of two wax statue's?
8th Jun 2007 23:13 edit delete swamprose says:
okay, helen, explain it to me.
8th Jun 2007 23:15 edit delete Puddlepuff says:
Do share Helen :)
8th Jun 2007 23:30 edit delete Sprocket says:
8th Jun 2007 23:33 edit delete swamprose says:
it's okay everyone. Helen knows.
8th Jun 2007 23:36 edit delete JokerXL says:
I can guess!
8th Jun 2007 23:37 edit delete nige says:
let me be the first to say:
8th Jun 2007 23:38 edit delete swamprose says:
yum, nige? case for more female mods just made.
8th Jun 2007 23:40 edit delete taniwha says:
They do look still. Curare?
8th Jun 2007 23:41 edit delete nige says:
haha. more female mods? yum to that too.
8th Jun 2007 23:45 edit delete swamprose says:
I just went through this blog. The babes don't read it or respond. so yes, nige, more babes on the modblog. there are only two.. I feel like I can say anything here and no one will notice.
8th Jun 2007 23:54 edit delete ViX says:
I'll like an HL explanation too please!
8th Jun 2007 23:56 edit delete Puddlepuff says:
*hits fist on table*
An explanation we want. :) And a de-highlight on my last picture if this stays a HL.
9th Jun 2007 00:01 edit delete swamprose says:
I think helen is asleep. I am patient. I can wait.
9th Jun 2007 00:01 edit delete Puddlepuff says:
Someone have her number? Wake her up :p
9th Jun 2007 00:04 edit delete White Fluffy Clouds says:
lol Im sure she'd really appreciate it.
'But it was very important, honest'
9th Jun 2007 00:08 edit delete swamprose says:
we can do this without helen. so why is this a HL? hello?
9th Jun 2007 00:19 edit delete ookiine says:
9th Jun 2007 00:23 edit delete AAH says:
"Do you think they'll notice my fake tan?", says Girl 1 .. "You mean, that's not real??!", says the Blonde
9th Jun 2007 00:37 edit delete swamprose says:
sexy = hl?
9th Jun 2007 00:42 edit delete goode says:
i had dinner with them one at live and loud in Glasgow a few years back.. well when i say with them i mean at the same table! And when i say dinner i mean a light snack!
I love Nadine and Cheryl this is a photo of dreams for me!
9th Jun 2007 00:47 edit delete swamprose says:
well, hey goode, you eat with interesting people. I am female. so it just doesn't give me the same kind of shivers. this is a hl for you?
9th Jun 2007 00:50 edit delete OJ says:
Interesting. I'm glad someone has brought this up (thanks Swamprose).
I presumed it was a highlight because it's a commercial blog and it's new, which I could at least understand. But if that's not the case then it's pretty poor.
I could have sworn I saw a cleavage shot highlighted in the last few weeks. If I weren't already pretty jaded about the whole highlight business i might have made a note of it.
So Swamprose, I agree with you about the need for female mods. Other than that I've pretty much stopped looking at highlights.
9th Jun 2007 01:00 edit delete swamprose says:
all the mods are asleep. all uk,cept for belf.
so yes, I am with the Puff, you can take down my HL too. best shot I had was of plants, not the eye. I am not interested in being alongside the babes.
9th Jun 2007 01:10 edit delete Helen says:
I think OJ has it.
Although the blog's not all that new.
And I guess they're pretty and famous and at no. 1 in the charts a lot and here they are, posing especially for us in front of a cameraphone. Nice and intimate. In touch with the fans.
It's not a highlight for 'us' as such. It's a highlight to say "oi, this blog is here", as it may interest the passing browser (and a few boys). And hey, it's Cheryl Cole, what's good enough for the front page of The Sun once a month and Heat magazine every week, has to be good for one highlight on Moblog, surely?
9th Jun 2007 01:45 edit delete Helen says:
(Sorry I abandoned Moblog for a bit. I was suckered into the world of FaceBook, got a bit absorbed in drawing a picture of a tiger for Margaret.)
9th Jun 2007 01:59 edit delete Hotdog says:
I prefer to highlight on the artist merit of the shot, but I can see that it may be of interest to the passing trade and may encourage a few sign ups.
9th Jun 2007 02:04 edit delete Hward says:
I like the picture! If it wasn't given a HL, I wouldn't have know about the GA Moblog.
Well done whoever gave it a HL!
9th Jun 2007 03:07 edit delete Electric Sheep says:
HL? EH. wtf. oK!
(and guys, they're not "hot", not my classification of h4wt anyways)
9th Jun 2007 04:08 edit delete goode says:
highlight's a highlight!
There has been some shit (My opinion obviously) posted that has been highlighted recently!
 *unfair to pinpoint certain people's blogs
put up or shut up is what i say! some are too quick to jump down the throats of the highlighters/moblogers!
I'm not saying this is a brilliant highlight, but it IS a highlight. You can't change that! protest all you like!
"a de-highlight on my last picture if this stays a HL." >>Can be arranged!
I dislike arguing over what is and what isn't a highlight! :(
[Please crucify me for my rant!]
9th Jun 2007 05:17 edit delete swamprose says:
sorry goode, crucifixion is not my idea of a good time. it was an honest question, not some sort of mod criticism. I like it that I don't always understand a HL, it pushes me to look harder at things. in this case, I honestly did not understand. No ulterior motives.
9th Jun 2007 05:40 edit delete AgentProvocateur says:
Agree with Swamprose. Just thought HL was all about visual concepts, ideas, different POV's, creative awareness, whareva..As in most cases, there has to be some kind of a "second-look" to it, but, oh well..
9th Jun 2007 05:50 edit delete AAH says:
Would anyone like some popcorn?
9th Jun 2007 06:59 edit delete swamprose says:
god I love this blog. popcorn? big hug.
9th Jun 2007 07:03 edit delete bronxelf says:
I have no idea who highlighted this one, nor why. I do know it wasn't me. (and ironically, I was asleep too.)
We highlight photos for various reasons. My guess is that this one was just for promotional value but I have no way to know that for certain. The only person who would say is the person who did it, and in this particular case it was *likely* (though not by any means definitely) Alfie, in which case you know what? He can do anything he wants.
However, more female mods wouldn't have changed this photo(or similar others) being highlighted. It's not as though all of a sudden there would be *fewer* photos like this highlighted were more mods female. The highlights would just go by a bit faster. It's not like there's only x number of mods and when one mod gets chosen another leaves. It just adds another to the pool.
However I do want to address Goode, because this really annoyed me:
If you dislike arguing about highlights then simply don't do it. No one stapled your eyeballs to this discussion. However your proclaiming a list of photos you think "are shit" is hardly making a case for not liking to argue about it.
For the record, you/we *CAN* change it-it's been done before. I am not saying it will be in this case because again- no idea who highlighted this one or why. I don't de-highlight things I didn't highlight in the first place. But don't proclaim that protesting it won't change anything, because that's simply not the case. It's not the case historically and it's not the case technically.
Further your obnoxious "can be arranged" to Puddlepuff shows just how much it *CAN* be changed.
9th Jun 2007 08:31 edit delete AAH says:
Get your popcorn, hot n fresh!
9th Jun 2007 08:35 edit delete swamprose says:
hello belf. and thanks for entering the discussion. I do not think more female mods would make a difference, but as in any organization I am all for equality and I love this blog and the proportion of female to male mods is not kosher.
I am not interested in rants or cruxificions. I am way past Hls for myself. I enjoy HLs because they challlenge my preconceptions of what a good photo is about. so bless the mods, and thank god they are opinionated individuals.
9th Jun 2007 08:56 edit delete Steve says:
I'm putting my chips all in and betting on an Alfie HL.
Just a thought and I might be opening a can of worms here, but what kind of split is there between Male and Female members of Moblog? I would guess (and could well be wrong) that there are more guys. So shouldn't there be more guy Mods?
Mat did offer to make more girl mods ages ago but I don't think many people took him up on his offer, it's somewhere in the depths of the forum.
9th Jun 2007 09:11 edit delete swamprose says:
steve, as one of the top hL people on the blog, your comments count. I asked a lot of questions when I was in the UK. I wanted to know how it works, what was important, and how to keep this insane blog relevant.
I don't think female mods would make any kind of different decisions, and frankly. I have some kind of silly affection for alfie HLs. But if the blog is moving on to facebook and other places, I want us to talk about it.
9th Jun 2007 09:29 edit delete AAH says:
So I'm imagining this is like my moblog space and I rock up to find a huge political discussion over something I had nothing to do with (except post the pic) and regardless of how good the popcorn is, I'm bewildered and confused as to what the f this has to do with me.
So hey .. all issues aside, take it somewhere else and respect the blogspace?
btw, does anyone else want to catch David Cassidy in Atlantic City tonight? I hear there's free popcorn
9th Jun 2007 09:41 edit delete James says:
How about everyone go and take some photos instead of arguing?
Seriously, is this really such a big deal? I have many more important things to worry about in my life than a photo I don't think worthy of a highlight!
Moblogging is not a competition folks, it's meant to be fun!
9th Jun 2007 09:50 edit delete Essitam says:
WOW aren't we an opinionated bunch...I quite often see photos that I think wow thats gotta be highlighted and then isn't, and then I'll see a highlight and will think erm...why?
We (well I) love getting highlights but even some of my pics that have been highlighted I think why, when in my opinion I have taken some better ones that haven't been.
I think when it comes to highlighting it is as much down to who is online when you post your pics, as to the photographic merit...
4 brilliant pictures doesn't equal a highlight if no one is around to see it but one crap picture can equal a highlight if just one mod who it appeals to is,
So how about we just go out and inundate moblog with fantastic pictures that scream for a highlight and then this one wont be on the front page for long!
9th Jun 2007 10:00 edit delete Helen says:
How many of the mods have actually put themselves forward and volunteered for duty?
I don't think that's generally how it works. I believe OJ, for a start, has expressed some interest.
Anyway, moblog is desperately trying to widen its audience. It is a tight community and that's nice, but it must be intimidating to new users. So, if using Girls Aloud and promoting their presence here works, then good for Moblog. (Maybe the girls will be encouraged to try a little harder with their photography for that next highlight...)
9th Jun 2007 10:19 edit delete AAH says:
To widen means to expand also. So .. highlights are a nifty feature for a small community to embrace, however if the community grows and their tastes with it, then does the ol highlights feature still appeal? Probably not. Helen is right. Perhaps a rethink on highlights? Artistic highlights, Teen highlights, etc. Categories will have to be considered.
I would imagine the moblog management are hoping moblog becomes successful enough to sell .. this will only happen if it's format does indeed widen to include other features. It has potential to be the next MySpace, except better.
9th Jun 2007 10:28 edit delete Puddlepuff says:
Dammit,... I missed a whole conversation while alseep.
And "Please crucify me",..... hmmm I normally only do that in a dark cellar on saturday nights. But if you pay like they all do, that can be arranged.
9th Jun 2007 10:28 edit delete Helen says:
(I would have highlighted the ginger one.)
9th Jun 2007 10:31 edit delete Puddlepuff says:
I'm just curious how they look under the masks,...
9th Jun 2007 10:39 edit delete Helen says:
Keep following the blog...
(Plus on the ratio to guys and girls argument... I'm sure more than 10 per cent of the moblog population is made up of girls. Only 2 out of 18 of the mods are girls... so, yeah, ok, really, why would anyone want to be a mod?)
9th Jun 2007 10:46 edit delete swamprose says:
ok. so what about widening the blog? I feel turned off mostly by the featured blogs. This thing is not running on air. so if the blog needs more people, hey you facebookmobloggers, et al, turn it around.
I'd do a lot to keep this thing as intelligent, funny and human as it is. you guys ready for some really bizarre torooonto phtghrs?
9th Jun 2007 10:47 edit delete Puddlepuff says:
Yeah but then to get a good slice of socienty we also need:
Mentally disabled (I know we have Alfie, but)
Blind (no we don't, see this HL as proof)
And so on,....
9th Jun 2007 10:52 edit delete Helen says:
We are forgetting the community editors though, it's not just mods that can highlight. I just don't know who they are anymore.
(*Something kinda oooh, makes my heart go boom boom...*)
9th Jun 2007 11:06 edit delete AAH says:
Are all mods volunteers for moblog?
9th Jun 2007 11:07 edit delete Helen says:
They don't get paid.
9th Jun 2007 11:10 edit delete AAH says:
That's neither a yes or no.
But anyway, in that environment, even though a mod may pause and think, 'This is probably not appropriate or in line with the spirit of highlighting but hey, who cares!, this isn't my career'
Basically the issue is not the image but rather the motivation for making this a highlight, as I see it. It's put some noses out of place and people want answers. It breaks down the open community trust/expectations/confidence etc that's been established and that's not on man!!
But hey .. they dont get paid. There is no accountability. Bad luck. Deal with it. blah blah.
Personally I think it's a typically male, weak willed, pathetic show of bad judgement with little thought thrown in. BUT, I don't know what the true motivation was .. so whatever I think is probably wrong.
So at the end of the day .. ignore it. Until moblog becomes a serious player and they boot non paid mods and hire professional editor like people who will be accountable, don't get upset, go make popcorn .. which I'm about to actually do.
9th Jun 2007 11:30 edit delete OJ says:
From my point of view "all this fuss" is about the fact that a post is *apparently* highlighted because it features pretty girls. Period.
In this case there are probably other commercial imperatives at play - presuming Alfie highlighted this.
But that is how it looks.
Goode, I agree with Bronxelf about your obnoxiousness. Someone who routinely posts sexist dreck has no credibility in this discussion in my eyes. I started to look for your bikini photo shoot but couldn't find it - but the obnoxious (again that word) statements about women on your sidebar have been there for long enough to illustrate what I mean.
To be honest, I'm not 100% sure whether having more female mods would magically sort out the problems some of us perceive - but I think it would be a step in the right direction. It might give new female posters more confidence that they'd be valued around here as photographers and contributors rather than sex objects.
Helen - I think I did say something about being a mod. I have a fairly civic minded view of what being a mod is about (surely highlighting is just part of it) - but I'm not sure that I have the time or have a neutral enough track record (see my comments to Goode above).
It's good that we're talking about Moblog. It means that we care and we don't - as Swamprose says - want to just wander off to the latest flash in the pan social networking site. If I had a wishlist for highlights it would be:
- more cameraphone and "out and about"/happening live shots (because it's a mobile blog, not Flickr)
- more photos with stories
- more diversity - I want to be surprised and challenged and find out things I didn't know.
- less of a popularity contest element - though I have no idea whether this is possible, or just a fact of life.
9th Jun 2007 11:35 edit delete AAH says:
and now OJ and I are holding hands and skipping off into the sunset.
End of blog.
9th Jun 2007 11:40 edit delete Helen says:
Sorry, I don't think I understand your question then.
Not that I am the one to answer it!
9th Jun 2007 11:44 edit delete Puddlepuff says:
You hit the nail on the head OJ,...
I especially agree with:
- more cameraphone and "out and about"/happening live shots (because it's a mobile blog, not Flickr)
I would like to add to that Images that have been created with PS,...
Might be an idea to start categories, as got suggested above somewhere.
9th Jun 2007 11:44 edit delete OJ says:
Was that a question to me Helen?
I'm confused now....
9th Jun 2007 11:50 edit delete nige says:
all of this chatter makes my "yum" comments sound rather silly.
AAH. all mods / editors are usually selected by the principals, and are not paid (to my knowledge). i think Helen was referring to this question, OJ.
9th Jun 2007 11:51 edit delete AAH says:
Me thinks, it is time for moblog HQ to prepare a survey for the masses. And one that is carefully thought out so as to target clear directions for the next phase of moblog growth.
This is one of those evolutionary moments when in the future someone will say, "Remember that highlight that created a roll of toilet paper in comments .. and what was with all that popcorn!"
9th Jun 2007 11:51 edit delete AAH says:
Yes Helen was referring to me OJ. My apologies Helen, I'm insanely black n white so grey answers throw me.
9th Jun 2007 11:53 edit delete Helen says:
Sorry AAh, your question was interpretable in more than one way, so I tried to cover my interpretation in the answer.
I didn't know whether you were asking how they are selected i.e. do people put themselves forward? Are they nominated? Or are they just approached by the ones on high?
Or whether you were trying to ascertain if they're paid/rewarded or not.
And sorry for confusing you OJ.
I think you're right though, AAH, some serious group brainstorming is probably needed. Moderators are moderators alone -- I doubt there's much consultation between them when it comes to highlights. It must make cohesion a little difficult, but you don't want to lose variety either.
9th Jun 2007 12:13 edit delete 540air says:
Mods are made up from those who are invited, or who volunteer as I understand it.
Highlighting an image is down to the individual mod and their opinion. The spirit of it is that highlighting is not a competition (as said earlier), but about bringing things to the attention of the community, be that a great picture or not.
For example, if a moblog event is happening, then an image relating to it generally gets a HL. Doesn't have to be a good pic, just needs to be seen by more people, so that more are aware of said event.
For the record, I didn't give this a HL either, but if it's for promotional reasons then so be it.
9th Jun 2007 12:41 edit delete seaneeboy says:
I'm a mod, I'm a volunteer. If my (or any mods) conduct was significantly out of line I'd expect that privilege to be revoked. There is accountability, but I've never been that happy with how much or how it works.
Further to that there is the question of transparency as well.
I don't agree with the current list of moderators, and certainly think it should be "thinned out" a little.
I'm also rather disappointed that there doesn't seem to be much of a mechanism for genuine feedback to the people who run the site. That would seem to be a reason why these things bubble up once every while (although it's also fair to say the disgruntlement has been more frequent and intense of late).
This thread on the whole shows us as both site members and moderators in a very bad light, IMO.
I for one disagree with the idea that Goode has "No credibility" - however I also feel his post was somewhat misjudged. In situations like this always much better to attack the content of the post rather than the poster - that doesn't help anyone and I'm disappointed that such an argument can break out in public between two moderators. We really shouldn't be like this as a team.
9th Jun 2007 12:43 edit delete seaneeboy says:
Also, as far as I can gather, women have been asked to be moderators, and an appeal was put out for female moderators.
I don't know how successful these drives were.
9th Jun 2007 12:45 edit delete Helen says:
Um, when? Officially? Were they?
Does Lily Allen have a Moblog?
9th Jun 2007 12:46 edit delete 540air says:
"I'm a mod, I'm a volunteer. If my (or any mods) conduct was significantly out of line I'd expect that privilege to be revoked."
Totally agree with you there sean. Not quite so sure what you mean by thinning out the current list though?
9th Jun 2007 12:54 edit delete seaneeboy says:
Helen, I suppose, actually reading back, it was more of an implicit appeal rather than explicit:
I don't think the balance of male/female mods is necessarily a main part of the issue here - I think it's the structure of the moderation team, their duties and responsibilities, and the transparency of what we do.
I for one would welcome a complete re-think on the moderation team. Without naming any names (on here anyway) there are some people who I know to be mods, aren't on the mod list, and IMO shouldn't be.
The mods need to work as a team, and we haven't done so particularly well so far - hence the need for a rejig from the top.
I would even understand if that meant my involvement on the mod team had to end - however I do want to keep helping build the site.
Lily Allan is more of a myspace girl, I believe :D
9th Jun 2007 12:57 edit delete seaneeboy says:
Also, highlights, eh? Don't like em? don't bother with them - they drop off the front page within a couple of days at most anyway :)
9th Jun 2007 12:59 edit delete 540air says:
Surely the only reason people get to be a mod (or site editor, though I've no clue what that means), is because teh guys running the show feel they can trust their judgement and that they have the best interests of moblog at heart?
I for one, love this place and the people in it and will do anything I can to help it grow and develop.
Another thing worth remembering is that for mat and Alfie, unlike the rest of us, this is also their livelihood. So they're not likely to let people become mods if they think they'll mess it all up.
9th Jun 2007 13:04 edit delete goode says:
I'm not arguing :(
Yeah Lily Allen is a myspace type gal! Would be nice to see her here though!
9th Jun 2007 13:09 edit delete Helen says:
Oh my, I am terribly confused about who is and isn't what now.
These comments should probably all be deleted/moved for being terribly off-topic... poor Girls Aloud.
I think Lily would make an excellent Moblogger.
9th Jun 2007 13:12 edit delete White Fluffy Clouds says:
Mentioning Lily on the Girls Aloud Moblog is enough to start another debate! ;)
9th Jun 2007 13:15 edit delete Helen says:
Cheryl started it.
9th Jun 2007 13:19 edit delete White Fluffy Clouds says:
lol. Pppff Girls Aloud FTMFW :D
9th Jun 2007 13:20 edit delete kel says:
Ok... just wanted to put a small comment about how I understand that commercial/featured blogs are vital to the continuation of Moblog as a site but just noticed from looking at this particular post that it has (unless I'm being a bit thick, which is likely, so if so, apologies) no link back to the actual main site.
Not great in either user terms or promoting the site to Girls Aloud fans...:)
9th Jun 2007 13:21 edit delete 540air says:
Nope, no thickiness there kel, good point :)
9th Jun 2007 13:24 edit delete OJ says:
But if we're to ignore highlights Seaneboy, how are we to find posts from people other than our existing "friends"?
This is a serious question. I do think some of the disgruntlement at the moment is coming from people who now feel that the site is more fragmented.
540, I agree that highlighting shouldn't be a competition. IMO, I think that *is* how it's functioning at the moment. And that's a big, smug, gushy turn-off for me.
Seaneboy, I think you're incredibly well-meaning and care about the blog and I like you but I disagree fundamentally with the view that we should "ignore what we don't like". To me, that means accepting I'm a second-class citizen here whenever I see something sexist or homophobic and implies that it's my problem for being offended by it.
As to criticising the content of a post rather than an individual - but I'm sick of being diplomatic when clearly there are individuals for whom being a mod is a power trip. FWIW, I didn't suggest Goode had "no credibility" - I said he had no credibility in the context of a discussion about sexism/gender.
Helen, I was about to say the same about the appropriate place for this discussion. But if you take it off the main site and onto the forum, it does get brushed under the carpet somewhat. Poor Girls Aloud nothing! They choose to make a living portraying a certain image, let the cope with a bit of debate.
9th Jun 2007 13:26 edit delete 540air says:
OJ, I tend to agree with you that it is almost becoming a competition at the moment.
I've only recently become a mod (about 2 months ago) and I consider it an honour and a privilege. I give a lot of thought when it comes to giving things a HL, as I am very aware of offending people, or it seeming like favouritism or whatever. I took my lead from mat and Alfie about what I was supposed to do, etc. and to the best of my ability I will stick to that. I really would hate to see the HL's just become a photo comp, when really this place is supposed to be all about cameraphones and people blogging things in their everyday life.
Hope that makes sense :)
9th Jun 2007 13:50 edit delete hildegard says:
Hmm... dunno if "off-topic" is so bad. Like the pics we send in, comments are serendipitous; I like the way a pic will draw out widely diferent responses & sometimes set things off in an unexpected direction.
ESheep - can't concur about your urge for public cohesion; it gives me much more faith in Moblog to see disagreement & discussion among Mods here in the open. Reassures me that you're not all obliged to conform to a Stepford mould of moderation. :)
9th Jun 2007 13:50 edit delete seaneeboy says:
Good point OJ, I retract what I said about Ignoring what you don't like - that's always been the case put forward to me when I've questioned highlights (for instance the greenpeace blog debacle - something I'm still not 100% happy about, but have let it go :) )
My point is that while the guys running the show have felt right in appointing every mod so far, it's been on a one at a time bespoke basis, with (as far as I can see) little regard for the team dynamic.
This is IMO why we have moderators questioning (and worse, arguing with) each other in public, double, triple, quadruple standards about what is and isn't acceptable on the site (don't get me started on driveblogging), and I'm fairly certain some moderators not sure what the current protocol in difficult situations is.
Hence my call for a review. And by that I mean a review of what mods do, how they are kept in the loop and how they are accountable within the site.
9th Jun 2007 13:59 edit delete bronxelf says:
Hildegaard, and others-
it gives me much more faith in Moblog to see disagreement & discussion among Mods here in the open. Reassures me that you're not all obliged to conform to a Stepford mould of moderation. :)
I agree with this a thousandfold. At the end of the day we are all humans with vastly different viewpoints on pretty much everything. Photography in and of itself is in good measure entirely subjective, as are views about a good many things. I do not believe that we are all one anything. We bring individual viewpoints on a subjective medium to the table.
There's plenty of highlighted shots that I see, and think "Gee... Why?" But hey- I didn't highlight them, and I figure someone else had a reason for doing so.
However I find nothing whatsoever wrong with people calling it out when they find something that's really bothering them or offending them on some level and putting it up and in public for discussion. If people want transparency (which is a concept that comes up fairly often), I think that you can't get much more transparent than having these discussions and/or disagreements in public. It shows that we are in fact, different people with different ideas. I see no reason for this to be some kind of closed-door discussion.
I'd even be all for a little thingy that said "Highlighted by: (insert here)" at the bottom of every highlighted post, if it made people feel more comfortable knowing who highlighted what. Hell, I'll even note it in comments that I highlighted something if it would make people happier, and if someone wants to call me on why, I'll just tell them.
As to this particular photo, again, I didn't highlight it, don't know for certain who did, and I don't know for certain why. I personally would not have done so. However, I think that OJ and Swamprose have every right to voice their opinions about the choice and should be respected in that.
9th Jun 2007 14:00 edit delete Helen says:
I was only thinking of the fans.
9th Jun 2007 14:00 edit delete seaneeboy says:
Hildeguard - whilst mods should debate issues that form policy, I believe it should be in a more controlled and appropriate fashion, and not reactionary in the comments of a particular photo up for debate.
9th Jun 2007 14:04 edit delete 540air says:
"I'd even be all for a little thingy that said "Highlighted by: (insert here)" at the bottom of every highlighted post, if it made people feel more comfortable knowing who highlighted what."
I'd second that, it's a great idea.
9th Jun 2007 14:09 edit delete OJ says:
I agree with everything Bronxelf said.
Helen - re. the fans.....
Girls Aloud and their publicity machine want to use the power of blog to sell records, right? Well they should respect that blogging is about interaction not controlled pushing of a message (and I'm not suggesting they don't btw.). It's a conversation, not a billboard.
9th Jun 2007 14:16 edit delete Helen says:
The point of these band blogs are to attract more mobloggers and to help make moblog commercially viable.
If I were band management and had paid for this blog, I would take my Moblog elsewhere, if it were to be dominated by discussions like this, rather than genuine talk from fans.
I think many GA fans would possibly be intimidated by discussion like this and might just look for their pictures elsewhere.
This discussion is more about Moblog, than GA anyway.
9th Jun 2007 14:21 edit delete OJ says:
Point taken, though it would be particularly difficult to be attracted to moblogging if you came in via this blog - as there are no links whatsoever back to the main site.
9th Jun 2007 14:23 edit delete goode says:
very ture Helen, this is why we have the forum! At which there is now a post set up! moblog.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3252
9th Jun 2007 14:24 edit delete Helen says:
Yes, why should it be linked one way and not the other?
Presumably though, people are encouraged to sign up for Moblog, as they will need a Moblog account if they want to comment under an assigned user name.
9th Jun 2007 14:27 edit delete Helen says:
Oops, sorry goode. Transfer may be difficult.
9th Jun 2007 14:28 edit delete Steve says:
"It might give new female posters more confidence that they'd be valued around here as photographers and contributors rather than sex objects."
I didn't realise that people felt like that on here. That's a shame.
Why doesn't someone cut and paste this onto their blog and then we can stop bothering these Girls? I suggest OJ or Seanee. (Just a thought)
9th Jun 2007 14:37 edit delete Alfie says:
Hi guys. Wow, there are so many issues here, and so many important areas of debate. Firstly, I did not highlight this image, although I do appreciate that some of you would consider it likely I did because I have moblog's commercial interests at heart, as much as I do it's tone and character.
We are part of an incredible community, for all the reasons talked about above. I personally don't think this is an issue of not having enough female moderators, and I also disagree with the idea that some of the people who are editors or moderators should not be; some people have site access privileges for reasons that are not about being able to highlight, but rather about access.
All mods/editors have my and Mat's email, and either of us are easily contactable on any issue through our moblogs. I think this is a really deep conversation,but I don't agree with the idea that there is any chauvinism inherent in this images 'highlight worthiness' - Helen had it on the nose in her description of why it was likely highlighted.
I'll aggregate all the important themes that you guys have brought up and create a forum post so we can all hack at it.
9th Jun 2007 14:38 edit delete add a comment
Steve, you didn't?
report abuse 9th Jun 2007 14:38 edit
Ah I took too long to read the thread, good work Goode
report abuse 9th Jun 2007 14:40
It may be worth noting that Swamprose and Puddlepuff might not be so exposed to the media machine of GA, what with being from countries other than the UK. So I can understand why they may have been absolutely clueless as to why these girls are of interest (I know, I know, that is in itself debatable).
report abuse 9th Jun 2007 14:43 edit
I missed the whole thing! But it'd because I don't bother looking at highlighted photos that don't interest me, not because I'm wasting my time on Facebook. I don't think being part of Facebook sound be seen as disloyalty to Moblog. Thanks for the drawing of a tiger Helen.
(P) what's this?