I'll do better next time
Hmpstd posted a good comment just now that I was going to respond to underneath, then realized my answer was getting unwieldly, so I'm going to post both here. Here's what he had to say:
Bacon Girl, I agree that the WaPo chats have good flow. It helps that all questions are held, and not instantly posted online. That way, the moderator can decide whether or not to answer a given question (a good way to filter out those that might be lewd or defamatory), and, if time is running out, a question can be held for response in a blog or column in the near future. Also, the question and answer are posted at the same time, which cuts down on the confusion. Because yesterday's Sun chat used specialized software, the effect was not unlike Windows Instant Messenger, in which questions and answers pop up in random order as soon as they're sent in.
I tried at one point to follow the chat in real time, but it was hard to follow, with new questions (and their accompanying annoying sound effects) constantly interrupting the flow. Also, there were two polls ("Was your RW a success?" and "Was your RW experience a success?"), and the software jumped back and forth to display the results of each poll. Since I couldn't figure out the difference between the two polls at first, I kept wondering why the "Yes" response kept jumping from 100% to only 38%. ...
Yes, the chat yesterday really was live, unlike the Post's, and like most live things, it got messy.
The confusion with the polls was totally my fault. No one was saying anything, which was weird considering the number of people who were watching. I looked to the left and saw there was a "create a poll" button (my first time on the chat software, remember) so I threw it in to make something happen.
I only gave the answers "yes" or "no," and someone asked for a "kinda" choice. I thought I could just add it, but that created a second poll. Hence the confusion.
We had hoped by opening up the window 10 minutes early, people would submit their questions and comments as they do at the Post. Carla could post them at intervals and I could respond. But no one did. The comments would have been held if there had been any backlog, but there wasn't.
All this is to say that I hope more of you will help me out and contribute next Monday, if only by submitting something in the advance time if you don't like live chats. You don't have to use your regular user name if you don't want to.
I knew going in that regulars on the blog don't need a live chat, auto-publish does that for us. But the chats are so well publicized on the home page that it's a good way to draw in first-time readers. They probably won't comment, and I don't really expect them to. The point is that I am on display. I hope next Monday some of you will be, too, to show why the blog at its best is fun to read.
PS: I'm clueless about the sound effects. I didn't get any.
Comments
Chat takes getting used to, because of just that. You have to figure out what response goes with which comment. It helps if people give more clues than they usually do. Something like, "Yes, I did enjoy Oceanaire." rather than "Yeah."
(The reasons I won't join in is that I'm afraid I'll say too much, and monopolize things. I'm used to chat and how it flows, and I'm too danged talkative online anyway. Sorry, Elizabeth.)
Posted by: Lissa | August 25, 2009 7:51 AM
I don't agree that regulars don't need a live chat because comments are published automatically -- that's still very different from a chat format, where you, EL, are sitting right there, responding back in real time, and everyone's there for the same event. I think the distinctions make a difference.
Then again, I am not a regular, so what do I know? [insert emoticon here]
Posted by: Multimedia Editor(ish) Mary | August 25, 2009 8:35 AM
Maybe we need a D@L IRC channel
Posted by: Jon Parker | August 25, 2009 9:47 AM
I tried to find the link to go to the live chat but given my limited ability couldn't figure out how to listen. Can you or someone please let me know how to do it?
Thanks, Earl
Posted by: Earl | August 25, 2009 10:29 AM
Hi Earl, the live chat isn't actually an audio "chat," but a visual chat that was held in real time. You can go here, then click on the little replay button, and the chat should pop up.
Also, everyone: The chat process is definitely something we're getting used to. As Elizabeth said, since comments weren't posted ahead of time, they came in as a flood during the chat. (Yes, this is different than the WaPo's chats). I didn't want to dissuade anyone from talking, so I published all the comments. I can see how that would be confusing, but I think there's a natural desire to respond to someone else's question. I'm hoping to figure out a way to strike that balance. If anyone has any suggestions, concerns, comments, etc., don't by shy: e-mail me at carla.correa[at]baltsun[dot]com.
Posted by: community coordinator Carla | August 25, 2009 11:17 AM
I didn't tune in Monday, but I don't think most of the WaPo Q&A hours are really "chats." Questions are submitted pre- and during the allotted time, and the moderator/answerer decide which ones to answer and publish the Q & A together. Often there are follow-ups, which is good. Seems like an actual real-time "chat" could get pretty chaotic.
Posted by: "OldPhil" | August 25, 2009 11:41 AM
CruchGear reveiwed them a while back in a fairly amusing video. I do have to say that making pancakes just isn't that traumatic of an ordeal.
Posted by: Stephie | August 25, 2009 12:40 PM
Um, oops.
Posted by: Stephie | August 25, 2009 12:46 PM
I'm able to post a few comments during the day, but there is no way I could devote an hour in the middle of the day to such an activity.
The only way I'll be able to participate is if the next chat is work related, and I doubt there is going to be much of a demand for a discussion on public administration.
Posted by: Robert of Cross Keys | August 25, 2009 12:52 PM
You can mute the sounds by following this path: Start>ControlPanel>Sounds and Audio Devices>Sounds Tab. Then find the sound you wish to eliminate and choose "None" for the option. You can do this with any sound emanating from your PC.
Posted by: Bill | August 25, 2009 1:54 PM
I never blog from work, or I'd never get anything done (she said sanctimoniously ...)
Posted by: Dahlink | August 25, 2009 2:49 PM
This looks like fun, I wasn't around a computer on Monday but I'll be here for the next one!
Posted by: Corey | August 25, 2009 3:55 PM
Also Liz, you BETTER do better next time! I'm tired of all these chat excuses and apologies. I'm a consumer and I want results dammit!
Posted by: Corey | August 25, 2009 3:57 PM