I’m owning up to some of my articles that didn’t quite capture the interest of folks around here. Duds.
___________
In the dead of mid-winter last year I wrote on things admirable, deplorable, or forgettable, a compilation of well-used and ill-used vocabulary. Seems that post was altogether forgettable. Nary a comment, not even a snarky one.
Want to hear crickets? Write a piece on leadership changes in state conventions. In spite of the fact that about 90% of Cooperative Program revenue flows through sixteen legacy state conventions in the south, there seems to be little interest here in the leadership that controls the spending of such. Thank you, Tony Jones, for the one comment on that.
When the Executive Committee released their annual statistical report in early June of last year, I called it the “Annual SBC Statistical Release Weepfest” because it’s mostly bad news. Not a single comment on that. Perhaps we’ve made ourselves comfortable that this is going to be the case. I hope not.
The Cooperative Program, our main cooperative giving channel, has been declining for over three decades. When I wrote of how denominational leaders and others employ magical thinking on CP percentages, a few people responded and several in agreement, an underwhelming response to our most important stat. Dud.
How could I put (1) a snake swallowing a woman, (2) a cheap shot against iced coffee, and (3) fakeJDgreear in the same article and get only two comments? Complete dud, evidently. Forgive me. I’ll try and come up with more scintillating subjects next time. Maybe I’m out of tune with most SBCers on iced coffee.
So I wrote that the CP will almost certainly be up for the latest reporting year which ought to stir the blood of any true SBCers…and I got a single comment, from the estimable Tarheel. The CP being up is news and ought to mean that somewhere, some Southern Baptists break out the party stuff. Guess not.
Lottie was up by almost $6 million but my report of the same was met with general disinterest. Dud. I’m hoping for a record year this year anyway.
Annie had a record year but when I reported that, pffft, one comment. Thanks again, Tarheel.
I worked hard to come up with ten good news SBC items (including the gem that Bert and Ernie made BP)…and got six comments. Dud. We are a convention of Joe Btfsplks evidently.
_____________
There are more. I’ll try and do better next year.
And, why am I smiling in the pic? The sun is shining, bluebirds are flitting around my yard, my gutters are clean, and in less than a month some flowers will be blooming here.
I might have to yield to the reality of Twitter where hot topics are things like whether you should cut your toenails straight across or with a curve, or, whether candy corn is better than Reeses Pieces. Heady stuff.
See you next year with hopes that Dave Miller will have a healthy 2019, Alan Cross will cross the 2000 word barrier going south, Adam Blosser will display some bearded acumen here, Dave Cline will end his self-imposed hiatus, and that you all have a year that shows fruitful service for our common Lord.
Honestly, the posts (I write) I like the most are often the ones that draw the LEAST traffic.
Technically, there are four ways to judge a post.
1. # of comments – to me, the least important.
2. # of page views/reads.
3. # of social media shares – this has become the most important in the new world. Commenting/discussion used to be the benchmark, but not anymore. People share then have their own discussions elsewhere.
4. The amen of God. Can’t be measured.
Your “duds” may not have been duds at all.
Keep the “duds” coming. I appreciate your posts. If you want to generate more comments, mention Calvinism or diss the Alabama Crimson Tide.
Perhaps higher traffic would be generated more with headlines like… “Annie Armstrong Up Despite Evil Calvinists” but I think your approach is better, even if there are fewer comments.
I care a lot about the Cooperative Program. We’ve differed slightly about that in the past, sometimes at length in the comments. Some of the posts you mentioned that involved that topic were discussions that I avoided because I was worried that I would take us back into the same old set of comments. So, don’t take my silence as disinterest.
My silence is due to the fact that I may agree with the article or it is new information and I am not informed enough to comment on it. Interested, just don’t comment.
Anyone else but me, first glance at the post title, read it as “Some dude of 2018”?
This is the nature of blogging. Posts that are merely informational, or incontrovertible simply don’t generate comments. If there’s nothing to disagree about, there’s nothing to comment about, generally speaking.
I take a little different view about heated comment streams. I think they’re fun. Yes, people can go too far, but because it’s something people care about.
I agree, Bill. If there’s nothing to disagree about (or disagreement is typically vilified so it’s avoided) then they’ll be less comments.
(As to Williams “duds” – about the CP and the missions offerings – much commenting wasn’t necessary as the plodders wit and the celebratory nature of the articles spoke for themselves.) I don’t think they were duds at all.
It seems to me that success of a forum like this (page views etc. -repeat ones certainly) are driven by the conversation starting articles themselves as well as active comment streams.
Doesn’t it stand to reason that people who are only reading the articles would come only one time… Do we really think anyone here is writing articles (or comments) so good and so God inspired that people are coming back time after time day after day to read the same thing over and over? It seems logical that active dialog is what drives traffic.
Further, doesn’t the sharing and having conversation elsewhere itself show that traffic/interest/etc. of topics is strongly driven by people’s desire to comment and discuss said topic?
Obviously articles are necessary for a forum like this – but I think articles drive traffic best when they elicit and foster conversation/dialogue/even (especially) disagreement among commenters.
In other words: Interesting discussion eliciting Articles/opening posts + interesting comments = high traffic.
Well stated.
I’m not fishing for sympathy or affirmation here, though were I a millennial, I’d at least ask for a participation trophy.
The comment count was just something to hang this topic on. I started to list all of Dave’s stuff as the duds but with him being sick and all…
Though they may not prompt lots of comments, I believe your posts on SBC statistics, including giving, are important. As Ed Stetzer says, “Facts are our friends.” These statistics are the vital signs of the SBC. They show that the SBC is sick. Just as a physician needs data in order to make the correct diagnosis, we need data in order to diagnose and render aid to the SBC. So, please, keep boring us.
I’m not in an SBC church so I rarely comment, but I read regularly – because I care about church, and church health. I continue to hear about Baptist (and other denomination) churches in two ways (1) as a BSF group leader, and (2) through a “welcome/ask-questions/find-out-more” ministry at my nondenominational church. Over the years, I’ve probably talked to a hundred people either leaving their Baptist church, or considering it. I also talked to people who left the Baptist church I used to attend. What I hear is this: many leave reluctantly. One big reason is, they are tired of disrespectful, suspicious arguing and fighting. On this blog, y’all have decided to discuss & argue gently & respectfully. That may not generate the most comments but it also will not alienate current & potential church members.
You never know who is reading. I personally know young people who have sworn never to set foot in a Baptist church (even some who were raised Baptist) because of the vicious comments they’ve seen online. (And sometimes what they experienced in church). That’s not fair, of course; so much good is going on in Baptist churches, and the Lord knows that! But maintaining a gentle & informative blog is an admirable achievement. I know it takes monitoring, creativity, and self-restraint. Thank you for that.
Looking back on the post on magical thinking I found this:
“The figure stands at 5.16% having declined from over 10% back in the days prior to the Conservative Resurgence.”
If someone had remarked on the possible implications, someone else would likely have responded with the words “move on.” The route of least resistance is not to comment in the first place.
Please don’t consider that post a dud. That’s some really interesting information.
Happy new year!