Washblog

Over the last two years, and in particular, during this last year after Washblog moved to a new forum, many conversations have unfolded here.  These posts have not contributed to the site so much as they have created it.  This is a forum created by its participants.  Until now, the editors on the site have done little to channel or direct conversation in any coordinated way.  We know that micro-managing and interfering in discourse can flatten it out.

But we think we have witnessed an emerging pattern on Washblog that illustrates a paradox.  Though too many rules can restrict expression, so can too few. Patterns within any system can begin to take on their own weight and critical mass until they crowd out others.  In a diverse conversation, some voices may be a little louder at first, but then begin to dominate.  The danger is that the dominant conversation may then not only marginalize the others - but become, itself, marginalized.

We are at a stage of development that we think calls for more rigorous enforcement of the rules of civility that were put in place here months ago -- not only to preserve our current diversity - but to encourage more.   There are many progressives in Washington who we want to be part of our conversation - and who may now be hesitant to participate.   In fact, I have been told directly by people that they do not feel comfortable participating now.

Passionate arguments, complete with name-calling and colorful language, can be entertaining to watch or jump into.   Any conversation theater can, especially in the short term, increase readership.  There is value to that heat and light.  And I admit to having even recently been less than polite .

But to what degree must we be absolute in our defense of unfettered expression?   In backchannel communications with people I respect, I have been told that political communications simply are going to be uncivil.  If someone is a moron, it's important to tell them right out, that's what they are, a moron.   Right or wrong, many of us Washbloggians are thinking along different lines.

A current wikipedia article on Social Proof defines it as  "a psychological phenomenon which occurs in ambiguous social situations when people are unable to determine the appropriate mode of behavior. Making the assumption that surrounding people possess more knowledge about the situation, they will deem the behavior of others as appropriate or more informed."  The article cites public blogs as forums in which social proof is forged.  

Washblog is more than a passive container for expression.  It's a presence that has impact on the surrounding culture.   Whether we attract 50 visitors a day or 500, Washblog participates, along with all the other political blogs, in setting the standard for Internet dialogue on political issues.   If some of our current critics are correct, and enforcement of civil dialogue will drive away our most interesting participants and lead to the death of the blog, then at least we have tried to be a positive presence according to our best efforts.  Perhaps others will learn from the experience.  

We think, however, that asking for and even demanding more civility will increase our audience and help encourage more people to engage in political action and to break their political silence.  At this time, we have brought on some new front page writers and, as we will soon announce, some new editors.  We will be looking for others.   Institute for Washington's Future (IWF) has agreed to be an advisor for our site, and we are actively seeking other advisor organizations.    I and other progressive activists and bloggers are working with IWF to find funding for new approaches to reporting on political and economic issues in Washington and in welcoming new participants into online political discussions. Some of this reporting and some of these participants may appear here on Washblog. We are also considering new features for the site.  

With all these changes in mind, we want first to thank all the people who have participated here - particularly those who have posted stories, diaries, and comments -- and ask you to consider staying on.  We appreciate you all - even despite the recent tension.   We think that, if you can put up with our new rules, you might end up feeling ok with our direction.  It's a kind of experiment - trying out new ways to communicate, to help crack the isolation not only of the cultural minorities - but also of the cultural majorities - including that majority known as the progressive movement.

So, please do check out our new Content Policy, now in draft form.   Pretty soon, we'll set it up so that a link to this document displays whenever someone registers for a user account on Washblog.   It'll also display on the screens where you type in your comments or diaries.   It will be the implied agreement between Washblog and its users.  We encourage you to post your response to this document here, to help us improve it.

Over the long run, we hope that, with your help, we'll work to find the best balance for applying this policy.   We understand that we may appear less tolerant at first.  I hope that you will respond with more tolerance for us - at least during this transitional stage.   By continuing to read and post on Washblog, you will be helping to shape its direction. Our new move is a risk - but risk avoidance creates risks of its own.  If you're interested in a theoretical take on some of these issues, along with a little historical background, I recommend this article (hat tip to Zappini):  A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy.  

Recently, I received a note from someone I met in a different forum.  I'm a conservative, but would it be ok if I post on Washblog, he asked?  I'll be polite, he said.   I Googled him and found an article in which he celebrated the murders of the family members of a liberal judge.  And I wrote him back to advise him to not post here.  It is quite true that civility, in itself, is no measure of compassion or reason, though it can contribute to it.  Our new policy does not reflect a judgment on different modes of communication so much as it reflects a belief that this is a good direction for us to move in to keep Washblog vital and better accomplish our goals.