Obviously venting your spleen about our delightful hosts and their nonsensical policies may seem like bad form to some, but I'm guessing not all, of us. So let's react—like a drunk and angry mob—to the rather perplexing comment that Denton wrote:
You're right. Writers from Jezebel and elsewhere don't go into the comments nearly as often as they should.
But just think about that phrase: go into the comments, as if it were a danger zone. Which it is, or at least feels like.
There are a lot of you critics. Not quite as many as you think, but all reaction is magnified online, it seems to echo endlessly, and it's overwhelming for many writers.
And, for some reason I'm not going to explore here, relations between writers and readers are particularly acrimonious on Jezebel [. . .]
So if we're to get their active engagement, we have to protect them from a reader mob. I wouldn't be surprised if people jump on me for using that word, mob. It suggests I'm looking down on the commoners from my perch above Balthazar restaurant in Soho.
But what I mean is this: we are all potentially members of a mob, carried along in an orgy of criticism or sentimentality; and we all need protection from it.
Protection? On some level, this new commenting system will certainly do that because I can't see any of us figuring out how to use it.
But as far as I'm concerned, author interaction is quite varied and that is a good thing. Lacey is brilliant and extremely interactive. HamNo rarely wades and when he does, it's pretty minor. I personally like it when John Cook pops up with the odd non-sequitur.
But on Jez, it is a different story. Maybe it's the times that really stick out (Miz Jenkins, anyone? Tracieiey banning anyone who criticised her comments on Roman Polanski), but Jez writers tend to head into the comments sections with more vitriol than Gawker writers do. I mean, Gawker writers get trolled by the guy who pays their wages and still remain pretty level-headed.
Maybe there is a cultural difference because I imagine Jez writers get far more threats from MRAs, and various other crazies (Slay, Chritter, or Celia can probably provide insight on this), but Gawker is pretty liberal and gay-friendly, so I can't imagine they're wholly exempt from internet shit-headedness? But aside from Brian Moylan, I can't recall Gawker writers being petty enough to head into the comments just to say, 'Fuck you, and now you're banned.' Am I wrong in this?
Also, if Nilla was right, it's about time the MoGlob wandered in and said something incoherent, like "Guys, we don't owe you the internet" or perhaps "You are a pathologist." Stay tuned.