Discussion Thread vs. Article

An article should have appoint of view or explain something. It should also be a two to ten paragraph essay rather than a one paragraph review or comment. Obviously some people (SJG) write articles even they are answering yes or no questions. Length is the main differential (as it always is).

Thanks

An article should be fairly long and explain or describe something. However, a few years ago I submitted a couple articles, and Founder moved them to discussions. I don't know why. He must have some additional criteria.

Why don't you PM founder and ask for his criteria

How do I send a PM to him? What is his user name?

Forget that last post. I just sent a PM to him.

Y'all were pretty much on the mark. This is what I received from the founder:

"Articles are usually longer in scope, and they describe something.  A

discussion post can be anything, questions, comment, quick

observation.  I have seen a few discussion threads that probably

should have been submitted as articles, but for some reason the author

chose not to."

Read a few articles and you'll see the contrast to discussion topics. I told of my recent brain tumor in an article because I wrote it more as a piece of performance art than an actual topic to discuss.

I post everything in discussions, and I gave up on writing articles a while ago. It can take so long to post an article that I forget about it by the time it appears. Plus I think more people read the discussions. I also prefer the back and forth in discussions which is rare in articles.

I think that is it. If the author wishes for a back and forth conversation -- soliciting points of view, or has a brief observation, then the post belongs in Discussions.

If the author wishes to present a series of facts or opinions -- in other words, tell a story that will require more than a few paragraphs, then Articles is probably a better location.

I wish Founder would let Articles bump the way discussions do. In my view, right now Articles are getting the short shrift.

SJG

Cameron Carpenter: Rachmaninoff's Paganini Rhapsody for Organ & Orchestra

www.youtube.com

This guy and his M and O modernized organ are out of this world!

Size matters (or so I’m often told) – thus as others have mentioned if the topic is one that requires a longer more detailed description then perhaps it should be an article.

Also - an article can stay up near the top of the list for a decent amount of time (couple of weeks) whereas a discussion thread can often get pushed down the list within a couple of days and shortly be out of sight and out of mind (i.e. discussions may have less PL staying power).

This analogy probably sucks but...

An article is like a Las Vegas Show Club. Expensive (long). Glitzy and glamorous. A more serious tone. And less fun. Little interaction

A discussion topic is like a dive bar. Cheap (short). Probably more fun. Not stuffy. Lots of customer interaction. That is, you don't just look - but make a connection

Motor: I only take issue with "less fun" for articles. Many of them are really interesting and entertaining, while too many threads in discussions are about sexual orientation of less respected TUSCL member or 20 posts of identical content. Although with Dougster gone and Juice seemingly more in control, we've seen less of that. In the Article section there's some good shit.

I find it funny when SJG"s replies are longer than the article

@rockstar

Honestly, I forget to look at the articles. Maybe I need to look more often.

I can remember two memorable threads that I believe were articles. Probably over 100 replies which is rare for an article. One was from a college girl claiming to be writing an paper on strip clubs.

If you show him your tits perhaps he’ll be less apt to flagging you – just sayin”

:)

^ damn - wrong thread

NOBODY wants to see my man boobs

I think the main reason why people who write article like discussions is because they are interested in feedback. The way that the articles section is set up is not as intruiging as the discussion section. If you have a particularly good article, it doesn't get bumped to t he top every time someone posts a reply to. And you can't sort it in any way other than it's predesignated sorting. Plus, not many people go on Articles section when the discussion section is more than likely more intruiging and not just because of the topic but because of the responses. THEN there's the simple fact that nobody wants to read big long ass stories all the time. We already have to deal with SJG.

Every time I see some potentially good reply, I wonder why it's so long and drawling only to realize I was reading something by SJG.

@motorhead I second rockstar's comment. Papi's articles can be particularly entertaining. Classic example is his bareback episode. A laugh out loud riot with lots of steam.

LOL ^^^^^ Agree on all, including how articles should be bumped when replied to.

For an article, you need to quote sources, have references, get approval from Founder plus two or 3 experienced members, then allow the sjg guy to proofread it,then after getting all the approval requests back ok, submit a final copy for approval.

Just kidding.

" I think the main reason why people who write article like discussions is because they are interested in feedback. The way that the articles section is set up is not as intruiging as the discussion section. If you have a particularly good article, it doesn't get bumped to t he top every time someone posts a reply to. "

Yes, it would be better if Articles bumped the same way that Discussion do.

SJG

^^^^ Have you ever thought that a small amount of people go there? What's the point of bumping if the thread is right there anyway" Ain't that many articles

There are enough Articles posted that they get pushed off the first page long before interest necessarily dies. Also, someone might add a comment far out in the future. Good then to see the Article bump back to the top.

SJG

1812 Overture, Op. 49 - Sir Georg Solti/Chicago Symphony Orchestra

www.youtube.com