Expanding scope: dealing with not-so-lolcows

[Null]

A lolcow is a person or group whose eccentric or foolish behavior can be "milked" for amusement and laughs.

We have two very fuzzy sections of content on the forum. People who are lolcows, and people who are dramatic. I have been grappling with how to deal with this problem for years now and I'm still not sure how I want to go about it. I've tried a variety of things to segregate information and I'm not happy with any of their results. I'm presenting what I know so maybe other people can think of some ideas.

The problem is that someone like Alison Rapp will display alongside someone who definitely is a lolcow, like DarkSydePhil.

If you visit this website specifically for lolcows, you won't like a lot of the threads you see. If you visit the forum for general Internet drama, censoring or removing threads on people not deemed "lolcow enough" can be alienating. Further, deciding who is and is not a lolcow can play very subjectively. Most people would not call Andrew Dobson a lolcow (anymore), and the interest in Dobson is routinely criticized on all lolcow / drama communities. Despite that I still find Dobson fascinating and am constantly having to purge the thread of shitposting just so I can read it.


The three main tools I have for dealing with threads are:

1. Deletion. Deciding where to draw a line can retain focus and go for quality over quantity, at the risk of pruning too much and alienating people.

2. Subforums. Organizing threads using a subforum defines a specific scope and completely removes it from another forum's view. People who only check Lolcow, for instance, do not see anything in Tumblr. This can create a good sense of categorization and adds room to grow (that is almost always filled by new users joining), but it also segments the community and isn't a very streamlined approach to organization. If a subforum is too niche or weird, like Loveshy is, then it will languish.

3. Tags. Tags allow threads to be categorized within a single board, but (like with Subforums) it's really hard to tell how we can categorize stuff. Dividing content on this forum is a massive headache. I think our current tags are ineffective (because nobody uses them AFAIK).


I want to expand the scope of the site again to adequately allow general Internet drama to be carried out here since there's an increasingly high demand for it. I'm curious to hear how other people think we might be able to facilitate this while still allowing people to find "true blue" lolcows that might interest them.

Discuss.

 

[HG 400]

'People of Interest' subforum for internet people we know damn well aren't lolcows but still wanna talk about, with some tags added once we see what kind of cultures/niches keep cropping up. Trying to split it up by niche will juts result in a bunch of dead subforums and a cluttered index.

 

[Watcher]

The problem I have with this approach is that this forum is generally antagonistic to things. Like our first instinct is to label something as autistic.

I just see it as easily abusable in the same way that Deep Thoughts is. Someone might make a thread on a controversial person who's not actually a lolcow. Like Richard Dawkins or Donald Trump and constantly bait people.

 

[HG 400]

Someone might make a thread on a controversial person who's not actually a lolcow. Like Richard Dawkins or Donald Trump and constantly bait people.

So? Stop being such a liberal atheist whiteknight.

 

[Null]

I just see it as easily abusable in the same way that Deep Thoughts is. Someone might make a thread on a controversial person who's not actually a lolcow. Like Richard Dawkins or Donald Trump and constantly bait people.

One of the polar opposites of funny is politics. I don't like politisperging, but at the same time I do not want to tell people who they can and can't make fun of.

 

[SpessCaptain]

Maybe the "Person of Interests" shouldn't be just some free-for-all and rather must develop from pre-existing conversations on threads, like say we were discussing a lot about Jared Fogle and his arrests - while people aren't considering him a lolcow he is worthy of discussion so into the VIP thread/subforum/whatever they go.

 

[Watcher]

One of the polar opposites of funny is politics. I don't like politisperging, but at the same time I do not want to tell people who they can and can't make fun of.

I'm just saying that with lolcows there isn't much nuance to absorb. "Chris chan shits himself, collects welfare and is autistic" is easy to understand and get behind. There's not much debate whether or not he's correct in doing that. There's not much thought process in following and talking about him. A person talking about something that is more nuanced though requires more restraint in order to get an actual conversation started.

I'm just predicting a large amount of bait posts flung in every direction and not much discussion on the individuals at hand. Mostly a lot of people defending that person and being mocked and ridiculed for doing so. It happens every time we have a joke lolcow thread about someone who people actually like.

 

[Batman VS Tony Danza]

One of the polar opposites of funny is politics. I don't like politisperging, but at the same time I do not want to tell people who they can and can't make fun of.

A lolcow can be in politics but their political views shouldn't be the draw unless they surpass the norm by a wide margin. It's like Brad. He's really into that religion shit but it's so bizarre that any person, regardless of what religion they follow, could see he's a fucking nutjob.

 

[Ruin]

Personally I'm against having threads on random Youtubers/Lets players/politicians simply because based on past experience they all go to shit really quickly. I suppose we could do a trial run and if it turns into a clusterfuck we can nuke it like the entersephere.

 

[GS 281]

Keep it simple. Follow the Dynastia plan.

 

[Locksnap]

I don't see the expansion of the sites scope in this direction as a good move at all. I think you'll really struggle to divorce the discussion of these "people of interest" from their politics.

One of the polar opposites of funny is politics. I don't like politisperging, but at the same time I do not want to tell people who they can and can't make fun of.

This is all very well and good, but you shouldn't be asking yourself whether or not you should be telling people who they can and can't make fun of, but rather whether or not it that funmaking belongs on the forum. I think Internet Aristocrat is a total fag and I'd make fun of him, but its become very clear to everyone that a thread on him does not belong here.

 

[HG 400]

I'm just predicting a large amount of bait posts flung in every direction and not much discussion on the individuals at hand. Mostly a lot of people defending that person and being mocked and ridiculed for doing so. It happens every time we have a joke lolcow thread about someone who people actually like.

So?

Personally I'm against having threads on random Youtubers/Lets players/politicians simply because based on past experience they all go to shit really quickly. I suppose we could do a trial run and if it turns into a clusterfuck we can nuke it like the entersephere.

It's basically a containment board for all the gamergate and clickbait and pedos and minor e-celebrities and atheism+ and sjw faggots that aren't really lolcows but are undeniably interesting to certain people. Moving them to a forum that doesn't say 'Lolcows' on the top will reduce 'BUT IS HE A LOLCOW?' debate and people who just want to focus on pants-shitting autistics will have a less cluttered forum. People who want to get super assmad over Milo Yianoppolous or Arthur Chu or Boxxy or w/e without having to justify them as a 'lolcow' to have a mocking, mean-spirited thread about them will have a place to do so.

It's win-win for everybody and if it turns into a clusterfuck it'll be a clusterfuck in a subforum you don't actually ever have to read.

 

[Pepsi-Cola]

I think the "people of interest" subforum is a cool idea but it should consist of Internet people only, allowing normal celebrities or talked about people IRL have their own threads on a subforum like that is just a recipe for shitposts, autism, and just a generally hard to moderate cesspool of a subforum.

 

[HG 400]

I think the "people of interest" subforum is a cool idea but it should consist of Internet people only, allowing normal celebrities or talked about people IRL have their own threads on a subforum like that is just a recipe for shitposts, autism, and just a generally hard to moderate cesspool of a subforum.

Agree, with the caveat that we should allow normal celebrities the internet has an unhealthy level of interest in (ie. Trump, Putin, Ron Paul, Amy with the Baking Company, Viper, etc.) They're basically internet people now whether they want to be or not.

 

[Null]

I don't see the expansion of the sites scope in this direction as a good move at all. I think you'll really struggle to divorce the discussion of these "people of interest" from their politics.

A lot of people considered moving away from Chris to be a bad idea too. I think it worked out. It just has to be done correctly.

 

[HG 400]

A lot of people considered moving away from Chris to be a bad idea too.

A lot of people also threw stimming tantrums when you changed the font. Don't forget what your userbase is when you see them react negatively to proposed changes.

 

[chimpburgers]

Dynastia's right on this one. It can't hurt to have a trial run of this and see how it goes.

 

[Zeorus]

Part of me likes the idea of more subforums or tags to further categorize shit, but the problem would be, as you said, that there isn't really a good way to standardize the definitions of these categories. I concur with Dyn on this one.

 

[GabeRegan]

'People of Interest' subforum for internet people we know damn well aren't lolcows but still wanna talk about, with some tags added once we see what kind of cultures/niches keep cropping up. Trying to split it up by niche will juts result in a bunch of dead subforums and a cluttered index.

So?



It's basically a containment board for all the gamergate and clickbait and pedos and minor e-celebrities and atheism+ and sjw faggots that aren't really lolcows but are undeniably interesting to certain people. Moving them to a forum that doesn't say 'Lolcows' on the top will reduce 'BUT IS HE A LOLCOW?' debate and people who just want to focus on pants-shitting autistics will have a less cluttered forum. People who want to get super assmad over Milo Yianoppolous or Arthur Chu or Boxxy or w/e without having to justify them as a 'lolcow' to have a mocking, mean-spirited thread about them will have a place to do so.

It's win-win for everybody and if it turns into a clusterfuck it'll be a clusterfuck in a subforum you don't actually ever have to read.

Agree, with the caveat that we should allow normal celebrities the internet has an unhealthy level of interest in (ie. Trump, Putin, Ron Paul, Amy with the Baking Company, Viper, etc.) They're basically internet people now whether they want to be or not.

Gotta agree with Dynastia, I think he's got the best idea for this. A "Persons of Interest" board would also be a good place to throw questionable threads that don't generate a lot of content, but are still worth talking about for the people who want to talk about it.

At the very least, it should cut down on the "Is this person a lolcow?" discussions that seem to dominate most of the newer threads in Lolcow.

 

[SpessCaptain]

I'm starting to think a little bit over it... Kiwifarms is about Lolcows.

I don't think that falls into the "People of Interest" Category, pretty much a cow needs to be milk-able or milks itself (produces interesting and lulzy content).

People of Interests kind of don't fall into that same wavelength. Like there would be little to work with and so much content about people and they would unlikely be interested in them. Lolcows produce dozens, hundreds or even thousands of pages worth of content, a Person of Interest is pretty much a shivelled up unlactating lolcow that just has a few moments then phases away, we'll only be interested in the thread for like a day and discard it like a washed up whore. like in internet terms drama that happened over 3 years ago is like ancient history for us.

It's basically a containment board for all the gamergate and clickbait and pedos and minor e-celebrities and atheism+ and sjw faggots that aren't really lolcows but are undeniably interesting to certain people.

wow all of these sound like really interesting and quality threads, I will follow every one!

Unless we're desperately wanting to grasp at the audience for eDrama and image board news then we should do it.