Eclipsed from the headlines by the ongoing carnage, there is an active
civil resistance in Iraq that opposes the occupation, the torture regime
it protects, and the jihadi and Ba'athist 'resistance' alike.
Submitted by Ormond Otvos (not verified) on Tue, 02/05/2008 - 19:31.
From Brian Tokar, Plainfield, VT:
I think the main problem is visibility. WW4's coverage is consistently more original and in depth than anyone else's, but it's not getting out there. People send me stories from all kinds of websites on a regular basis, but I never get WW4 stories except from you. Another one of my favorite sites, NewStandard, went out of operation last year. I only knew of its existence for a few months before it folded, only because a reporter contacted me for a story. Maybe getting stories cross-posted more by friendly sites like Toward Freedom would help? The web is all about webs of linkage, they say...
ww4 reports responds:
World War 4 Report replies: Toward Freedom is free to use any of our work with attribution, as is everybody else—even the repugnant ZNet.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Dear Editors:
That reply above is what's wrong, in large measure, with your popularity. It's factual, bare-bones responsive, and a little snotty. It's Hillaryous, and not in a good way: clear, factual, irrefutable, and bad tempered, curt, and not the tiniest bit personal, warm, self-deprecating or humorous.
And I say this as a person who reads your stuff, writes similar stuff on Salon, DailyKos, and currently PFF.
And finds it goes over a hell of a lot better when the abovementioned elements are present.
You see, DailyKos and PFF have comment rating. Maybe you could somehow develop the same. A little check box set, with as many rating names as you can get. Check out My Left Wing: they have eleven, and they're quite accurate.
The idea is to get the reader involved. We all move so fast in this medium, and the rule is: no emotion, no memory of the event. If you want to be remembered, and thus receive largesse (even if you ARE the most important site around, and it's conceivable, if not recognized) stop people and have them respond. THAT's what the comment rating boxes do.
Think about it. You needn't reply unless it's funny. I know I'm pissing you off. So? You're the one asking for advice.
Ormond Otvos in Richmond, California. I DO buy my way into your consciousness by donating.
»
Reply
For more breaking news and world events, seeThe first open media site where anyone can report from anywhere
Advertisements:
The inconvenient facts and unanswered questions surrounding the attacks are legion, but the endemic sloppiness of the self-styled "researchers" is delegitimizing the entire project of critiquing the "official version." The ostentatiously named "Truth movement" is not clearing the air, but muddying the water.
WW4 Report pamphlets
WAR AT THE CROSSROADS
An Historical Guide Through the Balkan Labyrinth
The Balkan region is intensely multicultural - a point of crossroads and clash for some of the world's major religions, cultural spheres, and economic systems. While there have been vicious wars in Balkan history, these have taken place in the context of manipulation by imperial powers and the self-serving local leaders who cater to them.
opensource technology and the people of Sundays Energy
Further ruminations on emotional bonding responses vs memory.
From Brian Tokar, Plainfield, VT:
I think the main problem is visibility. WW4's coverage is consistently more original and in depth than anyone else's, but it's not getting out there. People send me stories from all kinds of websites on a regular basis, but I never get WW4 stories except from you. Another one of my favorite sites, NewStandard, went out of operation last year. I only knew of its existence for a few months before it folded, only because a reporter contacted me for a story. Maybe getting stories cross-posted more by friendly sites like Toward Freedom would help? The web is all about webs of linkage, they say...
ww4 reports responds:
World War 4 Report replies: Toward Freedom is free to use any of our work with attribution, as is everybody else—even the repugnant ZNet.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Dear Editors:
That reply above is what's wrong, in large measure, with your popularity. It's factual, bare-bones responsive, and a little snotty. It's Hillaryous, and not in a good way: clear, factual, irrefutable, and bad tempered, curt, and not the tiniest bit personal, warm, self-deprecating or humorous.
And I say this as a person who reads your stuff, writes similar stuff on Salon, DailyKos, and currently PFF.
And finds it goes over a hell of a lot better when the abovementioned elements are present.
You see, DailyKos and PFF have comment rating. Maybe you could somehow develop the same. A little check box set, with as many rating names as you can get. Check out My Left Wing: they have eleven, and they're quite accurate.
The idea is to get the reader involved. We all move so fast in this medium, and the rule is: no emotion, no memory of the event. If you want to be remembered, and thus receive largesse (even if you ARE the most important site around, and it's conceivable, if not recognized) stop people and have them respond. THAT's what the comment rating boxes do.
Think about it. You needn't reply unless it's funny. I know I'm pissing you off. So? You're the one asking for advice.
Ormond Otvos in Richmond, California. I DO buy my way into your consciousness by donating.