I've got a theory...

[rich_jacko]

...it could be bunnies that the triviality of an LJ post is roughly proportional to the number of comments it will get.

So when I post about the last couple of minutes of a TV programme, I get 35 comments (and counting). This post is about something rather more important, so I suspect it will get far fewer comments ;o)

Whatever else you may think about the Tories' policies; or whether forcing a by-election is meaningless, money-wasting grandstanding or not; David Davis's speech yesterday was a rather magnificent condemnation of this government's relentless attack on our civil liberties.

I'd be interested to know what my normally anti-Tory, pro-civil liberties friends made of it.

- Video link
- Full transcript

Comments

[astatine210.livejournal.com]

For those who want to check what his political conscience has been like in the past:
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/david_davis/haltemprice_and_howden

[thegreatgonzo.livejournal.com]

I think it is one of the best things to happen in British politics in years...

[caraj316.livejournal.com]

I personally am glad to see that the politicians who feel strongly about this *are* prepared to take a stand instead of just blindly going along with what their leadership say. I particularly liked a comment he made a out the conservatives being a party not a regiment ad thought that Labour could do with taking that paricular comment well on board.

[pharrap.livejournal.com]

The only problem is that the Labour party could easily sidestep it by refusing to field a candidate. That would certainly dampen the impact of the gesture.

[grok-mctanys.livejournal.com]

I think your theory is correct, and has a pretty simple explanation.

It's easy to write a trivial and/or funny reply to a trivial post. A trivial post invites trivial replies; they are expected as they are the same spirit as the original post. Consequently, lots of people will thrash one out in under a minute without much trouble or need for thought.

It's possible to write a trivial reply to a serious post, but a serious post does not implicitly invite trivial replies. It invites serious replies. So you will get fewer trivial replies to serious posts than to trivial posts.

A serious post invites serious replies. Serious replies require thought, consideration and editing. Many times I've seen a serious post and:

a) thought "That's pretty much what I think. I don't really have anything to add here apart from a 'me too' which seems a bit pointless"

b) thought "I ought to respond to that, but I'm busy now so I'll do it later" and then completely forgotten about it.

c) started writing a reply, gone off to google or wikipedia to look something up, followed one link not related to the reply at hand, got competely absorbed in this other subject and not quite returned to writing the reply.

d) started writing a reply, gone off to google or wikipedia to look something up, found out more about the subject, realised what I was in the middle of writing was a bunch of crap, deleted it, and then couldn't get around to start writing a new reply from scratch with this new-found information.

e) Written a reply, started proof-reading it and realised that it was badly written. Paragraphs could be put in a much better order. I've made the same point made too many times without any sort of coherency. etc... Then I start editing the thing and make it worse. Re-ordered paragraphs refer to things I've now not mentioned yet. Half-rewritten sentences has inconsistent tense/case, or just stop in the. The reply is now worse than it was before, I realise I can't post it the way it is, but fixing it is suddenly too difficult so I don't bother and just kill the browser window.


Consequently, I don't write as many serious replies as I write trivial replies. I think other people will do some of the above themselves, and possibly find their own other ways to not post serious replies.

[pharrap.livejournal.com]

You obviously forgot to do (e) this time.

(this is a trivial reply to a serious comment)

[rich-jacko.livejournal.com]

Congratulations on posting a serious reply to a trivial comment in a serious post! :o)

[edy-.livejournal.com]

I was impressed by a politician making such an explict stand.

I was suprised it was a Conservative but that's proabaly as much do with my ignroance of his voting record and my sterotyped view of the party.

So as a normally anti-Tory, pro-civil liberties friend I'm left disconcerted by agreeing with a Conservative (ex)MP and hoping someone in power will take the (not subtle) hint.

Given the (non)impact of the Iraq war resignations, I'm sure something will happen to minimise the point being made here. Sadly, I don't expect much (if anything) will change but if nothing's ever said then there's no reason it'll improve. It's in the hope of making a difference, I vote, occasionaly write to my MP and then wonder why I bother.

[rich-jacko.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure why you should be surprised it was a Conservative making a stand on this.

If you boil the two main parties down to the basics, Labour are typically the ones who are all about state interference (taxing and spending, nationalisation, regulation, the nanny state); whereas the Tories are about minimising such things (tax cuts, privatisation, free market economics, letting people/businesses sink or swim).

What'll happen is that Europe will knock this issue off the headlines for a while. Should be an interesting by-election though...

[littlejenny123.livejournal.com]

Comment just to prove you wrong.

Now I'll go listen to the speech.

[littlejenny123.livejournal.com]

w00t! About bloody time someone showed a hint of sanity. Even if I don't agree with some of his other views, I'm gladdened to read this.

[bonedancer.livejournal.com]

The original, trivial post about a TV program sparked a philosophical debate about the nature of life, death and identity - not particularly trivial, regardless of the starting point.

My reaction to the David Davis speech was of discontent - it's outrageous that I should be expected to start admiring a Tory politician at my age.

Cynicism has now set in and I wonder how much of it is him grandstanding to have another crack at the leadership next time Cameron looks like he's in trouble... but you could just as easily argue that he's decided he's not going to be PM any time soon and he might as well start voting according to his principles. So a ringing endorsement on his speech, and cautious optimism for the idea that MPs might start rejecting the party whip.

[littlejenny123.livejournal.com]

Yes, the depressing side of the story is that it's upped the popularity of the Conservative Party.

[rich-jacko.livejournal.com]

Yeah, 'cause of course we want another five years of Gordon Brown in power......

[caraj316.livejournal.com]

I personally would welcome a change in government. Not because I particularly like the conservative party, but because I think that no party should be in power for longer than about 10 years, because they get complacent and begin to believe they can do anything they want to.