September 29, 2010
I think it’s a combination of a couple things.
First off, we encourage people to use their real identity when on Lunch either by using their real name and picture or even using Facebook Connect to log in. That is a great first step in reducing the anonymous negative attacks that we have all seen on other website.
But secondly and I think more importantly, there is something inherently different on Lunch than on other sites because on Lunch a different opinion is valued rather than criticized. Lunch is built on entirely on the concept of providing relevance… relevant content for a consumer and a relevant audience for our contributors. So when you have environment established where an opposing opinion to your own provides you a direct benefit, ie. not seeing that person’s content or relying their recommendations, it allows you to read it without feeling the need to try to convince that person they are wrong. We’ve all seen what happens on other sites when people try to do that and at the end, each person is only more steadfast in their original viewpoint. On Lunch each differing opinion helps to refine our Similarity Network and ultimately provides us a better experience on Lunch. So bring on more differing opinions!!
Hope for the future:
Since we are all part of building a site where differing opinions are encouraged and valued, I think we are taking a huge step forward in helping all of us to be more open to new ideas.
Granted i answered my own question... but i still want to hear want to hear what everyone else has too say. thanks guys.
December 08, 2010
Hmmm ... where to start? That's not a gripe, it's just an honest observation that I think Lunch could use minor tweaking or, at least, a "second helping" (hahaha ... get the pun?). Anyhoo, what I'd do primarily I had shared once before, and that's that I'd have a box on the main page that posts a Lunch question of the day ... it could be topical, newsworthy, entertainment ... almost anything that would prompt the regular participants to sound off on the topic of the day. I'm not too sure what to make of the submissions that are exclusive to Lunch.com
b/c -- to be blunt -- it doesn't seem as if all that many people seriously read here. It seems that there's a small handful who utilize Lunch to its greatest benefits, and I can't blame them ... my exposure over at Amazon.com
, for example, garners me tons of private messages as well as free merchandise from companies seeking my input on their books, products, DVDs, etc. So there's something to be strongly said for participating in other sites while Lunch largely seems to be driven out of the love for writing. Again, not a bad thing, but I think I get greater mileage out of what I write elsewhere. Also, Lunch seems to gravitate fairly heavily toward entertainment subjects. Again, not a bad thing per se, but I think that's caused many many many items (such as films, books, TV shows) to get multiple listings in the database. For example, I think I've come across the latest Harry Potter film under several of the same headings. Some of this results in folks not fully knowing how to access the database OR it's done by folks specifically who want to draw attention solely to their contributions and not fully appreciating the collectivity premise behind Lunch. However, I think this lends itself to an awful lot of 'housekeeping' that will eventually need to be done in order to elevate Lunch to the level of some other more professional sites. Additionally, when I've contributed to other sites, I'm occasionally contacted by folks who manage the site and offered the chance to post exclusive content under a very specific "exclusive content" banner, and this draws attention to the fact that I'm not just a regular or routine contributor ... it carries with it a certain 'clout' that goes hand-in-hand with being an exclusive contributor, not just writing something exclusive to a specific website. Also, those websites have linked their content out to other websites on some kind of pay-arrangement (not that I received any money but that the site I contributed to did in hit counts), and that broadens the appeal of my writing. (It's kind of the age-old truth that writers -- at the end of the day -- seek to be READ first, paid second. I don't feel that much I've written has drawn much notice from Lunch.com
, but I do know firsthand that I'm getting read at other websites.) As a suggestion, I'd encourage Lunch to consider adding some kind of forums section. It's a minor suggestion, but I think it might help kickstart dialogue around some limited subjects instead of having all of the multiple topic submissions. But, seriously, why can't Lunch.com
mgmt get together and select a handful of regular contributors to be a bullpen of regulars, and why can't that carry some nametag with it? As I do over at some sports websites I contribute to (such as Bleacher Report), I'd encourage several of the regulars here to be granted some kind of 'citizen journalist' role. Lunch.com
has some terrific experts, and -- like Examiner.com
does -- why not capitalize on the talents of those folks and officially credit someone as "Lunch.com
's Official Foreign Films Contributor" or "Lunch.com
's Official Fashion Correspondent"? I mean ... who wouldn't want to have that li'l recognition attached to his or her work? It just seems like such an easy idea to pursue, and it costs absolutely nothing OTHER than taking the time to make such a simple investment. Also as a suggestion, I've read a fair number of contributions (or quick blurbs) that I think are mildly inappropriate to the subject matter. This tends to happen with topics that are more political in nature when heated discussion of subject matter lends itself to saying something like "Sarah Palin should die." I reported the blurb, and I believe it was removed, but I'd think that it would be helpful for whatever action taken to get reported back to the person who reported it because that would only further underscore that your voice is actually being HEARD as a contributor toward making Lunch.com
a greater vehicle for credible writing, not chatboard gibberish. Seriously, like any of us, I could probably go on and on and on for hours on such a topic, and that's because -- like most of you who've taken the time to read this -- writers take what they pen very seriously. It's as much from the heart as it is from the mind, and I only want to know that I'm being read but some kind of recognition -- even more benign badges and perhaps site-specific mentions -- would go a long way toward my contributing more work here. I like coming here, and I very much enjoy the exchanges I've had, even with people I disagree with politically or socially ... I'm just thinking that the site only appears to be one grand idea realized but not much tinkered with. Now, if these Lunch.com
Awards are genuine, then I certainly hope that Lunch.com
can capitalize on some awesome contributions and draw greater emphasis to the site by piggybacking that phenom onto something bigger. Until then, I'm not sure what more any of us can do to make Lunch.com
a major hotspot for any daily surfer.
November 23, 2010
Well, I think my write up on why post reviews in Lunch.com?
covers my answer, at least from my point of view. However, I do have some additions as to why I like posting reviews here.
The ease of use is just tailor-made for my needs. You can customize your settings to get notiifcations and messages when you so choose. Lunch just makes my reviewing habits much easier. The site is just so user-friendly for me....
I am also really appreciative to the amount of support the site gives its members. Yes, it is nicer here. I do like the majority of the membership here and which is why I am still around--because the site does do things right.
a little more 'tweaking' and the site will be perfect!
Not much need to be added since Adri covered a lot of the other bases.