Gothamist: Christina Ray & Dave Mandl, Psy.Geo.Conflux

krucoff

Thu, 13 May 2004 06:47:46 -0500

Thanks for providing the definitive "one last comment" on the subject. Illuminating to the point of blindness. (I forget, who's being arrogant?) Yes, the internet IS a two-way medium (it can also be a three-way fuckfest if you fancy that kind of thing as well), and you CAN say WHATEVER you want on YOUR OWN site. Shout it from the tallest building my friend, buy ad space in the NYTimes, trash me from here to Canarsie. I don't care about the negative comments involving me in the least. Hilarious stuff in fact. But as Choire Sicha pointed out in the first week these launched, comments should *not* be on for interviews because this is not a regular blog post and it's a bit ridiculous for interviewees to be subjected to anonymous crap-mouthing. The thing is, I don't even like the positive comments. They add no value either. Neither I or the people being interviewed need any validation via this venue. It's a freakin' interview, it shouldn't turn into a slagfest of the subject or get all cutesy with Friendster-esque testimonials. There's just little point in leaving a comment. Is this arrogance? I don't think so but what do I know, I'm just a moron. But I got many emails today that echoed what this person said: "Also, thanks for taking away comments on Gothamist. Way to exercise the most appropriate of editorial powers." Again, feel free to grandstand your infinite insight on the Gothamist forum! Two-way away, dude...

Craydon Garter

Wed, 12 May 2004 23:07:32 -0500

"This is exactly why having comments on is inappropriate for interviews." Since Krucoff in his infinite arrogance has turned off comments, I think one last comment needs to be made on this statement. The thing that is great about the Internet is the two-way communication aspect. It's a levelling force. You've interviewed some very interesting people. But since there is an insistence on posting a new interview each day, there are also bad interviews. What's infuriating about your attitude Krucoff is how you seem to demand via implication that all comments be glowing and positive like some cheerleading rally. Get over it. People are saying what they think. And while in the past feature writers could exist in relatively protected from readers comments in print, online everyone can speak and they often will. And if you look at the majority of comments, it's a 50/50 split between positive and negative. The point being get over yourself. If you can't stand the fact that people can comment and make opinions online, please get offline and leave the Internet alone. We all know writers tend to be vain and a tad fragile. And Internet writers seem to suffer more from these traits. But just toughen up a bit and be an adult and learn how to roll with the punches.

bob

Wed, 12 May 2004 00:16:14 -0500

Would it be possible to restrict interviews to only people from planet earth?

Marc

Mon, 10 May 2004 12:07:06 -0500

If so, good riddance. The only reason developers build those useless, faux-public spaces in the first place is to obtain zoning concessions and bonuses. They may work fairly well as development incentives, but their return to the life of the city is negligible, and even detrimental. This city, as vibrant and eminently walkable as it is, would be better off without them.

Sterling

Mon, 10 May 2004 11:29:29 -0500

"We'd re-appropriate corporate atriums and convert them to public parks." That would be a brilliant way of making sure no one built a "corporate atrium" ever again.