Then why didn't Obama accept?  Or at least counteroffer a lower number of debates that wouldn't interfere with his own campaign so much?

Because ten is a ridiculous number. Who would even pay attention to so many? Maybe that was his angle. Obama did counter with a lower, reasonable number: 3.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

I would think you's get a better audience on almost any other night of the week.
Friday nights are peak socializaion hours.  

Maybe I'm projecting  but I fully intend to be belly up at a bar drinking beer with my friends as opposed to watching a foreign policy debate.  I think its fair to say that I'm much more politically involved than the average person and I've got better things to do.

I just don't see record breaking crowds viewing this debate, especially when the
Senators are quiblling over Iraq withdrawl schedules.  

I've got better things to do.

Me too.  Besides, I can just wait until tomorrow and get the 411 on how to think from my personally selected liberal media outlets.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

I don't know...
Maybe it's because I'm old and have kids (well, definitely), but I'm gonna watch it via the infernets, tonight.
Maybe I'm projecting  but I fully intend to be belly up at a bar drinking beer with my friends as opposed to watching a foreign policy debate.
No reason why you can't combine the two...
I were a younger man, I'd have a party and invent a drinking game for it.
Of course, as part of me is a young man imprisoned in an old man's body, I have to call bullshit on both candidates, but that younger fellow was the man who voted for Nader in 2000 (not that it made a difference, here, in Kanzas).

We really should invent a drinking game for this.
Okay, for each point (well-made) by Obama, you drink a swig from your previously made Black and Tans. Each time McCain scores a maverick point, you have to drink (in one go) an entire 12 oz. can of (US, not Czech) Budweiser.

----- The earth may burn, but we will quiver

I were a younger man, I'd have a party and invent a drinking game for it.

Every time McCain says "My friends," you have to swig.

Man, I thought that debate was lame.
I thought it sucked. If I'd played a drinking game by my rules, I don't think I'd even have copped a buzz.

----- The earth may burn, but we will quiver

I listened to it in the car with my aphasic father-in-law.

We both laughed out loud every time McCain repeated himself.  Apparently they only gave the old man a few things to say, so he had to say them over and over and over.

Actually, I know one or two other 70-year-olds who have that problem.

Neither he nor Obama really have a place in Washington right now until such a time that a plan comes up for a vote because anything they add to the dialogue that takes place will be seen as being said for their political advantage.

You don't feel that there's a potential for either candidate to take a leadership role and display the actual skills which will be required in the White House?

Wouldn't the ability (or inability) of the candidates to guide Congress to a decisive resolution be a valuable assessment of McCain's and Obama's respective fitness as president?

You don't feel that there's a potential for either candidate to take a leadership role and display the actual skills which will be required in the White House?

George Will sure does.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

I hear you.  Not only the comments, but the stories themselves tend to be a bit more casual.  This write-up, though interesting and sure to provoke discussion, isn't particularly balanced.  Not that every front page write-up should be perfectly balanced and neutral, but I'd like to think that the submitters and editors strive for that goal, with diaries providing an outlet for more opinionated pieces.  Promoting write-ups like this to the front page kind of breaks that model.  Now that might just be a model that exists only in my head, it's certainly not formalized in any of our policies - but I think this is worth discussing.

but I'd like to think that the submitters and editors strive for that goal, with diaries providing an outlet for more opinionated pieces.  Promoting write-ups like this to the front page kind of breaks that model.

Well, that's mostly right. However, from day one, I've made it clear that I'd be happy with promoting submissions that were slanted. Makes no difference to me the slant of the story; what does matter is the discussion potential and the quality of the writing. Whether you agree with logan's leanings or you don't, he is consistently an entertaining writer who's not afraid of skewering a target. Yes, this piece is one-sided, and yes this piece is also full of snark, but it's also a good read, regardless.
I checked the subq before I promoted this and found no submissions on the same topic. Recognizing this as the big news item for the day, I decided to kill two birds with one stone: getting a head start on the day's hot topic and giving the newly-implemented diary promotion tool a workout. The eds had a minor email conversation yesterday, regarding the steps necessary to promote a diary entry to the front page and I was curious to see how it worked. When ya get down to brass tacks, logan's story just happened to be in the right place at the right time.
Rest assured, we're not going to go on diary-promoting blitz with every spittle-flecked rant getting an uplift in status just cuz it's possible to do so.

Somewhere in my soul, there's always Rock -n- Roll... Joe Strummer

First off, I think you guys do a great job, and I don't want anything I say here to be taken as criticism.

I guess what I am worried about is the front page starting to look like a liberal blog (albeit a very intelligent, well-written, well-researched liberal blog).  Maybe some biased, right leaning stuff will make it up there from the diaries too, but there isn't much of that to be found - at least not anything that's meant to be taken seriously.  Regardless, it's the bias that bugs me, not the direction of the slant.

These diary promotions, though imminently discussable and well written, aren't consistent with the tenor of most other front page submissions.  I realize that not every front page submissions is a paragon of balance and neutrality - but I think these two diary promotions are well outside the envelope of anything that's made it's way to the front page before.

Think of it this way, our front page is our public face.  It's the first thing any new user sees.  If they hit the page and see the top story is a one-sided, snarky, spitty-flecked rant, they might just move on.  We have a better chance of engaging new readers with thorough, well researched write-ups that explore both sides of the issue.

I really like the fact that on TnT we can have both kinds of content.  But I also like the fact that there is a wall between them, even if that wall is only one-click thick.

I really like the fact that on TnT we can have both kinds of content.  But I also like the fact that there is a wall between them, even if that wall is only one-click thick.

I think trying to social engineer this site is a really bad idea.

With this internets thing, it's almost always better to go with the flow.

I definitely think this is a valid concern.  Maybe we should mark those stories promoted from the Diaries section as editorials to make it more clear that they're opinion pieces?

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

Everything here is solely the opinion of its author. I would hesitate to cloud that issue by labeling certain pieces editorials or opinions. If it's topical, well linked and will promote discussion it belongs on the front page. We just need to nurture more conservative voices if we want to be balanced and vital.

I like the idea of labeling diaries the "back page."

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

We could subtitle diary entries on the front page as "promoted from the back page".

- derumi (del-me)
"Bobby Fischer? Man, that guy is crazy!" - Mike Tyson

Now that might just be a model that exists only in my head, it's certainly not formalized in any of our policies - but I think this is worth discussing.

Just because its a model in your head doesn't necessarily mean that it's worth discussing.

No, I imagine an editorial policy for diary promotions isn't worth discussing.  Sorry for bringing it up.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

We've only had two diary entries promoted: this one and wetkarma's bailout entry.  Neither of the two were what you could call totally balanced but I think the key factor is the bailout one has generated a whole bunch of discussion and this looks like it will also.  It's really an editor's prerogative whether a diary entry should be promoted and, IMHO, that's the way it should remain.  I don't necessarily think that balanced entries should be the measure; enough write ups which aren't totally balanced run.  

Illegitimi non carborundum.

I am all for the editor's prerogative in promotion, but I think an attempt should be made to remove some of the bias in the writeup, in fact, to get back to the gist of p0157's original point, some of the original authors might actually like to tone it down a little before it hits the front page.  But even if the original author is ok with it as is, I'd prefer an attempt be made to make things look a bit more neutral and balanced before promotion.

My view (which may or may not be shared by other people) is that diaries are places to discuss things casually or in less formal terms.

I see diaries as places for more casual self-edited stories, generally more fun than the front page, but don't see a difference between comments in the diaries and comments on the front page.

but don't see a difference between comments in the diaries and comments on the front page.

It's probably just me, but I kind of do. For example, I would not have posted this if it had been a front page story at the time. I probably would have reduced the profanities by at least 27% and put a bit more thought into it, rather than relying on a heavily punctuated and carriage return laden "Fuck That Noise" to make my point. However, since it was a diary entry at the time, I had no problem doing so.

I kind of see main page stories as the upscale bar with the $9 chocolate martinis and the diary section as the seedy ally or perhaps polka bar next door they ask you to take your rowdy conversations to. I'm just saying.

The irony in your metaphor is in assuming that folks sipping $9 martinis aren't talking smack, which they do of course, in many cases in more gutter-like language than the proles in the polka bar.

I think one of the biggest problems with any discussion board is that people are afraid to just be themselves.  I think we're all capable of adopting higher tones and lower tones, but it seems pointless to me to assume a one-click boundary predicates how you express yourself.  

I think it will be a technical foul come November.

- derumi (del-me)
"Bobby Fischer? Man, that guy is crazy!" - Mike Tyson