Keeping score

“People say all kinds of things online,” my editor warned me, “especially when they can be anonymous.”

He’d called to tell me my article on couponing would be posted the next day and to give me a heads up about the fact that people might post critical comments.

The idea that anyone would spend one second of their time commenting on the value of something I wrote definitely got my attention. First thing the next morning, I went online to check the article which, it turned out, already had received five comments. The readers had rated the article, too.

About the topic of couponing, Missy wrote, “I love it! …I think I’ll change my ways and save even more!” before giving the article a +3.

Mmmhmm wasn’t so convinced, saying, “…coupons are never really for more than $1 off of the usual things you don’t need. Never on carrots and tomatoes...” Rating: +2.

To Middleroader, however (who gave the article a +5), the article was “Just more concrete evidence and fallout from 8 years of out-of-control Bush/Cheney/GOP economics that favored the rich time and time again until the system imploded.”

Hello?

During the day, I found myself strangely attracted to the comments (which varied from thoughtful to silly) and ratings. I returned again and again to the posted article, lured back to see if anyone else had said anything. It felt a bit strange. A traditional print journalist, I was used to turning an article in and never hearing another word. But Missy, Mmmhmm, Middleroader and 18 others had taken what would have been a static story and turned it into a living, breathing thing.

My article wasn’t the only one being read and rated that day.

“Portland jobless rate spikes to over 11 percent” earned 19 posts, with a highest rating of +7.

But it was “Search on for man and monkey in biting case,” about a pet monkey that bit a six-year-old child in a park, that captured top honors, with a total of 53 posts and a highest rating of +8.