I want to follow up on my last post with an example that is particularly relevant to me, Metafilter. This site features a very large number of good posts and interesting comments. Of course there is still the same noise that you’ll find in many such communities, with people flogging their own political viewpoints, posting snarky but useless comments, and the like, but by and large it is one of the most consistently interesting sites on the Web. Why?

I think it has a lot to do with the history of the site, such that by the time it was widely known, it had reached a “tipping point,” (see my previous post on this idea) such that the number of high-quality posts and comments intimidated or otherwise kept out the crap that floods so many other large sites.

Metafilter was founded in 1999 by Matt Haughey, who was experimenting with the new “weblog” format, well before a “blog” acquired a definition as a site written by a single person. He apparently attracted a number of San Francisco geeks, who had a wider range of interests, than, say, your typical Slashdot user. Journalists and other professional writers, along with blog pioneers like Jason Kottke also joined in suprising numbers.

These early users set a standard for quality that was self-reinforcing, so that only people interested in the sort of clever, intricate posts often featured on the site would stick around to participate in the community. Which is not to say that every post is great, but that the overall quality is better than most.

I also think the hands-off moderating style of Haughey and, of late, his colleague Jessamyn West, have had a lot to do with the site’s success. The automatic moderating system and “threaded” system of Slashdot and similar sites lead to a bunch of comments that are direct responses to the post, along with disconnected and confusing parallel conversations. Metafilter feels like a real conversation, rather than point-scoring and random insults.

To me, that’s important.