Every once and awhile, someone asks me if I view Coffeegeek as a competitor, usually in the context of my objection to their cross-posting the same message on both sites (e.g., pressing problems like "Help! My Silvia is dead!" ). I explain it's nothing personal, it's a matter of good online etiquette since many HB members are also CG members. Picking the site that best suites the topic at hand saves site hoppers the trouble of wading through duplicate messages and more importantly prevents the split of conversations across multiple sites. Besides, it really irks me to spend twenty minutes composing a thoughtful reply only to read a similar reply elsewhere an hour later. As proof of no hard feelings, I usually add a backlink to the thread from HB to Coffeegeek or alt.coffee so subsequent visitors will have a breadcrumb trail to follow.

These same cross-posters usually don't realize I'm a moderator on CG for the last five years, or that dan_kehn (there) and HB (here) are the same person. It's understandable. My activity on Coffeegeek has dropped off, not just because I'm busy following the discussions on HB, but because there's already a legion of CG members that pounce on every question before I could even type the first paragraph. No point in rushing when you'll be the last to arrive.

Lately I've been thinking about the Coffeegeek / Home-Barista.com relationship after reading Mark's column Fear the Detailed Review. It was published over a year ago and yet it escaped my notice. A bit surprising that nobody forwarded a link since Mark points to this site as one of the main reasons behind the disappearance of his Detailed Reviews. Huh?!?

Mark Prince wrote:Today, there's a bevy of websites that host very detailed product reviews. The most obvious is Dan Kehn's Home Barista website, where people like Dan and Jim Schulman have posted hyper-detailed reviews of products. Some are in "review" format, multi page, like the Andreja Premium buyers' guide, some are written in forums-format, like the ongoing Titan Grinders reviews.

I totally tip my hat to the level of detail, and downright anal-ness that the reviewers on HB have achieved. In many ways, the review formats early on copied the style and formats that I did on CoffeeGeek (I think Jim Schulman said as much in one of the reviews he helped write), but I didn't so much create those as copy them myself from DPreview.com and other influencer websites who lead the way in other technological fields.

But where I tried to balance out technical stuff with other factors I like in a review (readability, reach so that noobs aren't thrown off by too-technical jargon and detailed minutia, detailed, clear photography) HB reviews went for the throat when it came to tech - every possible technical aspect of a machine was looked at, tested, tweaked, examined, stretched, pulled, torn apart and put back together. A new bar was definitely set in technical aspects. Sometimes, I wish I had an engineering background lol!

<snip>

And my great worry as HB started up its reviews (and also some Euro sites, and even a few Aussie / Kiwi sites), was that, even if I maintained the standard I set for myself in my own Detailed Reviews on CoffeeGeek, the reviews I publish would be blown away by the technical aspects seen on these other websites. I already wasn't enjoying the technical standards I had set for myself, and here were some supergeeks, engineers, machinists, scientists etc etc who were raising the bar way beyond anything I could achieve.

Later he shares his friends' opinions of HB articles. Many are openly critical, saying they're too technical, amateurish in layout, too long and boring. Mark didn't call out the title of the article he cited as his favorite, but I cannot disagree that some of the articles are too dense. I've made cursory attempts to improve the worse offenders, most of which were written in the site's early days. Restructuring the content by breaking down the pages into smaller chunks and moving deep technical content to appendices helps the flow, especially for today's page-skipping speed readers of the Internet age. As for the layout and photos Mark's commentators labeled as amateurish, well, it's a shortcoming that I accept since I have neither the skills, budget, or time for professional web design services.

Comments to Mark's column supported his view that the HB content is just too technical, unapproachable, and other far less flattering descriptors. It's not the first time I've heard such comments, even from stalwart supporters like the site sponsors. These concerns were most vocal a year ago, but have died off lately. I hope this is in part because of improvements in the article presentation (Jim's recent Buyer's Guide to the Elektra Semiautomatica is in my mind the best article to-date, mixing good narrative prose and technical information in a way that's interesting and approachable to a wide range of readers), though my suspicion is that much of it is due to an emergence of a niche demographic whose interests align with HB's espresso-only focus.

The site has always targeted the serious espresso enthusiast. HB would not succeed if it were a "mini CG". In my opinion, the demographic split has worked out nicely for both sites - Mark focuses on the mainstream coffee lover, we focus on the so-called hardcore espresso crowd. Life in the shadows is not without its advantages. CG serves the masses and Mark clearly enjoys the media adulation; we get down to business. Everyone wins.

That said, there's always the risk of too much of a good thing. I take the critiques of the commenters' to Mark's column seriously since it's something I've worked on in my professional career for years: Explaining a problem and solution such that the newbie understands and the seasoned veteran isn't bored. The trick is addressing the audience at multiple levels, alternating between basic foundation and advanced topics, sometimes within the same paragraph. If you do it right, both readers will finish what you've wrote and say "Right, I get it" or "That's a good point, but did he forget about ...?" thereby leading the discussion to the next point at the next level.

It's a style that I encourage and one that I believe is the cornerstone of this site's success. When I hear comments that we're elitist or obsessed with pricey gear, I worry we've lost focus of the key to what makes this site unique. This is not to suggest I want to downgrade; no, I'm suggesting a bit of balance. With big projects like the TGP under our belts, we're overdue to investigate superior but down-to-earth alternatives and the results will be taken seriously because we've established a track record. I've raised this point several times with Team HB, but their buy-in isn't strong. You know, boys and their toys. Some want to investigate 380V three-phase espresso grinders. What next? A PID'd Silvia with Speedster backup?


From Cluttered Kitchen Counters

PS: For those new to HB, this post is a continuation of my semi-retired blog Overextracted.

Dan that was a great read.

I really think you've nailed the demographics and I like the sharp focus on espresso that this site offers. I've always though that H-B.com compliments CG and quite beautifully I might add.

Your reviews are top notch and I love the technical aspects, I want the graphs, numbers and the data. But I can see where a need for balance arises.

All in all I think Team HB does a great job and this site (and its gold mine of home espresso reading material) is attributed to the hard work you guys do.

I like it in the shadow.

Interesting observations, Dan. I have dealt with many of the same questions to myself. I take an approach in my reviews that somewhere, someone may want one of these, and so I try to find the positives about the device (even the Senseo). On the other hand I do not hesitate to point out a devices negatives and defects if I think they would be noticed by the user. That attitude helped to bring about improvements in the Hottop roaster.. at least I like to think so.

I think you have to pick a demographic and aim for it. And in the case of HB, I think you are on the right track and should continue on that track. it would make no sense to try to be "more like" CG.. There is already a CG and who needs two of those? There is only one HB, and that's the way it should be.

Your moderation has also been excellent. There tends to be more noise on CG, and even offenders of the basic rules are allowed to continue to be allowed to participate there. Whether this site operates on a mostly-positive note because the level of discussion draws a more civilized crowd or because of your control of the visitors.. I don't care... just keep doing it..

The level of many of the threads CG is well below what happens here. That's fine because we all start somewhere. I gained my preliminary education on CoffeeKid and on AC, but have moved on. it's nice to have a place to move on to.. to which on to move...? Anyway...

Although I do frequent CG on a daily basis, it is to offer advice not to find it. I am not at all surprised that there are comments on CG which point towards the elitist, overly-technical, or "anal" level which exists here on HB. High school and college are both useful institutions, but when you graduate from one you move on to the next.

It's easy to pull out the shotgun and hit most of the target, but it takes courage to try to hit the little red circle in the middle with an arrow.


For the more detailed reviews, maybe when done they an be separated into distinct sections and given a table of contents so that specific information can be more easily located (Steve's Digicam reviews come to mind).

HB wrote:In my opinion, the demographic split has worked out nicely for both sites - Mark focuses on the mainstream coffee lover, we focus on the so-called hardcore espresso crowd. Life in the shadows is not without its advantages. CG serves the masses and Mark clearly enjoys the media adulation; we get down to business. Everyone wins.

And I am most grateful for it. I spent much more time on CG a couple years ago, and very little now. I have a very simple kit, yet I find the current CG unhelpful. Mark's best work is now years old in his detailed reviews (humble opinion, mine, etc etc). HB's best work is now, as you say, and I jump to read the new reviews.

Dan, it's silly to say, perhaps--but your site and this community is a source of much happiness for me. It's limitless amount of adult "enthusiast" learning and espresso excitement makes it a treasured spot on the internet. Keep up the great work, introspection and all.

I think that the differences between the two could be clarified.
Just as Mark has moved away from the detailed reviews - I think that HB could easily move away from the "basics."
This would enable HB to focus on the fanatics for whom CG no longer cuts it - while CG remains more mainstream.
At that point - much of the criticism on CG would be moot, no?

I would hate to see HB become in any way "dumbed down". I find the articles and reviews of appropriate density and focus. That's probably why I've checked out CG probably 3 times in the last 18 months.

Dan,

First, I think this website is the only worthwhile site for the serious home espresso enthusiast. I include sites such as CG and coffeed.com and a.c. in this analysis. You are doing a good job. Since you seem to be soliciting feedback, I'd like to give you some.

I think you have a blindspot when it comes to online conflict. There are various kinds of online conflict, some of which can be productive and others of which are simply noise, such as name calling and use of profanities. The latter sort are easily dispensed with and not to be tolerated, but what of the former?

My impression, and I don't think that I am alone in this, is that you are too quick on the trigger to end a potentially useful thread when you sense that things are "heating up." I think this is often in response to emails you receive from people who have thin skins and perceive themselves to have been offended. I can think of one very recent example, a thread about a roaster, in which I did not post or participate. There have been other threads that I have participated in, in which I was personally peeved because what could have been an interesting thread was terminated because someone or several felt that rather than responding to the thread it was easier to make an end run and send a complaint email to uncle Dan.

I might add that at least in my opinion these sorts of complaint emails that you receive come from people who make very few real contributions that regular participants in this website benefit from. They are comments from the "peanut gallery," people who think they deserve "respect" that in fact (in my view) they have not earned.

My suggestion would be for you to figure out another way to deal with this issue than ending the threads or deleting posts, as this turns off some of your most potentially active and useful posters, the people who actually come up with topics that can turn into multipage threads.

How about adding a forum you can call something like "penalty box forum," or "controversial topics forum," or whatever? If you think a thread has become too hot to tolerate, but still refrains from name calling and obcenities, then you can split it off over there. You can headline the forum with the warning that this forum is not for the weak of heart or the thin-skinned, and that threads that end up there will only be moderated to the extent that name calling and profanities are prohibited?

At least that way, potentially useful discussions can be continued, and those who are apt to feel offended will have been warned that perhaps they should not participate.

fondly,

ken

To be perfectly frank, many of the more techno-type threads (especially engineering and electrical) are waaay over my peabrain! But I really enjoy this site. There is a wealth of information here and almost all participants are friendly and discussions are of interest to me. The site is easy to navigate. For me the comparison between HS and College seems especially fitting. I still feel like a freshman who somehow ended up in a graduate level class most of the time, but I enjoy it all the same.

Thank you Dan and TEAM H-B.

Ken Fox wrote:I think you have a blindspot when it comes to online conflict...... My impression, and I don't think that I am alone in this, is that you are too quick on the trigger to end a potentially useful thread when you sense that things are "heating up."

Ken,

We both know all too well how quickly things can get out of hand and how just one worm can spoil a very nice barrel of apples. So the discussion becomes one of where the lines should be drawn. After my (our) experiences on A.C., I believe I would vote that a slightly heavier handed Mod is better than one that is reticent. A stitch in time, and all that. Discussions vs. arguments...? There certainly is a difference. I think we could tally up points in a "should have been stopped" vs. "stopped too early" threads and discuss them individually, but overall I think the mods here do a great job and keep this site the useful, mostly-friendly, and very valuable site that it has become. How much has been lost from early closure of threads? Probably very little compared to the overall value of the site.. Folks can always take their discussions off site to AC or E-mail if they feel that there is more to say. Just my 2.0 grams worth.

"Thank G-- for HB and all who sail in her." Sir Lord Leverpull

I started with CG, but moved to HB because of the detailed content on the topics I wanted to know more about. And HB fit my detail-focused experience with tech review websites like Anandtech, Tom's Hardware and DPreview, which I know are not mainstream reading for non-nerds. But at the same time I do find the discussions on HB to be more "accessible" than many other focused sites. Okay, so all the temperature charts did throw me a little at first, but I figured them out eventually.

thanks

We live in the age of "the right gear." It's called consumer society, but it's really the age where you prove you have taste and know what the eff you're doing by having the very same stuff that people in the know use. This used to be as simple as going to the movies and picking your favorite star to imitate; but with the internet, it's changed. Now you look up what the x-heads and freaks are into, pick up their lingo, buy their gear, and show that you are a state of the art consumer. You don't do this for everything, but you do it for the stuff you're interested in.

I'm more guilty of this than most, and my kitchen, bookshelves, audio, photography etc etc. are filled with "in the know" stuff. When I wanted to upgrade my cappas in 2001, I hung around alt.coffee. There were tons of "in the know" posts, and soon I had just the right gear. But oddly enough, there were actually people posting who cared about the coffee. I caught that bug, and for me it now is about the coffee, not about me knowing about coffee.

CG does a wonderful job catering to people who want the right gear.