That piece by Ellis is a significant gauntlet drop. You may not care, but a real author continued a literary feud at the moment David Foster Wallace is about to be apotheosized. That should have sparked an interesting discussion at least, but people don’t discuss things on Medium, not because they don’t want to, but because they can’t.
This brings up a striking observation. I hope when we get to see Medium 2.0 (just saying), the developers will address this issue. Compared with dissent in other social networking sites, Medium is squeaky clean. This is great and makes Medium an excellent place for pitching stories. One also wonders what’s going on with user engagement? Where are the people? Or who are reading our stories? Do they care, one way or other? Or is everyone busy “selling their wares” in the marketplace?
That said, Medium is best in its class on the range, depth, reading aesthetics, and writing ease. It needs a community of users around the articles (thanks @Gutbloom). I miss here a neat “trail of discussions” if you will. By that I mean I miss here discussions layered on a story. I miss here a path of progression of ideas. I’d like to see how an idea forks in different tensions, directions and dimensions. I’d like to see here how ideas evolve from story to story and where I, a user, can add value.
Perhaps such interactions do not happen here (although it is hard to imagine). Perhaps this trail exists, but we users do not get to see it. It’d be great if Medium were to make the flow of ideas obvious.