2012.03.12
What do you think of this commenting system?
Our discussion last week on commenting yielded lots of suggestions from readers.
As an example, commenter Other John pointed us to the system that our sister paper, The Virginian-Pilot in Norfolk, uses: pilotonline.com.
It looks like the site allows comments on all local stories posted, and uses a registration system for comments.
Look like you can register with whatever name you choose.
Some other features include: being able to report comments for violations; allowing responses to other comments; creating nests within a thread; and the “thumbs up/thumbs down” button. You can also “hide” comments by specific users, sort by thread or by date posted.
We have some questions out to the Pilot folks to get a little more detail as to how registration works and how the comments are moderated.
Check it out (click on the image for a larger view) and let us know what you think.
A timely article on CNN this morning about commenting, etc.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/11/tech/web/online-comments-sxsw/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Comment by Ernie — March 12, 2012 @ 10:25 am
I like it for its ease of reading and use. I particularly like the thumbs-up / thumbs-down feature where the community can “self-moderate” comments. Ostensibly, most helpful/valid comments are upvoted, and less helpful ones are pushed down to the “I don’t care” view-space.
Comment by Paul D — March 12, 2012 @ 10:41 am
I didn’t comment last week, but I think the comment security system the RT uses is the most antiquated one I have seen in probably a decade of observing message boards and blogs. I hope it was inexpensive, because it certainly seems so.
My suggestion would be to do like virtually the rest of the internet medium, and have one’s registration act as the filter. I don’t know why that seems so difficult. Beyond that, my other complaint is that a handful of RT blog operators don’t bother to clear posts for display more than once every 3-4 hours. And that is only from 9 to 5. heaven help if you post something at 5:30 p.m. on a weeknight, or especially on a Friday. It’s 9:30 the next business day normally before it is posted. A late Friday afternoon post sits in limbo for nearly three days before being cleared. Of course, by then the interest factor is zero, so the blog just continues to drag along with a few cheerleading type souls, and you get 5-10 posts over the course of 2-3 days.
We all know that doesn’t enhance revenue or the profile of the RT in any manner.
For the record, I tried to post this earlier, and the captcha code wouldn’t allow me, even though I had the code exactly correct. I had to copy, clip and paste, just to retain my point about the inefficiency of your sustem. I also didn’t take a long time to compose, as I know the inefficient captcha code throws you out for that, too. It just kicked me out.
Seriously, the RT makes it a challenge with each and every post. I have to ask myself – ‘Why even bother?’ One last try…
Comment by crooked road — March 12, 2012 @ 10:47 am
As I mentioned, I like the format. Should it be on for each and every article? No…probably just the blogs. Kind of in line with the link posted by Ernie, I’ve found that the comment sections are increasingly annoying, particularly where there is little/no moderation. I never read the comments for sights like Yahoo…just not worth the effort. But on fairly well-defined communities like those at the RT, or a few other places…those I’ll get into.
Comment by Other John — March 12, 2012 @ 11:12 am
If you haven’t had the chance to click on the CNN link @Ernie shared (thanks, Ernie!), here’s a tidbit from it:
Gawker media founder Nick Denton was speaking at South by Southwest Interactive about the usefulness of comments.
“The idea of capturing the intelligence of the readership — that’s a joke,” he said.
He believes in maintaining anonymity, but he doesn’t believe bloggers have the time to moderate comments — especially not at sites like his with huge traffic.
An idea Denton has: “Post some stories that allow only a hand-picked, pre-approved group of people to comment on them. That, he said, would make the comment section an extension of the story and allow people, like Charney in the above example, to have their say without fear of being piled onto by others.”
What do you think?
Comment by Kathy Lu — March 12, 2012 @ 11:22 am
What I think is that Denton doesn’t have any feel for his consumer. I did take the time to read the link provided when I first clicked on here, for the record.
‘Hand picked, pre-approved group’? That certainly sounds like – ‘If you say what we want to hear, we’ll let you post’ – to me. I understand the uselessness of many of the major blog sites’ comment sections. I really don’t think the RT will ever have to worry about that, outside of Dan Casey’s blog, where that has been the rule for the last year or more. I guess the RT doesn’t mind the toxic discourse there, but is concerned about it infecting the rest of the website? Is that the concern?
Just great – after taking less than two minutes to type my post, captcha kicked me out again. I had the exactly correct code entered. Again.
Yes sir, user friendliness is job one, right?
Comment by crooked road — March 12, 2012 @ 11:30 am
@3: Yes, that is a problem, but I think it’s inherent in the practice of letting the blog authors do their own moderation. Most of these folks have jobs other than maintaining their blogs, and it’s unfair to expect them to work 24/7 on what is essentialy a sideline for them.
On the other hand, taking moderation out of their hands would change the whole communication dynamic; you wouldn’t have as many fun interactions with Dan, etc., since he wouldn’t be monitoring the comments as closely.
Comment by Mark — March 12, 2012 @ 12:30 pm
I don’t see the same issue at other websites that have blogs. Considering the miniscule number of posts that some of these RT blogs have, two minutes an hour wouldn’t be too much to dedicate.
I suppose the point of argument is whether or not folks get into journalism in the desire of a 40 hour week, 9 to 5 kind of job. As I said, the miniscule number of posts… will remain that way as long as so little attention is paid to the blogs.
Comment by crooked road — March 12, 2012 @ 1:04 pm
I am the most frequent commenter on Kevin Myatt’s Weather Blog. Once in a very long while someone comes on and complains about some of my comments, that they are at times not related to weather. That is a valid complaint, but only in a way. Kevin himself has repeatedly said that he doesn’t mind comments getting away from weather when things are relatively quiet on the blog, such as the past few days. He has said to try to stay on strictly weather issues when a snowstorm or tornado warning or thunderstorms are a “threat” to our area, and I do my best to abide by that request.
Having said all that, I am very much in favor of one thing that I have heard that the Virginian Pilot allows, and that is the ability of anyone to hide comments by another commenter. Someone just complained today on the Weather Blog, and I feel certain that he was complaining about me. Well, he should be able to hide my comments. More in separate comment.
Comment by Doug Griggs of SW Roanoke County — March 12, 2012 @ 2:28 pm
On the other hand, there is one capability that the Virginian-Pilot’s system allows that I despise, at least for the Weather Blog, and that is the “thumbs up, thumbs down” capability. Youtube has that, and I don’t care for it there. For the Weather Blog, in my opinion a reader who is unhappy with someone else’s comment is at least ten times more likely to select the thumbs down space than others who mildly or even enthusiastically like another person’s comment are likely to select the thumbs up “button.” Plus, there is the possibility of a “conspiracy.” Someone who doesn’t like another commenter may not only automatically select thumbs down herself or himself, but may get friends who do not even read the blog to do him/her a favor and join in on the “attack.” Again, in my opinion, it would be a gigantic step backward for the Weather Blog.
Comment by Doug Griggs of SW Roanoke County — March 12, 2012 @ 2:35 pm
Here is another recommendation. Allow different capabilities on different blogs. First of all, that may not be doable from the Roanoke Times’ point of view …. perhaps it is going to be a “one system fits all” for the blogs. Meaning that if the RT wants to allow thumbs up/thumbs down for Dan Casey’s blog (I just chose that one as an example) and most of the others, then all the blogs must have it. But if it is possible to allow different capabilities for the different blogs, I would encourage it to be done. I hope other regular commenters on the Weather Blog make comments here and express their opinions. If I am in the minority among the Weather Bloggers, so be it. But if I had to bet, I think my dislike of the “thumbs up/thumbs down” capability is the majority view among the WB folks.
Comment by Doug Griggs of SW Roanoke County — March 12, 2012 @ 2:42 pm
I don’t want to see a thumbs-up/thumbs-down type blog. I don’t post to see how popular I am or whether my post was good or bad. A simple feature in other sites is the ignore function where you block seeing a post from someone you don’t like, altho, I don’t think this good either. A back button in case your post gets et up would be nice tho.
Comment by wdbrand — March 12, 2012 @ 4:30 pm
I think a profile based system (similar to what the HuffPo has, but not quite as elaborate), is a great system. The one you posted here would work just fine. People have their usernames/passwords and they can post without Captcha etc. Otherwise, no posting for you!
Comment by Meg J — March 12, 2012 @ 5:29 pm
I say Denton is precisely spot on. Instead of seeing this (or any) forum as a place to hear other opinions and try to have a conversation, it is simply an insult fest or a “see how far the moderator will let you take it” contest. On the rare days when there is an actual conversation instead of pointed barbs masked in a comment, this is the greatest place to be. It does not happen often as no one likes insults, dishonesty and blatant disrespect, which we seldom have to wait long for. It is more like a bizarre tug of war most days than any kind of enlightenment or enjoyable discussion.
I personally think you should have a “Left” and a “Right” blog and just accept the divide is permanent. We have proven we are too far apart and have too much animus for anything else to work IMO. You folks should know that better than any one of us. You KNOW you are not a “liberal rag” and yet how often do you hear it said? The idea of civil discussion isn’t going to work. The number one comment I hear when I talk to people about blogging is that they hate how it always devolves. Even with a moderator, it is inevitable. No matter how wrong you might actually be, no one likes to have their beliefs sullied, their sincerity, honesty, sanity or decency questioned. That is not even natural.
Once a year in Virginia and every four years in this nation, we are asked to “pick sides”. We do and most of us take that somewhat seriously. It is not going to change. YOU, the medium, will have to to do the changing IMO. The sooner you accept that and make the changes needed, the better the conversations will become, with or without anonymity.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — March 12, 2012 @ 5:36 pm
I also really like the Pilot system. Registration was fast and easy and posting was so great without that Captcha Code. I liked everything about it.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — March 12, 2012 @ 5:40 pm
I do want the Hide comments for a specific user function. It would allow a person who doesn’t want to see a troll’s comments, but still wants to enjoy a blog the ability to do that. I don’t like the idea of a pre-approved group only being the only ones allowed to comment. Just because I don’t want to see a certain persons comments, doesn’t mean everyone feels that way.
Pre-approved sounds like only those who would agree with the poster. That’s wrong IMO.
Comment by Debbie — March 12, 2012 @ 5:42 pm
As far as the comments on articles or news stories, I think that the only fair way to do that is to allow the writer to decide if they want to accept comments, if they want to respond or if they want to moderate them. I do not think you gain by forcing it on anyone and I don’t think you gain by non-moderated posts, given what I have seen on some blogs.
I also agree that the blog moderator should have some leeway if possible within the system. It is not fair to expect 24/7 service or instant posting on some of the slower moving but still great blogs. I LOVE “Happy Wag” but I do not often comment there. Same for “Back Cover” and “Fridge Magnet” which is a fabulous blog. I don’t believe I have ever looked at the Weather or Outdoors blogs and some others. I love the variety you offer!
Comment by Sandi Saunders — March 12, 2012 @ 5:52 pm
I also don’t care for the thumbs up or down option. I don’t care about the number of posts someone has, I don’t care about someones reputation standing. If you are even a semi-regular, you know whats going on and you don’t need a stats page to keep track of stuff. It doesn’t take long to figure out who you are going to pay closeer attention to when a system is bearing down and who you might skip over. It also doesn’t take long to figure out who has a scientific, historical, or just a gut approach to forecasting and weather in general. Thus I think it would be taking away from that quality (and one of the best qualities of the board itself) if a popularity meter was added.
I’d be OK if the blog was kept the same as it is except for giving the poster the opportunity to re-input a failed captcha code.
Comment by John From Ruckersville — March 12, 2012 @ 7:12 pm
“Ignore” is a great feature, but it needs to be implemented smartly. It has to be a one-click and done feature. Not going into a control panel and typing in the user name, then saying “are you sure” etc….
A +/- system is helpful for two reasons, first it identifies the pulse of the thread. If someone makes a thoughtful comment, and they get 20 +’s then maybe the columnist or blogger might take note to either expand on that idea, or keep the topic going. It doesn’t have to be a popularity game. A +/- system can also be incorporated to automatically silence those that have gone overboard with the posting.
Sure, it could be abused. I’m certain on some boards some from one political party will click “-” for the opposite party and vice versa, regardless of the content of the post. But in the end, this becomes a zero sum game, and the community wins out by promoting what the community thinks is either acceptable or tolerable and squelches those who create a toxic environment (to steal a description from the CNN article above.)
This assists NEW users when they come in. They would then be treated to a better experience rather than what we see on Dan’s blog where one topic has 700+ posts mostly of people just iScreaming their iHeads off, and nitpicking grammar and spelling and stuff like that. That’s hardly what any new user wants to see…. and I imagine that the features need to not only cater to the existing audience, but make it more inclusive for new people.
Comment by scott — March 13, 2012 @ 7:28 am
I like the hide user option, with the ability to “undo” that action if you would like at a later date. I’m not really a fan of the thumbs up and thumbs down option. WDBJ7.com uses that in the comments section and it often times becomes a popularity contest or power play among users.
Comment by Shanon "Nurse Snow" — March 13, 2012 @ 8:59 am
I know RT staff has another life outside of the paper, but if you want comments on blogs they should either be approved quicker while they’re still relevant, or have a notification such as, “don’t bother commenting on the weekend…no one’s home.”
Comment by Elena — March 13, 2012 @ 9:57 am
Yeah, the more I think about it, the +/- thumbs up/down option doesn’t seem so good. But the others I think are pretty good…like registration with anonymous user names (but a valid e-mail address), ability to hide various people if you don’t want to read what they’re saying (useful for the trolls), and not having to deal with the spam/captcha stuff since comments could only be entered if through a valid and registered e-mail/user name.
Definitely don’t like the pre-screened commenter idea, that’s like a Presidential candidate inviting the audience and giving them pre-screened questions to ask at a meeting. I just don’t like that.
Comment by Other John — March 13, 2012 @ 10:16 am
Thanks everyone, for your comments so far about the Pilot’s site. We will be talking to the Pilot folks on Wednesday to get some more details about it.
Are there any other sites with commenting functions that you enjoy using? Please let us know.
Also, thanks for the feedback about how you value the promptness of approving comments. It will be an important part of our discussion about blogs as we move forward.
– Kathy Lu, RefresRT team
Comment by Kathy Lu — March 13, 2012 @ 12:17 pm
I think any system would have to be adaptable so that it is not too drastic a change from what we have now. The “thumbs up/down” is easy to ignore, the hide posts from this commenter is THE GREATEST TROLL TOOL EVER! Nesting so you can have a conversation is great, but the 750 character (including spaces) post is a harder sell for many posters on Roanoke.com. Losing the Captcha Code alone is worth registering and offering up a kidney IMO.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — March 14, 2012 @ 9:01 am
Kathy, one final comment regarding approving comments:
I am certainly not an expert in this field but many years ago as a moderator for America Online, we were sued by a user who was defamed/harassed by a comment posted on our site. He alleged we (the aol moderators) took too long to respond to remove the post. In the court ruling, AOL was not held liable due to being able to pass the “three-prong” test of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. (overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act)
Prong 2 is of note for the Roanoke Times, since the Roanoke Times employs staff that pre-approves comments, rather than retroactively removing negative content (as AOL did). In some previous court rulings pre-approval considered the information provider as the publisher or editor of comments, and would preclude immunity from any lawsuits for defamation.
I’m generally not a litigious person, but if I had knowledge I was being defamed by a commentator and that defamation was reviewed and acceptable by a human employee of the RT, I would argue that I have a case there.
This retro-active vs pro-active system may be something you want to run up the flag pole of your parent company’s legal department and head it off at the pass. I use the internet very regularly, and I am not currently familiar with any other service that has a pre-approval system of comments that is actually staffed by humans. (as opposed to a word/spam filter.)
Comment by scott — March 14, 2012 @ 11:01 am
Thanks, Scott, for the thought. Just wanted you to know that we have reviewed our current process with our attorney.
– Kathy Lu, RefreshRT team
Comment by Kathy Lu — March 14, 2012 @ 12:54 pm