Microsoft issues warning about Linux lawsuits (Reuters) [LWN.net]

Microsoft issues warning about Linux lawsuits (Reuters)

Posted Nov 18, 2004 15:53 UTC (Thu) by minichaz (subscriber, #630)
In reply to: Microsoft issues warning about Linux lawsuits (Reuters) by petegn
Parent article: Microsoft issues warning about Linux lawsuits (Reuters)

I ask once again: please, please would you limit comments to subscribers only. I don't want to be paying to read this if these pointless comments are going to mar the whole experience and interfere with sensible discussion of the topic at hand.

(Log in to post comments)

Limiting comment posting rights

Posted Nov 18, 2004 17:13 UTC (Thu) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

"I ask once again: please, please would you limit comments to subscribers only."

I've been trying to figure out the right thing to do here for a while. I hate to silence the non-subscribers; many of them have good things to say. On the other hand, every now and then we get this sort of stuff. Frankly, I think we get very little of it, but it does happen.

What I might do is add an option so that only subscriber-posted comments are visible. Non-subscribers could post, but subscribers who do not want to see them could filter them (and perhaps all subtrees below them) out.

Limiting comment posting rights

Posted Nov 18, 2004 17:54 UTC (Thu) by thompsot (guest, #12368) [Link]

Good idea

Limiting comment posting rights

Posted Nov 18, 2004 18:31 UTC (Thu) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

Hmm, but if you do that then discussions will seem disjointed. I want to see good discussions still though.

A moderation system might be better, but obviously a lot more work.

A less involved solution that would keep views of discussions coherent would be to delay access to posting by non members for X hours (eg 12 or 24), how effective that would be is hard to judge - for contraversial topics it would at least mean that the initial comments would be the (hopefully) more considered opinions of subscribers.

regards,

--paulj

Limiting comment posting rights

Posted Nov 18, 2004 19:35 UTC (Thu) by NightMonkey (subscriber, #23051) [Link]

Bear with me - I haven't had my coffee yet. How about allowing a single subscriber's nomination determine if a non-subscriber's submission is viewable? This way, it would not become like a Slashdot-like moderation system, but allow us to know that at least one paying subscriber authorized this posting to be viewed, and deemed it worthy.

It may still allow for some crud to get through (maybe because the subscriber didn't have enough coffee - or too much ;) ), but might limit it.

Limiting comment posting rights

Posted Nov 19, 2004 11:56 UTC (Fri) by zotz (guest, #26117) [Link]

I am not a subscriber, but of all the ideas I have seen floated on this topic, this one seems the best to implement. If any are to be implemented that is.

zotz

Limiting comment posting rights

Posted Nov 18, 2004 20:43 UTC (Thu) by sbergman27 (subscriber, #10767) [Link]

How about adding another subscription level at $0 which allows posting but no other added features. I really, really, hope LWN stays away from anything even remotely resembling the Slashdot moderation system.

It has the added advantage that you can remind them to renew their subscription periodically, and maybe next time they'll choose a higher level. :-)

Limiting comment posting rights

Posted Nov 18, 2004 22:00 UTC (Thu) by foo (guest, #1117) [Link]

> I hate to silence the non-subscribers; many of them have good things to say.

You wouldn't be silencing them. "Non-subscribers" were voicing their
(often excellent) opinions via the letters page long before the comment
feature was around.

The value of the site has been lowered, IMHO, by to the low
quality of the comments. I had always been impressed by the intelligence
and technical erudition in the letters page, and was surprised when
the comments turned out to not reflect that high standard.

I encourage our benevolent dictator to nix the J. Random Commenters.

Limiting comment posting rights

Posted Nov 19, 2004 8:17 UTC (Fri) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]

One major problem with that :-(

The letters feature is treated as editorial, and as such is effectively TWO weeks out-of-date for non-subscribers.

Okay, as a non-subscriber I have to accept that anything decent is only available to me a week out of date, but as the letters are discussing stuff that was a week old *then*, it's a pretty useless feature for non-subscribers.

Cheers,
Wol

Limiting comment posting rights

Posted Nov 19, 2004 1:03 UTC (Fri) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link]

I hate to silence the non-subscribers; many of them have good things to say.

Well, I'm not yet a subscriber, but I would rather not read this sort of thing even if I lose the right to post. Even if we lose some interesting comments.

Also, that would give me another incentive to overcome laziness and subscribe.

Limiting comment posting rights

Posted Nov 19, 2004 10:45 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Also, that would give me another incentive to overcome laziness and subscribe.

I mean, gosh, I slaved over subscribing for whole minutes.

(Compared to the amount of time Jon likely spent writing the code for the subscription stuff, I'd say subscribing takes effectively zero time.)

Limiting comment posting rights

Posted Nov 19, 2004 12:03 UTC (Fri) by zotz (guest, #26117) [Link]

E-commerce is not so easy from some countries. Look at payment options.

Paypal is out for my country - hey paypal, what's the problem?

Don't like using my credit cards online (or offline) all that much.

Getting a cheque drawn un a US bank is an expensive proposition both in terms of time and money.

Where does that leave us?

I have an egold account but need to find something to induce people to put something in it for me. Not sure how to fund it from here. (Legally.) Admittedly not a high priority right now.

zotz