| |||||||||||||
Paid commentsPaid commentsPosted Nov 20, 2003 2:50 UTC (Thu) by jamienk (guest, #1144)Parent article: On comment abuse I pay for LWN. Why? Because it is good and almost everything else of its kind is bad. I read /. at +4 now and a large part of those comments are the same old junk, often with a pro-MS bent. OS News comments, Newsforge comments, etc, are a gaggle of repetitious one-liners. There are good discussions happening on mailing lists, and the weekly summarizers of those are good (eg kt.zork.net, KDE CVS etc.), but the lists themselves are too cluttered unless you are participating in or following something very specific. Be draconian. Let the non-subscribers comment elsewhere. Also allow us to filter out bad commenting subscribers with a "never show me this person's comments again" link.
(Log in to post comments)
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 3:30 UTC (Thu) by djfoobarmatt (subscriber, #6446) [Link] What he said except you could allow comments from non-subscribers but filter the spam with bogofilter (call for trusted volunteers to train it though).
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 5:50 UTC (Thu) by firasha (guest, #4230) [Link] I'd like to second jamienk's filtering proposal. Having a "killfile" link won't do anything to keep spammers and trolls from posting, of course, but this way you'd only have to see it once. It also has the benefit of allowing non-subscribers to continue posting, which I feel is important (note: I subscribe to lwn). Not everyone who has something of value to say can afford to subscribe, and we as lwn readers are diminished if their voices are silenced.
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 7:17 UTC (Thu) by euvitudo (guest, #98) [Link] One avenue for making comments is certainly still open: Letters to the Editor. For lack of a better (read: less restrictive) policy, I agree with a policy for allowing only subscribers to comment. If what non-subscribers have to say is so important, and their circumstances do not permit subscription, they can still send a letter.
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 15:20 UTC (Thu) by chalsall (guest, #400) [Link] I'd like to second euvitudo's suggestion.Having subscriber-only comments avoids, for all but the most extreme cases, any issues wrt censorship. Letters to the editor is always available to get communications into LWN, and in fact, it might revive the LttE page which has suffered greatly since comments were introduced. And, lastly, this policy might help, in a small way, the number of LWN subscribers. Never a bad thing... 8-)
Subscibers vs Non-subcribers Posted Nov 20, 2003 15:54 UTC (Thu) by mceesay (guest, #2806) [Link] I agree with the parent post.Reserve comments for subscribers-only. Non-subscribers can write a Letter to the Editor to express their views.
Subscibers vs Non-subcribers Posted Nov 20, 2003 17:21 UTC (Thu) by yohan555 (guest, #4253) [Link] I definitely second that. This would be an additional incentive tosubscribe as well... J. Weiss
Subscibers vs Non-subcribers Posted Nov 25, 2003 17:37 UTC (Tue) by cthulhu (guest, #4776) [Link] I definitely agree with the reserving comments to subscribers, withletters to the editor if the non-subs really want to get through. I paid for quality content; I'd like to keep it that way. If the non-subs want to comment so badly (with their insightful comments), they should become a subscriber anyway. Obviously, commenting is important to such a reader, so they should help us keep LWN going by subscribing.
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 17:48 UTC (Thu) by smeg4brains (guest, #207) [Link] What about a sort of combo.. Maybe give non-subscribers the chance to post, but it doesn't go up until a subscriber either approves or rejects it.I'm sure the subscribers will probably work their way through the queues of messages from non-subscribers pretty consistently. The non-subscribers get to be heard.... probably... if they want to make sure they're heard, then get a subscription. This would work IMO until some idiot decides to automate/script his troll posts, but that's getting closer to an outright attack, and something can probably be done when that happens.. If not though, oh well.
checkbox: view subscriber content
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 17:50 UTC (Thu) by smeg4brains (guest, #207) [Link] oh yeah.. one more checkbox:
checkbox: view subscriber rejected posts
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 10:55 UTC (Thu) by minichaz (guest, #630) [Link] The first two options in the article are just Slashdot by another name. If any form of censorship or moderation is required then something is wrong at a more fundamental level: the community of people posting. Just look at Slashdot which has effectivley been destroyed by its own community.I agree with the parent poster. If we wish for LWN to retain its value then only subscribers should be allowed to post. With luck this should also increase the number of subscribers which can only be a good thing. Non-subscribers get a lot of quality information from this site for free and restricting posting to subscribers only will increase the quality of this information. See the logic? Banning non-subscribers from posting will improve the quality of the site that they get to view for free. Good luck with what ever you choose.
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 15:03 UTC (Thu) by leonid (guest, #4891) [Link] Be draconian. Let the non-subscribers comment elsewhere. Also allow us to filter out bad commenting subscribers with a "never show me this person's comments again" link.I'd like to second that. And I'd also like a t-shirt saying "I am subscribed to LWN.". Of course, I'll pay for that too. :)
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 16:10 UTC (Thu) by a9db0 (subscriber, #2181) [Link] I'll third this. I pay for LWN, and have since the subscription service started. If non-subscribers have a point to make, they can email a letter, or perhaps subscribe.I know this won't solve the problem, so perhaps some form of moderation or abuse reporting will be necessary. Hopefully nothing as cumbersome as /.'s implementation. Oh, and I'd like my shirt in XL. Dave
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 22:38 UTC (Thu) by malor (subscriber, #2973) [Link] I think, overall, I agree with this stance the most: be draconian. Subscriber-onlyposting is fine. It's not like LWN is expensive, and as others have pointed out, by the time the non-subscribers can comment on the important topics, the subscribers aren't reading it anymore anyway. I like the comments here because they are so thoughtful and interesting. Restricting the pool of people who can post (to those who have recognized that the site is worth paying for) seems like a good way to preserve that. Implementing a complaint button might be a good idea, for the off chance that a troll decides to subscribe. And this would help delay the hardware upgrade; the longer you delay on these things, the better, since hardware is always cheaper or faster the longer you wait. This discussion, itself, is subscriber-only content, and look how good it is. As someone pointed out, however, it might be smart to put it where non-subscribers can chime in.... the last defense of the accused. -) Finally, to the user who said that limiting to subscribers may create a knitting circle effect.... that can happen in self-selecting groups, where existing members ar the ones who choose new ones, but the subscription method is very democratic. Anyone who wants to pony up the $10/mo is in. That should prevent feedback problems.
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 23:35 UTC (Thu) by acristianb (guest, #1702) [Link] I subscribe to the draconian rules. This will get out the message. LWN was doing fine w/o user comments at all so I think it will do fine even if you filter out some potential honest readers that are not subscribed.I would try a scheme where as more subscribed users vouch for another subscribed user he/she would get a higher rank which would allow him to post directly w/o any restriction and the novice subscribed users would be allowed to post only by peer moderation and maybe editor moderation. This will get out the idea that he/she are part of a group and LWN is not a wall where pseudo anonymous people can make graffiti. And then in, say, two weeks an avid reader would reach the 'ok' rank. If he is spamming or trolling you know what to do... back to you...
Paid comments Posted Nov 21, 2003 15:04 UTC (Fri) by gregwilkins (subscriber, #515) [Link] +1 on Subscriber comments only.We all know that LWN operates on thin margins so anything that keeps
|
|||||||||||||