| |||||||||||
Paid commentsPaid commentsPosted Nov 20, 2003 5:50 UTC (Thu) by firasha (subscriber, #4230)In reply to: Paid comments by jamienk Parent article: On comment abuse
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.
(Log in to post comments)
Paid comments Posted Nov 20, 2003 7:17 UTC (Thu) by euvitudo (subscriber, #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 (subscriber, #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 (subscriber, #207) [Link] oh yeah.. one more checkbox:
checkbox: view subscriber rejected posts
|
|||||||||||