Accepting and Rejecting Comments
There is a thread going here about the possibility of closing comments on your posts. This isn't a bug, it is part of the blogging software. You can choose to not accept comments on your posts by uncheking the Accept Comments checkbox under the categories box on the right side of the Create Entry page. Since the comment link won't show up on posts with closed comments, prospective commenters should be vigilant when browsing the site so as not to accidentally recommend a post if they actually want to comment on it.
Advertisement
As you can see, Al, the ability to make the mistake of clicking "rec" when you intend to comment is SO GREAT that right now the offensive blog has garnered 16 recs to only 14 for the "good citizen" blog.
Can't we have a way to unrecommend?
Otherwise you've handed some people a way to get on the rec list with spam-type blogs.
It's not enough to say people should stay vigilant. This is too large a blog to set your system up to help spammers.
October 27, 2008 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
As you can see, Al, the ability to make the mistake of clicking "rec" when you intend to comment is SO GREAT that right now the offensive blog has garnered 16 recs to only 14 for the "good citizen" blog.
Can't we have a way to unrecommend?
Otherwise you've handed some people a way to get on the rec list with spam-type blogs.
It's not enough to say people should stay vigilant. This is too large a blog to set your system up to help spammers.
I predict you're going to have continual problems with this. Your solution simply won't work in the long run.
There have to be ways to unrecommend. That's the solution.
October 27, 2008 10:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry about the double post. When I say, we need an "un-recommend," what I mean is you need to be able to "retract" your rec'd. That's essential here.
October 27, 2008 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
rather than have an unrecommend, is it too much to ask the community to *read* the text of the link before clicking it? If it says "recommend" and you don't mean to rec, don't click it.
October 27, 2008 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's not quality formatting to have important features like this shift relative position. And since recommending and commenting are not really similar in any important way the links should not look the same. Recommend should be a check box, and reply should not have to be.
I would argue there should not be a choice to block comments. How is that a conversation? And if we don't want a conversation, why have comments at all? In a live social situation one can't speak without hearing comments, unless you are the boss at a business meeting or Bush in the Rose Garden.
October 27, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Look at the # of rec'ds for that post at the moment. It's up to 20. Do you seriously think 20 people intended to rec? I don't.
And the other post is slipping further and further down.
Plus, the truthseeker posted the blog on all 3 places. Whereas Aunt Sam posted only at the Cafe. Had Aunt Sam posted at the 3 places, then 2 blogs on each rec list would currently be taking up space that is unnecessary.
October 27, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
I made the same observation to users on a different thread. However, please don't get into the mindset of defending the system instead of making it better!
As an old-school UI designer I can tell you from experience: if multiple users are clicking something in error, the layout needs to be tweaked or the problem will persist. It is less energy to fix it than tell every new user they should pay more attention as the problem arises over and over. The correct fix IMO is to eliminate the ability to disable comments.
Several of the new features (disable comments, tweak publishing dates, etc.) simply shouldn't be possible for a standard registered user. Just because the system CAN have a feature - doesn't necessarily mean that the function is appropriate for the application.
October 27, 2008 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. If you look at the placement of the recommend button, when comments are disabled, it absolutely takes the place of the comment button. So, simply by habit, people would click that if they don't see a comment box. It is a very poor design.
And yes, to say to users that they simply have to put up with a "system" - is to say we don't care about users. System first. We already had that under bush.
October 27, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
+1
October 27, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you for saying this. I have noticed this as a pattern of response from the TPM team. The other day, it was "get a modern browser."
Since we're the ones using the new software on a daily basis, we are in the best position to offer suggestions to make the site better. I hope TPM will really listen.
October 27, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
C'mon, Al. Please have realistic expectations. :)
October 27, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Al, admonishment is a poor approach to UI design. Here you have a number of savvy, regular users, to which I add myself, telling you that they sometimes click the wrong button carelessly. You're fortunate to even have such feedback. Most website owners have no idea about the problems that confound their users. You may feel that users should pay closer attention, but *should* isn't the issue here. Users won't change their behavior based on what you think they should be doing, so if you'd like them to use the site more effectively, you'll have to implement modifications that help them to do so, even we careless ones.
PS Without adding an "unrecommend" feature, I would expect that you could address the problem easily by changing the color, emphasis, or position of the buttons.
October 27, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
is it too much to ask the community to *read* the text of the link before clicking it?
-------------------------------------------------
I have a real problem with management refusing to take responsibility and always placing the burden on the user. Why should we be forced to read buttons before clicking when there are so many ways you could fix this problem?
For example if every button generated a pop-up window asking a simple question, "did you really want to (recommend, reply, follow, etc.)" I'm relatively certain the problem would be solved.
I do recognize that there is some small possibility that people will not read the pop-up window. If that turns out to be a problem a quick fix would be the addition of another pop-up window with the question, " did you really mean to click yes on the previous pop-up window."
Now before one of you smart asses tell me this could go on forever, recent psychological experimentation has proven beyond any doubt that is not the case. Research has proven the factual basis in the long derided folk maxim, now renamed by Scientists, The Third Time's a Charm Law.
Stop pushing your failures off onto your users and generate some software solutions that take into account the attention span of your average user.
October 27, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hah, I can't believe that I'm being less snarky than oceancat (though I do welcome the rare yet always amusing oceankat snark, this comment included). Perhaps it's because I do this for a living. Users are disposed to commit no end of dumbass mistakes, even, snark notwithstanding, clicking through 3 warning pop-ups without reading them. If you blame users for their errors rather than taking steps to help them avoid errors, you're only hurting the quality of your site. There are only two reasons not to make a change to help users navigate the site correctly:
1) The benefits don't justify the cost of the changes
2) Negative effects of the change outweigh the benefits
A pop-up warning falls under 2). While it would help some users, it would annoy most others, nullifying the improvement. Building an unrecommend feature may fall under 1). It's probably not trivial to build, and TPM may not regard this issue as serious enough to justify prioritizing such a feature, which is fair enough IMO.
But I can't imagine that it would cost too much or that there would be a significant negative impact to boldfacing or repositioning one of the links.
October 27, 2008 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can't you just have the word "reply" greyed out and unclickable?
Seems like a simple solution to a thorny problem.
=D
October 27, 2008 9:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to disagree with everybody here. I don't see the problem with reading the words and then clicking on the correct one. Once you get used to where they are, it won't be an issue.
And anyways, how do we know that all of the recs for that post were unintended? Just because some of us found the post ridiculous, doesn't mean all of us did.
October 27, 2008 10:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Orlando, we all know your opening line by now - no need to spell it out. "I have to disagree with everybody here." ;-)
In fact, you could probably sell T-shirts to this crowd with that slogan on it. (1st smart-ass to follow this with "not me" or other clever form of disagreement gets a nuggie.)(Genghis gets two.)
October 27, 2008 10:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's not fair. Sometimes my opening line is "you're a jackass."
Example: Quinn, you're a jackass.
October 27, 2008 10:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the information, Al. The accidental recommending is hilarious. Made my day. ;-)
Now, can you please un-ban a few radicals on the TPM Un-American Activities Committee list?
October 27, 2008 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Al, could you please get rid of the post at the top of the list that is dated 10/31/08? It's been at the top all weekend. Thanks!
October 27, 2008 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, I unpublished the entry.
October 27, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you had consistent and easy availability of all reader blogs posted, in chronological order, page by page, rather than having many becoming totally invisible after a couple of hours (unless you have time to do a weekly archive, in which case they are available, but not easily,)
then people would not care such a great deal about the recommended list.
They might then think of using recommends to actually recommend. and not so much as helping people to win a contest. A game of winning a contest will always get into fairness and unfairness questions.
October 27, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
P.S. People can see the number of recommends on each post as they scroll through a chronological list. They wouldn't care so much about a contest to get on a menu if their blogs could be seen.
Few get much benefit out of paying the extra money for a listing on ebay at the top of the page in a category. That's not how a lot of people use the net when they are looking for something. Many here end up using the recommend menu now only because you have no depth easily available for browsing if they only visit every couple of days. If they only visit every other day, they often have only two choices: the most recent couple of hours of posts, and the reocmmended menu.
October 27, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
We will have a full archive very shortly.
October 27, 2008 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
And the dashboard really only allows you to check on a few recent comments. Mine is updating without problems. But I don't look at more than the very page that is up.
What I do find helpful is the ability to follow people, so at least you can click and go back to a previous post. But still it's not as useful as the former features did.
October 27, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think anyone proposed this is a bug. The feature just sucks - and is totally inappropriate for the forum.
October 27, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually I did call it a "bug" but in parenthesis, and I agree, as a feature that makes it even worse.
Makes sense that this is a feature for the front page. But not for blogs, which presumably are not meant to be advertisements.
October 27, 2008 11:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
sorry, I meant "in quotes"
October 27, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Al, a couple of off-thread comments here.
There is a minor bug in the log-off process that I believe is caused by cookies set. If I log-off, but do not close the browser session, and then return to TPM, the site recognises me, but still tells me I must log on. My hunch is this has to do with a session cookie somewhere. I don't have a cookie watcher set-up as a firefox extension presently, but use one on occasion. If you are uanaware of this bug, and are interested, let me know, because I believe it may be trivial for me to track-down.
In my latest blog post, I discovered that I am able to insert:
into links. Is management adverse to my attempting to explain this to those who may find it a useful function? (using pagerank for good, not evil...)October 27, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Allowing the ability to turn off comments was probably a bad idea. If someone posts something on which others want to comment, and the author has not permitted comments, the would-be commenters will resort to presenting their comments in entire additional blog posts, which will exacerbate the already serious problem of posts being driven very quickly off the "Recent Reader Posts" list by the high volume of posts, mutual-admiration games played with the recommend function, etc. We will see multiple rapid posts in what is in effect a single "thread" clogging up the Reader Posts section.
October 27, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am in total agreement with you. That and the fact that it's so easy to mistake the box for commenting with the rec box. Which clogs the rec threads.
October 27, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I also agree. If someone chooses to post their opinion the rest of us should be able to comment.
Those who made the mistake of recommending a post when they intended to comment probably won't do it again. So I really don't see it as a major issue.
October 27, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
But that's a total of 22 people now. Out of how many more in future who will make the same mistake?
October 27, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, who the fuck cares how many people make the same mistake in the future? People make the mistake of recommending your posts all the time, TheraP.
Heh.
You're obsessing. Better keep tabs on that. 10 comments out of 27 in this thread so far.
October 27, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please post your evidence that all 22 people clicked recommend by mistake.
October 27, 2008 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I clicked on Recommend on purpose. So did truthseeker.
Heh.
October 27, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Troublemaker. ;)
October 27, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
You love it. ;-)
October 27, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
the would-be commenters will resort to presenting their comments in entire additional blog posts
True. But I am surprised that more of this hasn't happened already in order to communicate, given that they haven't been able to have User Comments Lists update properly. Chances are you can't travel back to a thread right now via your comments or someone else's comments, but you can find blog posts under user names right away.
You know, the choice of Movable Type was partly an on purpose prejudice more towards blogging and less towards commenting, the way I understood Josh Marshall's explanations correctly. Note that Marshall does not even take comments on his blog, nor do you see him comment much on other websites. It's blogging tradition to "talk" via blog posts, and one he obviously prefers.
It's a format, a way of communicating, that I don't happen to like. That's why I like forum software tools, so you it's not a situation of everyone constantly getting up on a soapbox, but actually "talking" with others. Some of the new software tools will help go back in the other direction, but I still see a strong prejudice in the software here towards starting new blog posts to pontificate, rather than discuss.
I must say, though, Dan, that the choice to allow bloggers to turn off comments sounds pretty purposeful along those lines, judging by Al's post we are commenting on, and Marshall's past statements. Reader blog churn is the priority here, and we a minority, Dan, get used to it?
October 27, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the 'no comments feature' is maintained at all, (and I question the reasoning for such a feature as often I find as much or more information in the comments as the post), posts utilizing it should have a distinctive look so as to avoid erroneous recommendations.
October 27, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Al. I'd compare you to the Pol Pot/Stalin/Bush regimes, but I think they've all been covered off pretty thoroughly.
Which is to say, the improvements are great, some tweaks will be fine, but overall... still big thumbs up.
Though if I could be allowed to beta-test that new "Electrocute Non-Recommender" (ENR) button, that'd be just TASTY.
Have a great day dude. (ENR. Yes We Can.)
October 27, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, I'm confused because you didn't mention Hitler. And a question: is there a flip side to Godwin's Law that says if a poster turns off commenting ability, you can call the poster a Nazi as many times as you want, since the thread has already ended? :-)
October 27, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I prefer codewords for "Nazis."
Right now, I use "Snazzy" a lot. e.g. "Hey! Snazzy outfit, dude!"
I donno about anybody else, but it's workin' for me.
October 27, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I, too, have an issue w/ the ability to block comments. I don't see this as a place to merely spout our opinions unchecked, but rather a place where ideas are exchanged and debated.
When opinions are made to sound like facts, and left unchallenged, they stand as facts...That's been one of the problems with this election cycle. The McCain campaign has been allowed to state lies as facts, then reporters allow the comments to stand unchallenged and people believe them. Shouldn't we have enough integrity to not allow that to happen here?
October 27, 2008 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
We need a "worry blog" encouraging people to "worry" about the election and post their worries. But no comments allowed!
October 27, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey everyone,
This is obviously a contentious issue, and the way it is now isn't set in stone. We implemented this new blogging system to give users more control and choice over their own blogs- and, honestly, I didn't think shutting off comments on a particular thread is something most people would want to do. We're open to reconsidering this 'feature,' though do you all anticipate it will create that much of a problem? How much of the problem is the denial of comments itself, and how much is it the consequential change in the position of the recommend button, which is a UI detail that can be addressed?
October 27, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
For what it's worth, the rec issue doesn't matter to me. I generally do look to see what I'm clicking on.
The ability to shut off comments does seem pointless to me though, and will create the problem that Dan mentions above.
October 27, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm waiting for someone to complain that they meant to rec and hit the comment button by accident.
October 27, 2008 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Al, I think TPM regulars love to argue and complain, so please don't resolve this issue for several months. Thanks.
October 27, 2008 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
who do you think he is? He's Al, not Appl.
October 27, 2008 9:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm with repositioning the buttons as a starter, as I don't think many of us fully understand yet how the "No Comment" button might be used, and it might be quite useful at times.
I'm still a big fan of extra buttons and options though. Like, some nights, I'd just prefer to have a "Give Me Candy" button, instead of comments. Or a "Help Q Achieve His Ultimate Goal of Having Sex With Angelina Jolie" button. Donno if that's workable, but it's sure worth pursuing.
October 27, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wuss. Don't you know nice guys finish last and only the good die young? I'm pushing for a "ban this user" button.
October 27, 2008 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha! This place would be in nuclear winter in no time!
October 27, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Al, I believe what you are seeing is pure ego driven reactions (that is "ego" not "ego statistical"). A few people who hit the button felt a narcissistic injury hence all the squabbling.
What is lost in the mix here is this:
If you hit that button too quickly, maybe you were too emotional to post to begin with?
And I say this as someone who is on record as hitting the button by mistake.
October 27, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
But the point is, when something unintended is happening on such a frequent and wide-spread basis, that's a bad design - bad user interface - and should be corrected.
Ideally, good design enables the right thing to happen more often than not. So having different types of links/checks for the two functions that helps differentiate them more would be better design. Or any number of a thousand things along those lines that you could implement.
But you get the idea - make is easy for people to do the right thing. Make it hard for people to make a mistake. The intuitive way to do things, the fast way to read patterns, the least amount of work that needs to be done are usually good criteria to watch.
It is really not ok to say "don't do that". I know, I'm a software developer, and I've been in that boat many, many, many times. I've closed many a bug "Will Not Fix." But this one is a no-brainer, and will make for a happier user community.
October 27, 2008 10:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Personally, to answer Al, I think if a user posts a blog, it should be considered part of a conversation. If a user does not want to converse, then they can start their own blog and refuse comments there.
October 27, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
With all due respect. The option of starting one's own blog is open to those who don't like the new system installed here. It's free and takes 10 minutes to set up a blog.
I know it's off the subject, but I wish those posters who put up those real long posts would just post a short summary and refer folks to their blog for those interested.
October 27, 2008 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, TPM has a new feature just for that situation. It's called the "extend" tab and it sits just behind the "main" tab when you start your TPM blog.
October 27, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
The more I think about it, the more I think your best solution is to turn off "no comment.
Once you do that it solves several problems. No need to reposition the rec button (unless you want to). And it solves the problem of cowardly posts, which can publicly shame a user without a way to answer back. That to my mind should be the primary concern here. And it saves the bandwidth of a second, "response blog.
Actions should have consequences. So if a user wants to exercise their right to free speech, they should be forced to defend their perspective. Why have a feature which will only cause endless frustrations?
Even Josh, who doesn't allow comments, has a way for everyone to respond via email. (which is Josh's type of response button)
October 27, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly...
October 27, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
If I may:
The level of emotion on this issue is astounding. May I suggest to TPM, first and foremost, that the "no comment" feature be kept, and when it is enabled, simply "grey out" the "comment" button and make it unworkable. That is standard interface design -- and was even suggested above first by Genghis. It preserves the visual layout of the page and there's no problem.
As one of the several people who made the mistake that TheraP talks about: let's not grow the issue out of proportion. Some of us (me included) made a mistake. Oops!
It's not like we hit the button to start nuclear war. So a single post got over recommended. So what? It's been discussed to death now in the past 24 hours and it -- and the subsequent posts -- will soon drop off into the digital trash heap. Where maybe 3-4 people will care it about. For a day. And then nothing.
Meanwhile, it should be clear that some people (at least the ones that said mea culpa) didn't mean to rec the post. We all get it.
Let's get a sense of perspective here, folks!
October 27, 2008 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, clearthinker. I can't promise anything, but I'll look into this greying out option.
October 27, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Al, if you stop the "no comment" function, you will stop future problems. If you leave that function, it's going to cause endless problems and frustrations.
Solve the problem that started this to begin with. Which is the slamming of an innocent user, in a public way, with no opportunity for that user or others to comment.
October 27, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
TheraP:
To say that there was no opportunity to respond to truthseeker at this point is quite disingenuous. There are now *two* threads dealing with this topic.
If you don't like a poster, it possible to deal with them quite directly. You just ignore them.
As you have been ignoring me. A very solid example of how to deal with a situation like this so I know it's possible... and you do too! ;-)
October 27, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
The topic of the thread is closing comments or not.
Seems to me the majority here favor comments only:
Tom Wright
kgb999
stillidealistic
miguelito20
Dan K
Chris Brown
Hillarym99
artappraiser
TheraP
(Orlando, Jade, and Genghis possibly as well)
From Aunt Sam's blog, comments are favored by:
Donal
Barefooted
PseudoCyAnts
The Old Grouch
Other than CT, and a couple of esteemed "regular" nay-sayers, no one seems to be advocating that users should have this "no comment" feature. Indeed, several have spoken eloquently about why conversations are the reason people come to a site like this. And the nay-sayers love to comment it would seem, based upon past behavior.
October 27, 2008 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
TheraP:
I'm being dismissed by you as a "nay sayer"? That actually hurts. After all, you were the one that welcomed me to TPM many months ago.
I think it's extremely grandiose to take less than 20 posters as a "mandate". That, indeed, is a Rovian tactic.
Is all this really necessary just because you goofed on hitting a button?
Are you really interesting in conversation? Then why won't you talk directly to me? On more than one occasion, you have referenced a point I was making but only posted to the general blog, and not to my specific comment.
Of course, it is your right to ignore me for whatever reason. But once again, the irrationality of emotion rears its head. You claim to want "conversation" but you also show you have the free will to respond or not to respond. This invalidates your argument as it is trivially easy to start another a commentable thread (if there is interest) in tandem with the original one.
Having a comment feature is a feature. It is not a bug. Complaining about how someone organizes their website -- and having someone like Al even respond to it -- is beyond extraordinary. Taking away options is restrictive. It's as simple as that.
I know that by directly challenging your points, TheraP, with your high status of people watching, I'm probably damning my own posts for several months, but I believe this point needs to be said out loud.
October 27, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
favor comments only
Since you put me down there, I feel obliged to comment here again, to say that I don't feel as strongly about as you do, mainly because I doubt many are going to chose it, and I don't think people having the option of shutting off comments is that big of a deal.
Most are going to do it on something where no one cares, for some odd reason. Once in a while, people will do what truthseeker did. That kind of behavior is easily solved by ignoring it, which people here don't seem to be able to do lately for some reason.
If it were my website, I would allow shutting off of comments, but that's because the whole site would be different, I would not allow people insulting other posters with posts or with comments. I would be encouraging discussion, and people would be there to do that, not mainly to blog, and not to find friends and enemies (they hae Facebook for that, I hear.) If they used the option, they'd have another reason.
But it's not my website. Pretty clear to me they like people to blog here, and to get into the ego gratification of blogging, and comments and discussion are secondary. If it were my site, I'd put comments and discussion as primary. But I'm not creating a forum, just using someone else's, so I go by what they want.
I think people taking things too personally is the real problem in this instance, not shutting off comments. It would be just as ugly to me if it had happened in comments as in blog posts.
October 27, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
When it did happen in comments at EC, artappraiser, management eventually banned the practice or the blogger, who had figured out a method to prevent others from commenting. So, the practice in the past was to insist that people could comment on someone's comment.
I agree with your assessment and I've previously made that clear to Al. It's their blog. They can do what they want. It's obviously not a democratic system by any means. So, as you say, if cutting off comments doubles those posts, then that plays in their favor.
My concern was, more than anything, for the innocent person who was publicly ridiculed. On 3 rec lists. With no chance to defend herself. That is the main reason I have been concerned about this. Other than that kind of behavior, it really may not matter. Though, I would agree with you that people who come here come to discuss. They can choose who they want to discuss with.
If the "no comment" button is kept, then there should be a strict rule that users not ridicule someone in blog or title while using that feature.
And if I misunderstood your comment about your preference, I certainly apologize. You may not feel as strongly as I do, but it did appear you weighed in on the side of commenting.
Peace.
October 27, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps the point was not to hack the site to get features not offered everyone else?
As far as this public ridicule you keep referring to, TheraP, I don't think she seems to have suffered anything for it. An entire community came out to discuss the issue -- and I don't see her posting here distraught. Surprisingly, you've had far more public say on this than a mere comment had the original post allowed comments!
Maybe at this point, she would prefer not to be at the center of attention? At this point, you are the one that keeps spotlighting her!
Again, the answer is simple. Ignore the poster. Every here gets that concept. And I know you do as well -- because you still are ignoring me.
Yours is the classic argument for removing everyone's privileges because one person took advantage of something. And really, it's still not clear how that person took "advantage" of the system. What's really the issue here? That you accidentally rec'ed something? As I said, I did as well. It's over. We made a mistake. Beat me, spank me, make me post on TPM!
Phew. That felt better.
October 27, 2008 8:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, there are two valid points to this argument; one from either side.
Putting a grayed-out comment tag as a place-holder is a very good idea, and one that's probably not a real brain buster template hack. Admittedly, I'm a lumbering PHP coder, but it can probably be fixed with something like:
if {comments disabled}: then print {grayed comment tag}On the other side; y'all need to look before you click. As one who had accepted the role of friend geek to call when the PC is on the fritz, I can state with authority that if users would pay more attention to just what the hell they are clicking, their online experience would be much more fulfilling. Look Before You Leap.October 27, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
But what about the business of ridiculing a user in a blog title, without allowing comments? That's what started this discussion, PCA. If it were a purely theoretical issue, I likely would not have weighed in here at all. To me this was an ethical issue.
October 27, 2008 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ignore It.
Do Not Feed The Trolls,
Unless You Are At A Site
That Is Devoted To Trolling.
They Only Get Fatter and More Numerous that Way
October 27, 2008 8:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I will obey with alacrity! Bless you, my friend!
October 27, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink