Boing Boing's Moderation Policy
Q. Why does Boing Boing have to have a moderator?
A. First answer: Because every general-interest online forum that's worth reading has some kind of moderation system in force.
Second answer: Because four years ago, Boing Boing's first, unmoderated comment system went so septic that it had to be shut down. The Boingers want to never go through that again.
Third answer: Because Boing Boing gets enough traffic to attract non-automated scams.
Q. All the vowels have disappeared from a paragraph I wrote! What's going on?
A. We did it. Someone (a moderator, one of the Boingers) was expressing displeasure at your remarks. The technique is called disemvowelling. It deprecates but does not delete the remark. With work, the disemvowelled text should still be readable.
Q. You disemvowelled a very polite comment of mine that happened to mention a current presidential candidate. That means you're biased against that candidate, right?
A. Wrong. It means you shouldn't throw in mentions of presidential candidates unless they're mentioned in the main entry or are highly relevant to it. This rule will apply until the next president is inaugurated.
Q. Something has happened to the link back to my website that I put at the bottom of my comment.
A. There's an answer to this problem: please don't put links in your comments that aren't relevant to the entry. We'll just have to remove them. Instead, put a link to your site in your user profile.
Q. Are you changing people's comments in any other ways?
A. Not really. We'll occasionally fix HTML errors or zap duplicate comments, if we feel like doing it and have the time.
Q. There's an old comment of mine I want you to delete.
A. Drop us a note, if it's really important; but the default answer is "no."
Q. One of my comments has disappeared!
A. There are several possibilities. One is that we may be having technical problems. It never hurts to write and ask. Another possibility is that someone thought your comment would be better gone.
Q. I can't believe that Boing Boing, of all places, would be using censorship. What happened to freedom of speech?
A. Boing Boing is steadfast in its support of your freedom of speech. We believe that you, O Reader, should be able to have (or refuse to have) anything you want on your own website, as long as it doesn't deprive others of their rights. Yay, freedom of speech!
By that same token, freedom of speech also means that the people who write and edit Boing Boing have the right to have (or refuse to have) anything they want on their own website. If one of the things they don't want is a comment that you have posted, they aren't depriving you of your freedom of speech. You're free to put that comment up on your own webpage.
Q. Why can't you just tell everyone to ignore the trolls?
A. Because they can't. Everyone automatically reads the text that's there. If it's nasty or unpleasant, they get a dose of that. If there's too much of it, they stop participating. There's far more internet discourse lost to trollage and casual rudeness than is ever lost to moderators.
Q. Isn't the moderator just enforcing compliance with her own political views?
A. Not at all. You couldn't reconstruct her personal views from a list of the times she's intervened in a discussion. The time she invented disemvowelling, it was so she could deal with a flaming leftist.
Q. Isn't the moderator just enforcing compliance with the Boing Boing party line?
A. There is no Boing Boing party line. The Boingers have varied political opinions.
Q. What's with all the [steampunk, outsider art, papercraft, other Boing Boing obsession]?
A. One or more of the Boingers likes it.
Q. Aiiiiiiieeeeeeeeee! Boing Boing has advertising! Doesn't that mean you've become hopelessly corrupt?
A. You mean, unduly influenced by whatever advertisers are the source of the site's revenue? Don't worry about it. Boing Boing's editorial content is unaffected by its ads.
Q. But--but--those people are giving them money! How can they not be affected?
A. (The moderator speaks solo: "In order for the Boingers to be unduly influenced by who advertises on their site, they'd first have to reliably remember who those advertisers are. Trust me: this is not an issue.")
Q. But you take ads from Microsoft!!! Aren't they the root of all evil?
A. This is rank Manichaeanism. Go lie down with a cool wet cloth on your forehead until you feel better.
Q. The moderator disemvowelled one of my comments, supposedly because I had violated some rule of debate. Doesn't that just mean she doesn't agree with me?
A. No. Online discussions are not formal debates, but the usual rules for what constitutes valid argument and legitimate rebuttal, and who's responsible for proving what, still apply. They are independent of content.
Q. I thought I was being reasonably polite when I got into an argument with Bonzo, but two of my comments got removed entirely, and he just had a couple of paragraphs disemvowelled. Why me? Why not him?
A. There are many possibilities. The biggest one is that you were insufficiently polite. In the heat of an argument, your own remarks are going to seem more justifiable, and Bonzo's arguments are going to seem shabbier and more malicious. This temporary distortion is best addressed by being more polite than you think should be necessary.
Another possibility is that Bonzo has an established history of posting clear, well-informed, apposite, and entertaining comments, whereas you're posting for the first time. Or you're posting for the third time, but the first two times you did it, you posted snarky and unilluminating remarks. Under those circumstances, Bonzo is going to have a lot more credibility with the moderators and editors.
Life is an unending series of auditions. Get used to it.
A possible explanation that's guaranteed to be wrong: we're not going to delete or disemvowel your comments because we simply can't deal with the vast swoop and majesty of your hard-hitting opinions. If we tell you it was due to your behavior, believe us.
Q. One of the people in our comment thread is behaving abominably. Does Boing Boing flame trolls, or just ignore them?
A. Neither. See the little one-eyed icon in the top right-hand corner of messages? That's the lookitthat button. Clicking on it tells the moderator that she should come look at that particular message. Be sure to explain what it was about the message that prompted your action. If you include your name, you may get a thank-you note. You can also use the lookitthat button to point out comments you think are particularly good.
Please don't use the lookitthat button to post comments. The moderator's the only one who'll see them.
Q. It's obvious that you won't tolerate anything but supportive comments from brown-nosers and yes-men--right?
A. I'll venture a guess that you responded to a new entry on Boing Boing by announcing that it was hopelessly lame and boring, and then came back later to discover that your comment had disappeared.
Q. Yes! Why did you remove it?
A. This is another one of those questions that has multiple answers.
First: you didn't explain why it bored you. Without an explanation, announcing that you're bored is neither useful or entertaining. Also, it's a real bringdown for readers who lack confidence in their own opinions.
Second: because frequently the "I'm so bored" thing is just attitudinizing. There's a whole big internet out there, and it's full of people who, if they don't like what they're currently reading, move on and read something else. They don't post about how bored they are just to have something to say.
Third: maybe that entry just isn't your thing. It could be someone else's. Why drag down their conversation?
Q. So we're not allowed to say something's boring?
A. Of course you're allowed. You just have to explain why.
Q. How come the moderator nailed me for a comment that didn't contain any swearing or personal attacks?
A. It's remarkable how many people believe that "you're good as long as you don't swear or launch personal attacks" is a universal rule. We'll tolerate both those things if you do them perfectly. (Few people can manage that. Best not to try.)
Q. What's likely to land me in your bad graces?
A. Since you've asked, here's a nowhere-near-exhaustive list:
1. Spamming. Linkwhoring. Re-posting text you've already posted on a dozen other sites.Q. It's not fair! You've misunderstood me and disemvowelled or removed me because you mis-read what I posted. Can't we talk about this?2. Making supercilious and unpleasant remarks in a civil liberties thread about how the victim had it coming. This is not to say that victims never have it coming; but there's a species of internet demi-troll that appears to specialize in posting such comments. Try not to look like you're one of them.
3. Making snide comments and insinuations about the editors. That's right out. You don't like one of the editors? Take it up with them in e-mail. If you're going to comment on an entry, talk about the entry.
4. Being nasty to no purpose. (This is the catch-all.)
5. Using unnecessarily exciting language. Making an argument is fine. Making your argument in language guaranteed to make your hearers see red? Bad idea. It practically guarantees that you're going to have a dumb (and therefore boring) argument. And if the argument's not going to be interesting, we don't see the point.
6. Jeering, sneering, condescending, or one-upping when there's been no provocation. Telling people they're naive idiots for caring about whatever-it-is. Like the "I'm bored" pose, it's empty attitudinizing, and it's remarkably unpleasant.
7. Failing to notice that there are other people in the conversation. Posting a remark that's already been made five times and answered six. Coming back and re-posting essentially the same material after a twenty-message thread has discussed your previous comment. Trying to forcibly wrench the conversation onto one of your own pet topics. Posting a stale, canned rant you've posted a dozen times before at other sites. Not coming back to see how others have responded to you.
Why post comments at all, unless you expect to be read? And if you expect to be read, you must know you're part of a conversation. Therefore, you should act like it. Engage with what the other commenters are saying. Read the thread before you add to it.
8. Posting a snotty but otherwise worthless anonymous comment. It's a lot easier to get away with snotty comments if you're a registered user.
9. Dragging in one of those topics that's guaranteed to generate a huge thrash that goes nowhere, like gun control, abortion, or Mac vs. PC vs. Linux. You're only allowed to discuss those if (a.) they're relevant to the entry; and (b.) everyone in the discussion is doing their level best to say something new.
10. This list will undoubtedly get longer.
A. Sure. If one of your comments is disemvowelled or removed from its thread, you're welcome to write to the moderator.
Q. I can't register or post a comment. Does this mean I've been banned?
A. If you didn't get into some kind of fracas, it's highly unlikely that you've been banned. It's moderately unlikely even if you did. We're probably just having technical problems again. Drop us a note describing what happened.
Q. I was told my comment posting privileges were suspended for a week, but they never came back on. Am I permanently banned?
A. Probably not. If you were given a specific period and it's expired, drop us a note.
Q. What happens if I re-register and come back under another name while I'm suspended?
A. If we catch you, all the comments made by that false identity will be unpublished, and your suspension period will be re-started from the point at which the false identity was caught. It's okay to change your username when you aren't suspended, though we'll look askance at you if you do it too often.
Q. Is it okay for me to have more than one userid at a time?
A. No.
Q. What happens if I use someone else's userid?
A. You mean you use their identity without their say-so in Boing Boing's forums? We throw the book at you.
UPDATES:
08 May 2008:
There's a new rule about not mentioning presidential candidates unless the main entry mentions them first. That rule will remain in effect until the next president is inaugurated.
08 May 2008:
We believe in community-based moderation. In theory, anyone can momentarily act as a moderator, as long as their action is warranted and they get it right.
However, Boing Boing also has Assistant Moderators. It's like having a deputy sheriff's badge. Currently, the Assistant Moderators are AVRAM, as in Avram Grumer, and ANTINOUS.
So now you know. If one of them should suggest an alteration in your behavior, or ask what you're hoping to accomplish with your current behavior, you'll no longer need to ask who the bleep they think they are. You'll know who they are: they're the Assistant Moderators.
not the longest EULA ever
Please disemvowel this message. I just want to see what it would look like and I'm too lazy to do it on my own.*
Thank you.
*joking...but not really
Pls dsmvwl ths mssg. jst wnt t s wht t wld lk lk nd 'm t lzy t d t n my wn.*
Thnk y.
*jkng...bt nt rlly
I would really like to see all the different types of boingboing trolls mocked up as lolcats...
"being more polite than you think should be necessary."
that oughta cover it
tht ws ttlly wsm!!!Lng, bt wsm stll th sm -- dsmvwllng fr hck f t. :)
does this mean speaking dsmvll will be the new Leet?
Absolutely brilliant. I run a listserv where I could use exactly this sort of policy. Am I correct that this is covered by BoingBoing's CC-BY-NC license?
The disemvowel system emasculates a post, in a way. Its sort of appropriate for the overly macho type troll to see his effort robbed of its potency.
I just want to know how I can make an acceptable personal attack. I'm really not sure how I could pull that off.
I have less trouble understanding how I could use an expletive appropriately. In fact, since I was in the US Navy AND a construction worker during my life, I'd say I'm about as expert at swearing as you get. After all they don't say "swear like a sailor" or "crude as a construction worker" for nothing.
(though I'll admit that since becoming a civvie I'm not really comfortable with making "Fuck" every other word in a sentence, these days I try to keep it down to 1 in 5, maybe 1 in 6. *LOL*)
-abs
Teresa, forgive if this is an ignorant question. You mention that one should email with questions protests, etc. I've looked, but I just don't see how to do it?
wht th fck! Mch? gmm brk, nbdy rbs m ptncy!!!
hey, this is fun!
Summary:
Q: Reasonable question?
A Snide answer.
Q: Other reasonable question?
A: Unpleasant, jaded answer.
Q: Kinda snotty question?
A: Withering, unhelpful answer.
gonna run with this; from now on, if someone starts speaking Jerk at me, I'll reply in Dsmvwll and refuse to acknowledge them until they use it too.
(Hee hee! Teresa's gonna feel like a den-mother with fifty Ritalin-dependent brats to tend!)
Ah! Just the other day I read about a team of doctors at the University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Medical Center who had to remove six of a comment's vowels and refridgerate them to remove the cancerous intent of the poster. After the flame war died down, they re-inserted and attached the vowels.
In total, the vowels were outside her post for about 90 minutes.
disemvowelling is awesome. I look forward to seeing it in action as I had not heard of it before.
It seems like a better solution to the comment moderation/censorship thing would be to have two views of the comments. The default view is the moderated view and then the second selectable view is the unmoderated view. This would allow people to choose for themselves if they wanted to deal with the trolls.
Here here! (or is it hear hear?) Reads like a great moderation policy to me.
First -- thanks very much for taking the time to make this post, Teresa. It's great to have some light shed.
Now, I have a suggestion or two that could make the BoingBoing discussion experience a bit smoother. These are really minor changes, but I think they'll help:
1. Could we have the "Recent comments" view on the profile pages sorted most recent first? It's a drag to have to scroll down to the bottom when catching up with recent discussions, not to mention having to see one's first-ever comment displayed with permanent prominence.
2. Along those lines, how about a way to indicate which post we're replying to? I'm not asking for a full threading system, just a "Reply to this" link that prepends a link back to the comment being replied to. This could even be used to trigger an email notification so that (at our option) we could be informed of replies to our own comments. A lot to ask, I know.
3. This is just a bug report, really, but the Favorite feature seems broken. It used to work, but now nothing I favorite ever gets added to the list on my profile page.
Thanks again.
absimiliard said "I just want to know how I can make an acceptable personal attack. I'm really not sure how I could pull that off."
Well, of course you do, you dim-witted ninny. If you weren't such a jerk, you could pull this off. Remove you cranium from your posterior and see if that helps.
Sorry, couldn't resist :P
A. (The moderator speaks solo: "In order for the Boingers to be unduly influenced by who advertises on their site, they'd first have to reliably remember who those advertisers are. Trust me: this is not an issue.")
Hahahahah!
Could you fix my spelling while your at it?
re: #18 Dan's bug report - the same has happened to me. I really miss being able to use the favorites feature. It hasn't worked for me for a couple months now.
#12 -- I was more or less thinking the same thing. I'm glad it's not just me.
It would be interesting to see if it would be possible to have a rude comment made EVEN RUDER by having it disemvowelled. That would take some dedication (or an Enigma machine) to pull off.
*laughs*
Damn Harrkev. Totally PWNED me.
Thos're some l33t flaming skillz!
I don't think I'm up to playing in such skilled company. Guess I'll just have to stick to swearing.
Ooops, let me correct that sentence.
Sht, gss 'll jst hve t fckng stck t fcked-p swrng.
(boy, I am out of practice, 20 years ago that would've just rolled off my tongue, AND it would've parsed more naturally as well too, AND I wouldn't have felt compelled to disemvowell it as well. Hrmmphhhh. I hate getting old, and civilized.)
-abs
#21
LOL. The good lord of computers saw fit not to bless me with working h g or ' keys. I feel a bit guilty whenever I post. Any chance of an automatic contraction maker function?
The time she invented disemvowelling, it was so she could deal with a flaming leftist.
Did the mod really invent this?
Making your argument in language guaranteed to make your hearers see red?
Readers ?
10. This list will undoubtedly get longer.
This EULA is the Stephen King book the internet. It's way too long already. Do you really think people will read this, say, more than the would the Microsoft EULA ? I doubt it very much.
Why not just do what you want? People will call you a fscst sshl either way.
It seems to me like the "don't be rude" is a bit of overkill. What do you expect? This is the internet. It's inherently dehumanizing. Well, at least more so than it is humanizing.
This extremely defensive and poorly written "policy" stands as proof of the poor quality of moderation at Boing Boing.
I have run several large message boards going back to BBS days, with many, many hot button topics. The quality of moderation on this site is extremely poor. Miss Hayden is a moderator who clearly lets her own emotions and opinions get in the way of even-handed moderation, which is a shame because there could really be some good discussion here.
Basically she makes very little distinction between a valid opinion and abuse. In my case, I have had two comments disemvowelled for no other reason than the moderator disagrees with the opinions expressed (one was about Kosovo and the other about the baby who died in TSA care -- see my profile). They were not abusive in any way. When I asked the moderator about the deletion of I was given a bogus response, saying that my research was bad. Even if that was the case, which it wasn't, do we all have to have perfect research before we express an opinion? The purpose of discussion is to exchange opinion and facts with other users, with as little interference from authority as possible.
I wrote a letter to Mr Doctorow expressing my surprise that someone who is such an advocate of freedom of speech should allow the suppression of opinion on his own forum. No response so far.
I also think disemvowelling is a very poor way to treat people. Howevermuch Miss Hayden think it is clever, it's simply annoying to make readers work so hard to read a comment. It took me over 15 minutes to re-emvowell one of my own short comments and I knew what it was about. It is also pain insulting to those who have taken the time to comment and who are left asking themeslves 'WTF is going on with my post?'
Disemvowelling is not any kind of invention that you should be proud of. Be polite to your contributors. If you don't like the comment, simply dont publish their message and send them a mail asking them to resubmit it. Almost all will do so.
In addition, the moderator should not be allowed to comment on the topic of the discussions, as is currently done. The moderator's voice is very powerful and can easily distort the discussion.
Frankly, due to the poor moderation policy I have not felt like commenting on Boing Boing recently, and my opinion of the site has been lessened somewhat. I wonder how many other people have been disheartened also?
hang on, have to try something...
i i a ui a i oo?
now, THATS tough!
Clicking on "Teresa Nielsen Hayden / Moderator" above gives me Error Unknown user ?! I'm sure more credit is due.
Such long moderator policy makes you remember the days when there were no comment system in BoingBoing.
When BB launches commenting earlier this year, I had high hopes that this blog will turn from a one-way medium into a two-way medium that allows fellow readers to interact with the bloggers on the issues they posted.
It turns out that the bloggers rarely replies on the comments section, which makes this system pretty similar to the ones we have in other big blogs: An arena for those who like to argue and release their resentment. It is pretty apparent when there are blog posts on sensitive issues. You find comment warlords in every blog site and forum, and this is no different.
On the other hand, I love the Favorites system that you had implemented. Since human beings (these days) are very bad at complimenting the *wonderful* things, but very good at criticizing the things that make you wonder, the Favorites system at least shows that there is still love in humanity, supplementing the sad fact that most human beings lack the vocabulary to express their excitement and enthusiasm.
Could you fix my spelling while your at it?
Could you fix my spelling while you're at it?
It's a disorganized and rambling hybrid of an actual moderation policy and an editorial stylebook. You can easily find lots of moderation policies online - google "comment moderation policy." Moderating using standard practices is hard work but it's not rocket science. Here (and in the "moderator's" other blog) we have the consonant trick, the thing with 'sock puppets' and identity guessing games, the mid-thread smackdown anthology posts, one-line microsnarks at posts and posters, etc. Nothing will change because BB is what it is, and fortunately
I love BoingBoing, but I don't always think Teresa (or any one of the Boingers) is right, or agree with how rude or dismissive she appears to be in text when answering some questions. Does that mean she is actually being rude or dismissive? I don't know. It could just be my interpretation. I rarely post comments, and when I did once where she responded to me in another comment, I was a little disppointed by what she said, but I didn't find it to be offensive.
Regardless of my own experiences, this is their site and they're free to respond, remove stuff, and edit at their own discretion. When you write in to the OpEd section of a newspaper, it's the same thing. Sometimes the exercising of one's freedom isn't totally beautiful and utopian, it's kind of unfair to another. But that's okay because we are free to do the same on our own turf, and are always free to particpate on their turf by their rules, to break their rules and deal with the consequences, or to simply choose not to participate. They don't have to be fair to everyone all the time: this isn't government, this is a website.
And maybe I'm naive, but I do think it would make an awesome statement if BoingBoing didn't take money from companies like Microsoft and refused to run their ads. Though I don't blame them for doing it because things are rarely black and white and I don't pretend to know anything about their particular advertising situation. For instance, it's highly likely that they long ago hired a company (Federated Media?) whose job it is to sell and place ads on BoingBoing, and the Boingers themselves are not at all knowledgable or responsible for the content of the ads.
Longest post ever! Teresa Nielsen Hayden, is this really necessary? On the better message boards I frequent, the moderator is seldom heard from. When there is a problem, they post a quick two-sentence explanation and disaapear for another month or so. Your moderation style is a bit too vocal and I really don't like your style. You try to be a group leader rather than a moderator. You participate when you should moderate. And you were at the center of the Hampster/Windows Mobile debacle which was handled about as horribly as anything I've seen on any message board evah.
Now your commentary is spilling over to the front page where it is hard to ignore. Never in the history of all the Internets have I ever seen anyone take front page space to post a massive moderation policy. Me thinks you should just get your own website.
It's more like a disorganized and rambling hybrid of an actual moderation policy and an editorial stylebook. You can easily find lots of moderation policies online - google "comment moderation policy." Moderating using standard practices is hard work but it's not rocket science. Here (and in the "moderator's" other blog) we have the consonant trick, the thing with "sock puppets" and identity guessing games, the mid-thread smackdown anthology posts, one-line microsnarks at posts and posters, etc. Nothing will change because BB is what it is, and indeed when the "moderator" is too busy to get involved, BB still has good threads. But I would think twice about importing this mess to another forum.
For anyone who wonders what the minimal standard among the community for "acceptable swearing and personal abuse" happens to be, please refer to the timeless canonical classic on the subject,'Insult Scene from "Roxanne" by Martin and Hannah'.
If you cannot meet the minimum level of self-deprecation and originality - as well as wit - set by that milestone, please consider not engaging in either personal abuse or swearing.
Thank You.
(paraphrased from my policy statement on my WWIV-BBS, circa 1991).
Y fckrs thnk y'r s wsm, wll y'r nt. m N mth fckn mdrtr s gng t tll m wht t d, 'll jst pst nd pst ntl y sshls gt t thgh yr thck sklls tht m wrd s th grtst mssvs y'v vr rd, nd vr wll rd!
Pre-emptive devoweling.
Frankly, I think a threaded discussion, and some sort of alert to when someone is replying to me would be more helpful than someone 'saving' me from trolls, swearing, or the like.
Whatever works, I guess. I had to disable comments on my own blog because of spam - after that, I'd love some good 'ol trolls.
Anyway to indicate that a post has been disemvowelled as opposed to one that a person having a hard time with spelling?
Somehow I got a double post on the reload there, you can delete the earlier one at leisure.
Howevermuch Miss Hayden think it is clever, it's simply annoying to make readers work so hard to read a comment.
To quote someone else: "Not everything in the world needs to be clever"
Could you just use the common methods the rest of the world does? (delete, filter, edit, etc.)
Sometimes there's a reason people use time tested methods.
Quite frankly a disemvowelled post just clutters things up. Please either delete the comment outright or leave a "deleted comment stub"
Yes it's a cute little name and idea, but functionally you're spilling cat litter on the floor as you empty the litterbox.
In theory it sounds like a good approach.
In practice I've seen it applied unevenly with a heavy hand.
BTW Speech is either FREE or MODERATED you can't have it both ways.
Really, a simple, "'Cause I said so!" would suffice.
It's your toy, you get to say who plays with it.
No problem!
I would do the same and in the long run, I doubt anyone could do better than you are doing here .
Keep it goin' on!
We all support BOING BOING.
###
Anyone else see...
and read boingdown?All of this disemvowelling is giving me consonant dissonance.
WOAH - reformat this post! I thought I'd bookmarked an FAQ page and my links were screwed up, or I'd hit an errant link by mistake. Not very home-pagey.
fck y
Disemvoweling..
In college for a C programming class they had us build one of those. At the time I was working at a tax software company and I had the Text of the entire State of California Tax Code that I was working on for the Tax Software.
I disemvoweled the entire Cal State Tax code in less then 5 seconds if memory serves.
good times Good Times
So in summation, you're saying:
"This is our house, to which we graciously offer you entrance and allow you to discuss topics which interest us. However, if you start smearing shit (which is a subjective term, and may be arbitrarily defined any number of ways at any given time by us) on the walls, we reserve the right to politely exclude you."
While it would be impossible to deny your right to do this (nor would any reasonable person want to), and I agree that this in no way infringes on freedom of speech, It definitely lends credence to the idea that those in charge at boingboing have chosen to associate themselves (by dint of their behavior and overall disposition) with such insufferable persons as cranky librarians, PTA parents, and members of the high school debate team.
Perhaps you appreciate the comparison.
That being said, I still love you guys (much as I love libraries and debate), warts and all. :)
Boooo!!! Hisssss!!!
Sad day in boingboingland.
#28: I'm with you. Being a moderator myself, I had gone through the stages of being a bad mod as well. I know how a moderator commenting on a topic can easily distort a discussion, when a mod is known to abuse his power.
When moderating comments, warnings and reasons should be given before taking any actions. I agree that it is extremely rude to 'disemvowel' one's comment, especially the reader did take the time to read and reply.
There is a distinction between one attacking another person, and one responding critically to another person's comment. Notice the difference: One deals with the person, while the other deals with the topic. The former is trolling, while the latter is a discussion. The moderation here does not seem to be able to differentiate between the two, and quite very often blatant attacks towards other users are ignored.
I have nothing against Miss Hayden herself, I am only commenting on the state of moderation in this blog. Please do not misunderstand.
I like the summary of Hayden's post. Brilliant. I don't know, I'm personally a fan of fark and once was a fan of slashdot, until I got tired of hearing about technology and microsoft vs. linux.
The ability to have user feedback on comments (slashdot) and voting on posts in general (fark) seems to be a good self-moderating approach.
I think many here have the impression that Hayden is being personal, albeit arbitrarily so (as expressed in her own discourse that you won't be able to find a pattern of her beliefs with the moderation).
I also like the suggestion that defaults to the disemvowelling, if that must remain the method, but allows anyone else to see the full text.
And I agree that it'd be more fun if the bloggers themselves responded more often. Perhaps they are too busy disremembering who their advertisers are. Lol.
Me, #28 Sparkzilla, I've been disheartened and I agree with your comment completely.
Ths pst ws jst cry fr ttntn frm th mdrtr.
f y wnt ttntn 'm sr Cry wld lt y fnd nd pst cl thngs.
@28
I remember the first board I modded on was on the old TinyFugue system, running off the server at Georgia Tech. That server was later bought by MindSpring, who then became Earthlink.
I know they still have Itchy and Scratchy (I used to ATDT via those servers), but I can't remember the name of what used to be the GT server. Since those days, I've modded a little here and there, so I think I have some experience at this, as you do.
All I can tell you is, if you don't like the message board feature of this website, you don't have to interact with it. Telling everybody else they're wrong because they don't do things your way can make you seem very controlling. Tattling to Cory Doctorow, as you said you did, also isn't very becoming. You aren't the moderator here, so it may make you happier to stop trying to fill that role.
Don't get me wrong - I like the idea of talking to other old hands on the net. I'm just saying if it bothers you that much, avoid it. It's just a website.
How about boingboing goes back to no comments at all ?
Bcs dn't wnt t b n yr pth whn y strt bldng t f yr vgns nd g crzy !
wait, do Ys and Ws count as vowels?
Comments complaining about how boring the post is are nearly always, themselves, boring. In order to keep these self-referential comments from bootstrapping themselves into computerized sapience and spreading their boringness throughout the Known Net, they have to be deleted.
Kaiser: judging by some of the comments in here, apparently it IS necesary.
I've found the moderation to be more than reasonable. I really think it can be summed up as "don't be a troll, don't be a jerk, don't spam and don't threadjack." Those are really pretty simple principles to follow. I suspect most of the people who get up in arms about moderation here fall into trollish category.
As an aside, most popular blogs out there don't have a large amount of give and take between the readership and the writers (in the comments anyway). The editors pop in to respond to the occasional statement, but they don't really have time to hang out in there and read every response.
After all they're busy doing the research/what have you :)
now that i see the rigor involved in deciding which comments will be posted and remain posted; to see that my singular comment from months ago still lingers on (horse mask dancing man - who could resist?) I'M SO PROUD! Thanks for being SO COOL in doin' what ya do! seriously - yay. (and yes, i actually went back and looked):
What happened? I check BB twice, if not more per day ...what did I miss? In other words, was this post neccessary, I mean, couldn't you just post a link to a eula or something? Sounds so unfriendly.... There's nothing wrong with how you want to manage your site, that's OK with me, but did we deserve a reminder of this kind on the frontpage? Are you being sued and you don't want to talk about it or what?
disemvowelling seems like a fun and indirect way for the Moderator to "injure" the commenter, while adding no productivity or clarity to anything.
Pull the comment and have them repost. Don't waste people's time.
cool invention though, for about 15 seconds ...
So are the little eyeballs a subtle way of telling us you're watching us?
The moderation at BoingBoing has always struck me as excellent. Lively, sometimes contentious discussion happens without devolving into constant flame-fests. But long detailed policies seem pointless to me. Who's going to refer back to this in the heat of composing a flame? This reads as mostly Teresa giving in to an understandable need to vent a bit. I'd go with:
1. Don't be a jerk. It's the moderators job to decide if you are being a jerk. If you think she or the editors are being jerks, tell them about it somewhere else.
2. Nothing is as boring as being told how boring something is.
And yes, I realize I'm saying this post was too boring except for the part about not saying posts are too boring.
Anyway, keep up the good work.
Thank you for this. I hope that it gets either favorited or something. This long and thoughtout policy is the reason that I continue to enjoy boing boing content.
Keep it up.
I love you moderatrix.
I'm upset that this site that I look at at least once a day has content that I'm not 100% interested in. Sometimes I see things that offend me, or I just think are stupid. And when I comment, I can't say what I wish because site owners might delete me.
I want a refund! WAAAH!!!
Hy md, ll prddng sd. f y wnt t lk t lrg cmmnty tht sms t fstr smwht ntllgnt rspctfl dscssns, 'd sggst gng vr t Mtfltr nd tkng lk t hw thy hndl thngs.
Notice you never see Teresa Nielsen Hayden and #63 Psyco Path in the same place at the same time ??? hhmmmmmm...
Glad to see this posted! I haven't been paying too much attention to comments lately, but when you first allowed them I do remember feeling that the ground rules needed to be a bit more explicit.
Something else I think you should consider is having dedicated user accounts for moderation. Ah, but I bet you think you already do! Nope, sometimes the moderators are simply participating in the discussion thread... I think that's a bad policy because it blurs the line of when they're just stating an opinion and when they're laying down the law.
Ideally, I think moderators should simply moderate and leave the discussion to the groundlings. But at the very least, I think have two accounts for the moderators (one for taking part in the discussion, one for moderation) would be a good idea.
#47: Yes, you would think that the site would advocate or experiment on some innovative ways of moderation, since the blog posts are so radical about politics and government. But in the end, when it comes to reality, the site is run traditionally with ads and moderation.
I don't mind the ads, though it does feel a little hypocritical, as soon as it keeps the site alive, I'm happy.
#61: LOL. Yes. It reminds you that you can be reported!!
* * * * *
This thread is an interesting moment in Boing Boing history, because it puts Cory and company to the test, where they are the presidents of this micro-government.
It would be interesting to see if this issue will be ignored or resolved, as that pretty much draws the line between idealistic scholars and pragmatic politicians.
Hey and while I'm at it, how about letting us post IMAGES in the comments section as well, ala FARK? I think the type of creative mind that one finds in here would be ripe for visuals.
#68: what's to be resolved? I don't think basically "don't act like a jerk/idiot" is an unreasonable policy (and really that's what it all comes down to.
"disemvowel". LOVE IT! Never heard that phrase.
If you're dealing with young trolls, you could also use ROT 13, it would confuse everyone under 35, anyone who was never on USNET.
Michael W. Dean
@66
Why in the world would any right minded person want to visit ohio...
Though if you want to fly me out to meet the BB crew I certainly wouldn't argue.
Teresa, maybe you could put a link to this moderation policy (with or without comments thread) at the top of the Boing Boing page.
Or, as some mailing lists do, post it periodically, once a month or so.
Why does this EULA make me pity the mod? Probably because she's working in an environment that forces her to be this nitpicky. I do not envy.
#69 considering the amount of absolutely stupid idiotic crap that goes on in fark threads, I'm not sure that's a good road to go down. :p
/saying this as a long-time Farker
This isn't moderation, this is about as heavy handed as it gets. A post this long, smack bang on the front page, full of personal rhetoric is not moderation.
The link we click to get here is labelled "Discuss" which is usually an invitation to voice opinions, but, as stated here so many times before, they're not even really interested in that either.
This is similar to the spoiled kid at the party taking toys away from his guests.
Y'all are overreacting. Srsly.
#70: You might agree with the whole policy, but quite a few of the comments here indicates the otherwise, and those feedbacks either need to be resolved, or simply ignored. Either way, it's a position for the admins to take.
The EULA prompted me to join after years of reading daily (and ignoring the comments when they were introduced, because I've learned to ignore unmoderated comments--they're often too vile and ignorant). Funny, forthright, and useful.
I guess I don't "get" what's to disagree with, I suppose. What? You WANT to be able to log on with someone else's account? You WANT to be able to spew profanities and vitriolic comments? what is it?
Heh.
(just providing examples btw, dont take offense).
Thanks for a good policy Teresa. I hope you are well compensated for all the shit from idiots.
I have to ditto the comments about the Favourites page being broken; mine hasn't been updated since November, though the tag on the post will change.
As to the comparison with EULAs, this is more entertainingly written than most EULAs I've attempted to read.