|
|
|
Stand behind your words, stay on topic and don't be abusive. As the note says on the new comments window, this is not a bulletin board. Signed, and I hope thoughtful, replies to the posts are welcome.
Many of the biggest and most-visited blogs, from Romenesko to Instapundit to LA Examiner, don't let visitors write any comments directly to the site. I do for now, and will try this small refinement to the experiment for awhile. It's the first tweak since L.A. Observed began in May.
It's on the honor system, with the twist that comments that abuse this ethic may be summarily deleted. Real names are preferred, but it can be your website or a nickname as long as there's a real email or web address behind it. Am I going to check the email? Not likely, unless there's some reason to do so. If anyone has a (to me) good reason for not putting any name on their comments, talk to me. Maybe it works to register your name with me or something. I'm sure there will be wrinkles that come up.
Works for me. Thanks Bob.
Posted by: Kevin Roderick at July 24, 2003 09:11 PMOn an unrelated note, I don't get how LA Examiner is such a great, big, influential blog (you're the second person in as many weeks to say that).
It's rarely updated. And when it is, it's not that interesting.
Thanks very much for filling that void, btw.
Posted by: bobby at July 24, 2003 11:49 PMIt's a good thing that you allow for posts. For one, the comments are often as interesting as the original posts. Another reason: It shows that the blog's publisher is willing to accept criticism. It has always struck me that if you want to critique, say, Instapundit, for uttering some inanity, you'd have to take direct aim at him from your site--or someone else's--instead of addressing it directly on his site. That allows for honest criticism instead of the appearance that you're just taking a potshot.
Posted by: RiShawn Biddle at July 25, 2003 08:04 AMThanks RiShawn. Yes, comments have those real benefits. There are other ways a publisher can encourage feedback, like the way Romenesko does it with signed letters that he posts, but it's not as satisfying for the commenters or for those readers who like to see some mixing up. Like I said, for me it's all an experiment to see what works. My main personal consideration is time to put into the blog, which is already limited and will become more so. The best comment experiences I see at other blogs benefit from the blogger's active engagement in discussions. I haven't been doing it that much, and really can't in any timely way.
Posted by: Kevin Roderick at July 25, 2003 08:58 AMTo illustrate. The time is now 9:17 a.m. By 9:30, Rishawn Biddle will know the "real me," as I must call him with my flak hat on. 'tis a small world!
Posted by: BobfromPlaya at July 25, 2003 09:14 AMI think your new policy is smart. Anonymity gives people a license to be vicious. Sure, there are certain risks that go with using my name when I want to comment and express some personal opinion here or elsewhere, but I'm willing to take them.
Posted by: Tim McGarry at July 25, 2003 10:17 AM
of LA Observed
Ah, delightful move. I keep my name masked due to my representation of certain public companies who may not see eye-to-eye with my political pronouncements. However, I am consistent about the name I use, and can always be found through my email.
Posted by: BobfromPlaya at July 24, 2003 08:59 PM