tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post6988270039662523636..comments2023-10-29T10:32:36.914-04:00Comments on Philosophy, et cetera: Comments and Quality ControlRichard Y Chappellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-74059774648338548172008-05-28T04:49:00.000-04:002008-05-28T04:49:00.000-04:00Hi RichardI'm also leery of comment moderation mys...Hi Richard<BR/>I'm also leery of comment moderation myself. However I would consider implementing one of those vote up vote down things that allows your readers to rate the quality of comments.<BR/><BR/>The downside to this is that it breaks the narrative flow of arguments (by changing their position)<BR/><BR/>Cheers<BR/>DavidDavid Hunterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10511387997239132302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-67968773714449681962008-05-02T22:13:00.000-04:002008-05-02T22:13:00.000-04:00Well, I think there is one thing in favor of the p...Well, I think there is one thing in favor of the policy, namely, that it can sometimes be tricky to judge how tangential your own comment is (not everything that jumps out at you in a post is something the writer of the post considers even important), and this does handle that issue.<BR/><BR/>Also, sometimes comments grow on you without your realizing it. When I <I>notice</I> that a comment is growing long I often move it to my own blog. But in cases where you're responding to a number of points in the post or the previous comments, or just laying out some reasons for a particular point already mentioned, a comment can seem short when writing it but turn out to be quite long indeed. (You can catch it in preview, but (1) some comments are borderline in length; and (2) I doubt very many people always use preview.) And it would handle that as well.Brandonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06698839146562734910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-41257635839731240332008-05-01T22:16:00.000-04:002008-05-01T22:16:00.000-04:00Or if you can't be bothered with what David Chalme...Or if you can't be bothered with what David Chalmers does (in relation to PG above), then perhaps a system with a list of polite, pre-written reasons for comment deletion would be a reasonable way to go about things. Blogger doesn't have this (as far as I know) but if you like the idea you could always suggest it to them.AWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03424492860526805066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-56809388092461854672008-05-01T21:44:00.000-04:002008-05-01T21:44:00.000-04:00Something nice David Chalmers does is answer in pr...Something nice David Chalmers does is answer in private comments he deletes for being too confused to contribute to the discussion (I know because I had the misfortune to make some of those). This seems like a good policy if one has the stamina, esp. given your agenda of making analytic philosophy more widely accessible without adulterating it.Peli Grietzerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02338260572782761649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-85341441408947875742008-05-01T20:52:00.000-04:002008-05-01T20:52:00.000-04:00I'm leery of significant comment monitoring. Too o...I'm leery of significant comment monitoring. Too often on blogs, comment moderation is just an excuse to make it hard to express disagreement with you. Not that I expect you to do that, but "appearance of impropriety," "slippery slope," and all that.<BR/><BR/>One thought: what's the merit of a system that would let people respond specifically to each others comments? This might make it easier for people who want to talk about the initial post to ignore tangents.The Uncredible Hallqhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09565179884099473943noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-32864256347077095642008-05-01T20:48:00.000-04:002008-05-01T20:48:00.000-04:00Well, it's your a blog, but I think it's a very ba...Well, it's your a blog, but I think it's a very bad idea - as long as someone is honestly trying to grapple with the issues, why discourage them?Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028612648881844683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-66722704212164765542008-05-01T18:12:00.000-04:002008-05-01T18:12:00.000-04:00Peli - I'd prefer to combine those into a single s...Peli - I'd prefer to combine those into a single scale of <I>contribution value</I>, and filter for that (i.e. whether the comment contributes to the discussion). It seems less offensive to focus on pertinence. But I guess my main worry is the possibility of incompetence diverting the discussion.Richard Y Chappellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-29612308725950248642008-05-01T17:30:00.000-04:002008-05-01T17:30:00.000-04:00Is the idea to filter for competence or to filter ...Is the idea to filter for competence or to filter for pertinence? Obviously the two can't be wholly told apart, but still.Peli Grietzerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02338260572782761649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-69470746639396568782008-05-01T14:13:00.000-04:002008-05-01T14:13:00.000-04:00In my experience, attempts to keep threads on topi...In my experience, attempts to keep threads on topic are futile, no matter the architecture or supervision. But perhaps you'll have better luck.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07597410735412554920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-24543366587100493722008-05-01T13:53:00.000-04:002008-05-01T13:53:00.000-04:00Scott - yeah, I agree that the comments here are g...Scott - yeah, I agree that the comments here are generally extremely good (and perhaps I should have emphasized this more -- I certainly don't want to discourage people!).<BR/><BR/>But sometimes a thread gets derailed nevertheless. So I wonder, for example, whether the discussion of '<A HREF="http://www.philosophyetc.net/2008/04/zombie-rationality.html" REL="nofollow">Zombie Rationality</A>' might have been helped by moving some of the tangential comments elsewhere. (Maybe not; perhaps no-one would've had much to say about the original post's topic in any case. But I wonder.)<BR/><BR/>Alex - good point. Collapsible threads would be great. I'll add that to my feature wishlist!Richard Y Chappellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1895049441723345282008-05-01T13:30:00.000-04:002008-05-01T13:30:00.000-04:00I would imagine that threaded comments would make ...I would imagine that threaded comments would make more sense, so that one can choose to reply either to the post itself, or to a comment on the post: starting a thread. Then tangential discussions would have their own thread, easy to ignore. (If threads were collapsable, all the better.)<BR/><BR/>AlexAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-47820006870378681232008-05-01T13:01:00.000-04:002008-05-01T13:01:00.000-04:00Well, gosh, now I feel self-conscious.Generally, I...Well, gosh, now I feel self-conscious.<BR/><BR/>Generally, I wouldn't advise that policy, but in this context--a blog with a narrow subject matter, with high level discussion, and intelligent commenters (and me)--it's a good idea.<BR/><BR/>But I would have thought that was already the policy, as I seldom see very lengthy, unproductive comments around here.*<BR/><BR/>*Except for those of anyone who disagrees with me.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07597410735412554920noreply@blogger.com