miss_s_b: Abby Scuto says Awesome (Feminist Heroes: Abby Scuto Awesome)
I see that circumstance has given you an opportunity to restructure. While I am sure you will feel the loss of Count Packula keenly, it would be a shame if you did not treat his departure as an opportunity for reform, particularly of what happens below the line. I'm sure you are aware of the dissatisfaction many of us feel with the way comments are run on LDV. But I'm not here just to whinge! I'm here to propose solutions.

1, The number one most important thing I would suggest is to follow the advice given in this article on the Online journalism review. If the author of an article isn't prepared to engage in the comments, there is no point offering comments on that article. I don't propose to retype Robert's article here, but I suggest you all read and digest it.

2, Please, please, PLEASE enable comment subscription. If you don't enable comment subscription the only people who are going to return to the comment threads are the combative arseholes who obsessively hit refresh to see if whoever they want to attack has replied so they can attack them. This does not foster a positive commenting experience.

3, You should read Anil Dash's article about how to foster a positive comment space, digest it and implement it. I think Anil's comment that if you allow arseholes to foster you're an arsehole yourself is possibly a bit harsh, but the advice he offers on how to stop arseholes fostering is sensible and easy to implement, and most importantly it works.

4, Don't be afraid to wield the banhammer. If a person came into your house and behaved the way (to take two random examples) jedibeeftrix or Simon Titley do, you would not put up with it. Lib Dem Voice is all our house. Don't be swayed by the free speech argument; you're not affecting someone's freedom of speech by banning them from LDV. They are quite free to go and set up their own blog and scream abuse at you from there. Freedom of speech necessarily involves the freedom to ignore and/or respond however you wish.

ETA 4a, If you wield the banhammer, do it publicly, with reasons. This way everyone knows what the rules are and how they will be applied. Vituperative trolls will see that they won't be tolerated and eventually stop bothering to comment at all. This will make life immeasurably easier on your moderators.

5, It's not about whether or not someone uses their real name or a pseud - Simon, bless him, is ample proof of that - it's about how they behave towards other people. If someone is constantly aggressive and arsehole-ish that's going to put other people off. Active moderation will need to be strong in the beginning, but people will eventually get used to it and you'll find you need very little moderation once it's bedded in. I can't remember the last time I had to delete a comment on here, but that's because I have always, consistently, had positive comment policies and been clear about them. The best thing is, because all my regulars are comfortable with what my policies and comfort zones are, on the rare occasion an arsehole does turn up, my regulars generally deal with him or her before I even notice they are here.

I expect this post to cause some controversy. I also expect it to not make a blind bit of difference. But I feel better having put it out there.

yrs

Jennie.
miss_s_b: (Mood: Kill me)
  • Autoplaying music or video. I tend to have lots of tabs open, and it's very annoying if you can't tell which tab the noise is coming from.

  • Flashing/scrolling text, especially if it's an advert.

  • Pop-ups, especially ones that are
    1. Advertising;
    2. Excessively needy - "sign up to my newsletter! Go on, PLEASE!", and/or
    3. Have the close button in an unusual place or an unusual colour
    Seriously, if you're GOING to have needy pop-ups, it should have a HUGE red "bugger off" in the top right hand corner...

  • Articles spread across multiple pages. The New Yorker is a particular offendor in this regard.
This list is not exhaustive. I bet you lot can think lots of stuff to add to it, can't you? Any really good ones I shall edit in and credit you.
miss_s_b: (Default)
miss_s_b: (Default)
I'm going to put this simply, so that everyone understands. If this bill passes, Peter Mandleson will have the power to cut off YOUR internet. Not just your home internet, but your work internet, your school or uni's internet, ANY person or body's internet, because someone who uses your connection IS SUSPECTED of downloading copyrighted software. There's no court, no burden of proof, no appeal. Your entire family's internet could get cut off because your kid does something stupid. Your entire workplace could get cut off because of that one dude in sales.

This, like many other new Labour laws pisses all over the principles our legal system was founded on: innocent till proven guilty, punishment should not be collective for a single person's crime, beyond reasonable doubt, etc. etc. etc.

This bill is going to be pushed through in the wash up. That means no proper debate, no chance for further amendments, nothing. It WILL become law if we don't do something.

Now, we Lib Dems have done what we can. At our spring conference over the weekend, we bitchslapped our MPs into realising that this is not a good plan and they ought to vote against it. But there's only 63 of our MPs. There's nearly 600 of the other buggers. So we, as a country, as constituents, ALL OF US, need to write to our MPs and tell them that we don't like this. 38 Degrees have put up a webform for you to do just that, if you don't want to do it yourself. It takes 2 minutes, literally. Please go and fill it in.



My March sponsor is Mark Reckons, and he wants you to write to your MP about this too.
miss_s_b: (geekiness)
... is a website which searches for your given search term across several search engines, along with positive, negative, or ambivalent phrases. You can try it for yourself here. It doesn't return any results for me :(

However:
  • lib dems: 89.1% negative
  • The Liberal Democrats: 76.1% positive
  • The conservative party: 78.1 positive
  • The Labour party: 87.9 positive
  • The Tories: 88.5 positive
This has made me giggle. Especially the first one.



This blog is proudly sponsored by

About This Blog

picture of Jennie Rigg

Hello! I'm Jennie (known to many as SB, due to my handle, or The Yorksher Gob because of my old blog's name). This blog is my public face; click here for a list of all the other places you can find me on t'interwebs.

twitstamp.com



Flattr this

Ebuzzing - Top Blogs Ebuzzing - Top Blogs - Politics



==================
Awards & Endorsements:

Click for a list of awards won by this blog
Quotes about me and a list of people who have sponsored this blog can be found here.


==================
Charities I support:

The Survivors' Trust - donate here
DogsTrust - donate here
CAB - donate here

==================


Creative Commons License
Miss SB by Jennie Rigg is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
Based on a work at miss-s-b.dreamwidth.org.

Please note that any and all opinions expressed in this blog are subject to random change at whim my own, and not necessarily representative of my party, or any of the constituent parts thereof (except myself, obviously).

Printed by Dreamwidth Studios, Maryland USA. Promoted by Jennie Rigg, of Brighouse, West Yorkshire.

Style Credit

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios
Page generated Wednesday, June 19th, 2013 03:54 am

Subscribe

RSS Atom

June 2013

M T W T F S S
      12
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 1415 16
17 181920212223
24252627282930

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Most Popular Tags