Cheers! FINALLY!
I like having an open conversation that is positive (what happened in the recycling story) and comments that can lead to positive change in Buffalo. Personally, I am sick ot death of reading the open and public personal battle between a group of people. A good, humourous comment once in a while is fun to read.
I think this is an excellent decision!
It is past time to return the Comments to a respectable place. I have never clicked Avoid User until recently and find I am clicking it more and more. Thanx for taking action on this topic.
This is a problem that has been around a long time. I am not sure why some people enjoy trolling so much. It can become burdensome to keep track of off topic attacks and repeat offenders. You might try the disemvoweler to save yourselves some time and energy.
Firstly, the trolling of which BRO complains is a case of karma, or BRO reaping what it sows.
Seconly, deleting and editing comments to satisfy the deliciate sensibilities of a few, and subjecting them to the subjective whims of editors is a sure-fire way to kill any sort of online community. The only comments that ought be deleted are those that are patently libelous. Period.
Thirdly, the post implies that "trolls" are not "good citizens". Seems to me some of the people labeled as "trolls" are good citizens who have a different perspective on what is going on in Buffalo, and they sometimes use humor to get that point across. This is throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Fourthly, being a "community" doesn't mean that everyone has to agree and give each other five stars and pat each other on the back for their amazing work and wonderful participation. People in a community bicker, argue, call the cops on each other, sue each other, disagree, yell, scream, and behave obnoxiously. To now sanitize a good-news site with only comments deemed acceptable by its editors is playing a game of make-believe.
This site began in - and with the viral support and promotion of - Buffalo's blogosphere. This decision, coupled with the earlier deletion of what passed for a blogroll, has completed Buffalo Rising's divorce from it. Why does that matter?
As co-founder George Johnson wrote for Placeblogger.com:
Before that night though, we were longtime fans of blogs, specifically ones that understood that the medium was all about conversation-a conversation between author and reader, author and commenter, commenter and commenter. We wanted ours to be a conversation among writers for the magazine-a chance for readers to see what those writers spoke about in between issues and an opportunity to engage in that dialogue and perhaps shape what those writers wrote.
and
On it's best days, the discussion on Buffalo Rising was like a great cocktail party: memes we started were picked up and extended and expanded and debated. In posts about real estate, brokers, property owners, developers and investors had conversations that lead to offline commerce. Controversial civic and neighborhood issues were debated ardently and Buffalo Rising became the forum for issues from governance to the built environment to development to whether restaurant bars should have tvs and the ethics of foie gras.
That is now being jettisoned. And for what? So that an isolated person feels better about sending a link to a friend in Charlotte?
We have policy about racial comments, obscenity, gratuitous foul language, threat of violence, and making unsubstantiated claims about an individual.
Yes, Alan. I guess I have drawn a line between individuals who comment using these elements and those we'd like to cater to as good citizens.
You can still pontificate on any issue that you wish, imagined or otherwise, as long as you don't break those rules stated above to get there. I'd say that leaves a lot of leeway to have a civil, informed discussion. It just eliminates trollage.
Wow. I'm sure many posts have been low class, but this is a strange decision. I think you have just energized your critics who contend this site is far too one-sided, non-journalistic, and otherwise myopic if not self-serving and perhaps collusional with advertisers and supporters.
A post such as the one about the green building being beautiful followed by comments that is for sale, being exposed as trend by a commentor, requires rebuttal not frustration. Many examples like this exist.
I hope you reconsider and simply edit out more of the truly distasteful posts....but warning posters?....that's just against the spirit of a two-way blog.
Change your mission statement.
Pundit, Oh come on! The comments that BRO is talking about had nothing to do with any conversation or debate. BRO is not scared of debate. The arrogant hateful nonsense that these guys have been posting has been ruining the conversation.
Elena:
One wonders why, in a thread that you started with a post decrying trolls, you would post such blatant trollbait?
Your attempt to smack me down as being an apologist for racism, violence, obscenity, and "unsubstantiated claims" (which I assume means defamation), is a miss.
Why? Because none of that has anything to do with this email from which you quoted:
One of my dearest friends lives in Charlotte and I will often send her links and interesting articles. Incredible negativity! I can understand disagreeing with something but lately it's just a continuous slap-down and especially Newell bashing. The guy tries to do so much good for the city and people cannot even find an ounce of respect or thankfulness, disgusting!
Negativity. "Slap-down". Newell bashing. Lack of thankfulness. Then the next e-mail advocates for an "on-topic only" policy. You then go on to expand your list of no-nos to "off-topic".
Also, with regard to the "pontificate" remark - I see what you did there!
By using that word, you backhandedly called me a pompous and arrogant. Maybe I am, but in your own thread about troll-deterrence, you went ahead and insulted someone who left a pretty legitimate comment. Doesn't that run counter to the earlier plea for civility and on-topic-idity?
Horvath:
We have policy about racial comments, obscenity, gratuitous foul language, threat of violence, and making unsubstantiated claims about an individual. Off topic refers to going after the author with no regard to the topic of the post.
That's all. Everything else is a go. No worries on actual discussion of the topic.
Alan: Did you say I troll-bated? You just reminded me of one of my favorite characters from Princess Bride. Better check that goblet.
Maybe if the SAME people didn't jump on to EVERY story and say something negative about it, others wouldn't be so fed up with it. I am not happy that this had to be done, but glad that the possibility of more discussion of the issue at hand can occur, rather than the same complaints being aired below every article.
Troll-bation is something of which I've never heard. Also, I have an immunity to iocane powder.
Glad to hear it. I went into the Village Beer Merchant last night and mentioned Buffalo Rising and the guy working there said he saw that someone complained about the number of articles written on his place. I was so embarrassed I didn't know what to say to the guy.
I agree on removing obviously off-topic baiting posts. Dictator will not work, but either does total anarchy in any environment.
You can see the posters that drop in the same childish hot buttons even if they have nothing to do with topic being dicussed. It is true that topics are fluid but someone dumping boulders into the flow just to divert it has gotten out of hand. I wish more people would just ignore the crap so it would 1) go away on its own, or 2) have the same handfull of childish people conversing amongst themselves in every thread. Some of them actually appear rather intelligent and succesful which makes you wonder why they feel the need to act the way they do.
Most of the time, an average joe can see when someone is honeslty trying to add to the conversation and when they are just trying to be an immature bully/trouble maker. There are some others that seem to have some good intentions in their constant hijacking, but hopefully some warnings would help that out.
Of coarse some will see this as the "end of the world". I doubt it will be such. If it is, then BRO will die. Perhaps it will grow? The market will dictate.
Most of the top learning institutions have very open and free forums of discussions in the classroom about the topics at hand. Though I doubt they would allow the free for all that happens here that degrades every conversation.
ECB - BS!! I've had dozens of comments removed for not being pro-Buffalo!!
Please do not lie to these people - it gives BRO piss-poor journalism credentials!! Go ahead people and make a comment about the fact that Byron actually fired dozens of whites and replaced them with blacks and next thing you know - or a comment about how you can't get a project without donating to his war chest and watch...poof - your comment mistically disappears!!!
BTD:
You have two strikes today. Both of them were for obscenities. One was over-use of the verb in caps. The other describing a sex act.
You have not been deleted for being anti Buffalo. You can make accusations all you want, and they don't have to be factual, like the one above because you're not a journalist.
But one more comment that is obscene, racial, violent, etc...and you're gone. If you come back as any derivative of your name, you're gone.
I have a new writer who will be posting family events. If a young family can't see your comments...you're gone.
It sux that it has to come to this but I totally agree that this is the only way to stop these losers...
The idea of a troll-free comments section sounds good on paper (or should I say on-screen) but at the same time I don't have much sympathy for people who walk away from the conversation because of what's being said, no matter how hideous. I'm as appalled as anyone by some of the hateful comments that have become more common lately. My solution is to ignore them or click the "avoid user" button at the bottom of each comment.
It's up to all of us to create an environment where people from all over Buffalo (and beyond) share ideas, discuss, debate, think, learn and grow. Abandoning the conversation because of a bad apple or two (or four) only means they've spoiled it for everyone. Don't let them.
Adios BTD...Pundit will have you drop your nonsense over at his site for a juicy discussion on race, sex and cars.
It is a shame that BRO must move in this direction.. I don't blame them I guess it just is a shame that some people can't find the patience or tolerance to keep civil.
Whynot:
We will not abandon the conversation. No way, no how. We're just not going to keep it on topic.
Many of your readers have no problem with occasional colorful language such as obscenities or "over-use of the verb in caps" (whatever that verb might've been) as a harmless trade-off for wider diversity of comments brought by BTD, etc.
BTD: You have two strikes today. Both of them were for obscenities. One was over-use of the verb in caps. The other describing a sex act.
MJ hit on the key point here:
some will see this as the "end of the world". I doubt it will be such. If it is, then BRO will die. Perhaps it will grow? The market will dictate.
The policy change you're planning is making a guess that the number of people who avoid the site due to it's current comments exceeds the number who are drawn to the site at least in part because of the more open dialogue and diversity. There's a chance that guess is wrong, in which case your ads will be seen by fewer people over time. What you should want to do from a business perspective of course is to attract both groups.
You might want to consider that a smarter business decision (maximizing clicks and eyeballs) could be to have two versions. Leave this one as-is, and it'd be very easily technically feasible to set up a buffalorising-filtered.com that would automatically output the same content minus any comments not meeting the additional restrictions you described above. Or the other way around - buffalorising.com could be the more restrictive editing policy and buffalorising-unplugged.com would be current way. Either way, I'd bet the non-filtered version would draw a LOT more clicks and eyeballs.
A note at top of each page would inform readers of the other option and provide the other URL with a convenient link to it. Once people know, then they'd just go to version they prefer. Avoid User feature would still be available in both versions, allowing even more customized control. Other than setting up the second URL, it wouldn't be any additional continuing effort beyond what you say you're planning anyway.
"We will not abandon the conversation. No way, no how."
My comments were directed at those who no longer participate because of trolls. They have most certainly walked away from the conversation. Hey, that's their right of course, but it's also their choice.
very often the articles are poorly written and the prescribed topics are dull when a much more interesting topic emerges out of a few sharp and disruptive comments.
Very often a great conversation is blunted by dull witted off topic comments by a very few commenters who's only aim is to hijack the thread to call attention to themselves.
buffalopundit: "Troll-bation is something of which I've never heard. Also, I have an immunity to iocane powder."
who are you, the comic book store guy from the simpsons?
I think we will see what conversations look like shortly. A dissenting point of view is much different than the kid in the back of the class acting like a clown looking for attention and disrupting everything when the peanut gallery then has to jump in.
I think there is a big distinction bewtween a dissenting opnion and that which is being targeted for editing.
BRO might consider enhancing their account validation process. Readers are currently allowed to post prior to validating their account, you can literally put in anything in the email address line. I know because I have done this. Why not require validation prior to posting? I know it is not perfect, but it takes a few more steps to create a fake yahoo account then to just create a new alias. My housemates and I have at least a dozen aliases on BRO, some to post legit comments and others to have fun with. We all know that this isn't uncommon on BRO.
Adios BTD...Pundit will have you drop your nonsense over at his site for a juicy discussion on race, sex and cars.
Cars? Yes. Race and sex? WTF?
@ Ben: And yes, I am the comic book store guy from the Simpsons. Because I'm the one who invoked the Princess Bride.
I see the off-topic policy has already been jettisoned. What a joke.
I think that all of this commenting, debating, insulting, and now on to debating about commenting is an unfortunate waste of time. Does anyone here see that history is repeating itself? We are our own worst enemy.
And we wonder why nothing good ever happens in Buffalo.
Kudos to BRO for trying to keep it above the board when others couldn't. I was floored when reading "those" comments that anyone think they were appropriate for this forum. Freedom of speech was inteded to permit discourse or an open exchange of ideas in a free community. It does not give you free reign to say whatever you like and tell others to deal with it. My rights don't give me the "right" to trample on others and put them down.
I would have no problem having my e-mail validated prior to being allowed to post if that meant that this community discussion could be used as a great way for concerned, happy, or frustrated people interested in our city to share ideas openly. That is the purpose of free speach, journalism and our intended Constitutional rights.
Just thought I might throw out there - we have friends from other parts of the country as well as in the suburbs that read BRO daily. I am embarassed at times to know they read certain stories - the stories that had a long list of personal attacks on either the writer or other people posting. Buffalo will never get out of the current "rut" unless the people within it are positive and work toward the common goal of making it better. Positive discussions and healthy debates for good for a community. They reflect in a manner that businesses want to come here, people want to live here and those that are already here want to stay here.
No one wants to be around the name calling, insulting, mean 5-year old bully and that is what some of the comments sound like at times.
There is no need for some of the dirty, racist comments that have been made in the past to be seen by the rest of the country or in the burbs. It perpetuates the negative feelings about Buffalo. I am all for a good joke, or witty rebuttal, but some comments have really crossed the line.
Good call BRO.
I don't pay close attention to BRO anymore, but not just because of the stupid vulgarity of some of the postings. That was annoying but it never ruffled me, even when I was mocked for having a different point of view or for where I live. I found the coarseness and obscenity of a few less worrisome than the herdthink here, and the belittling of different points of view by the non-vulgar posters.
But I understand the decision. At the same time, I respectfully urge better writing and editing (and proofreading), more discernment about the subjects and tone of articles, and a bit more neutrality about certain projects or issues.
Bad idea. I usually ascribe to the notion that if I don't care for something I'm reading I move along, the same as is often said with TV or radio stations...change the channel. Granted, a lot of posts devolve into absurdity but a greater number lead to a fecundity that you simply can't get anywhere else. Too often what is perceived as negative points of view are in actuality constructive criticism, ya some are genuinely negative. So if the desrie is to create a legion of BRO Yes Men & Women, I think you'll find readership down. No offense, but many times the responses are better than the articles.
Elena, Newell, Authors, Posters et al (no, not me),
hmmmmm. my friends, this can be a slippery slope. one that i am slightly wary of.
it is obvious to any regular reader to this site that, as of late, thing have gotten a little uncomfortable and even out of hand. threads seem to degrade quickly into vulgar (yet often accurate or even funny) observations.
But is a wholesale editing policy the best way to go? at best, its a time consuming, difficult to administrate, and somewhat perception based task of whack-a-mole to monitor every posting.
At worst, editing can become, or be perceived as becoming (sadly, perception is reality), just as abusive as any comments. the freedom to say whatever one feels, is the great liberty of the internet. it keeps the whole system honest. very often it is comments from our resident trolls that help me re-examine an issue. and if going off topic, qualifies for disbarment, i know ill be in for big trouble. like this one time . . . sorry [self edited]
there is a price for such liberty, however: we must weed through the small petty comments, the insults, and the all around childishness (that last one is me) to find the truth. just like real life. lets face it the web is humanity unvarnished after all.
perhaps a somewhat different tack is in order: a call for civility and a little restraint.
i know i have be guilty of forgetting there is a person on the other end of those comments or articles. i know i have been brusque-er (it’s a word) than necessary. remember somebody felt strongly enough to write something for the world to see. if you don’t agree, say why. namecalling or insulting somebody doesn’t prove a point, it just makes the author look one dimensional and childish.
-----
im also going to guess that editing only feed the trolls more – just to see what they can get away with.
I work with young people who are doing amazing things in local schools around combating racism, homophobia, etc. in our community. This seems like something that should be featured on BRO, especially since most of the students I work with are from the city. However, I would never subject those kids to the comments section.
My point is that it's not only the potential readers/commenters you are losing now, but also potential stories as well. Those of us working in the community would be much more willing to suggest story ideas if we felt certain that we were not subjecting those individuals to the type of comments that have become far too common here.
I'd like to see a more diverse offering of stories posted (like Marilyn R's work), and I hope this change is a move in that direction.
If a commenter is being racist or sexist, don't other commenters criticize that and give it a smack? If someone is being a racist tool, isn't it better to keep it there and either criticize or ridicule the hell out of it?
"Those of us working in the community would be much more willing to suggest story ideas if we felt certain that we were not subjecting those individuals to the type of comments that have become far too common here."
Gretchen, life offers precious few guarantees. I don't think it's possible for any public forum to give a promise that there will be no negative repercussion to participation. For example, as a BRO author and commenter I've gotten positive and negative comments addressed to me. I've also gotten "hate mail" both here on BRO and in my private email box. That's the risk we all take when we join in the conversation. The internet isn't 100% anonymous.
I understand your desire to avoid making your students a target. We all have to weigh the pros of getting involved against the cons and decide for ourselves if the benefit outweighs the risk, and even then you're taking a chance.
It's hilarious! You delete anything you don't like! BRO, what are you afraid of? That we'll see you are poser journalists?
"Glad to hear it. I went into the Village Beer Merchant last night and mentioned Buffalo Rising and the guy working there said he saw that someone complained about the number of articles written on his place. I was so embarrassed I didn't know what to say to the guy."
We should all be embarrassed that the tiny crumb of good news that is one store opening in a region of 1MM people deserves in depth coverage of 10 articles. It makes us all look small.
Pundit,
The problem is not the one-off comment here and there. Recently, comment threads have been taken over by malicious posters. One recent WCP comment section was pretty much taken over by one poster writing racist and unsubstantiated drivel. None of the posts being deleted and discussed have been written in the spirit of debate and exchange of information.
Why does everyone always try to miss the point of BRO article posts! Comment if you have a comment to add (about the article - may seems obvious, but oft lost in this crowd). Get your own dern website if you feel the need quit your A.D.D. meds and rant uncontrollably like a cranked-up 12 year-old tourette case study.
Oh, FYI - newspapers (the original land of journalists) get 100s of letters (i.e. "posts" for those of you who have never actually felt the cool damp of newsprint) each day. Those fascists print less than a dozen a day.
BRO might consider enhancing their account validation process. My housemates and I have at least a dozen aliases on BRO, some to post legit comments and others to have fun with. We all know that this isn't uncommon on BRO.
It's in the interest of BRO to continue the proliferation of usernames, it gives off the air of more than a dozen readers. The more aliases, the busier this joint looks and the easier it is to sell ads. It's pretty simple.
@STEEL:
I guess "unsubstantiated drivel" is somewhat subjective. From what I can gather from that thread, someone indicated that you can't get business done in Buffalo unless you know somebody. Well, it sure does seem that people who are well-connected politically, or donate money to the right politician or political club get preferential treatment. Especially in the Casey Brown administration.
As for the racism, that's just garbage. I personally think it reflects badly on the person who posted, and no one else. Deleting it accomplishes nothing. It doesn't chastise the writer, and it doesn't let others see what a racist tool he/she might be.
But what's telling about this thread is that "off topic" comments are contained herein, but have yet to face removal. What gives? Is the policy dead on arrival? Is there a double-standard at play? I mean, if there's going to be a policy, enforce it consistently and evenhandedly.
My favorite cry is the freedom of speech. You are posting on a privately run site. Where does freedom of speech come into play? You are free to create your own site and state your opinions etc. Double post your BRO responses on your own blog to show what important information big bad BRO is editing.
Where's the crime in asking and then enforcing an on topic conversation? It is their site. Start AnarchyBuffaloSinking.com and watch your servers crash over the massive influx of people looking for perpetual Zuba and Sabres jokes, two sentance generic slams, off topic posts to carry over old post arguments or 15 post long inside jokes. There is a multitude of places to comment on the internet. Why does everyone have to accept every single comment regardless of its relevance or intent?
I've been part of too many forums that start out with a nice core of people interested in the topic at hand. They will never all agree but their passion on the subject shows and thus they are respected. After the site starts to grow you are bound to start to get the attantion whores that are there to stir things up and then start to cry about free speech when you ask them for some behavior that we ask of our grade school children.
I think we all want to see passion here, be it pro or con to the subject at hand. I've had some nice back and forth diasagreements here with some posters without it degrading to name calling or personal attacks. Clean up the crap. There is no reason that a majority of threads need to be filled with the same off topic crap.
What about a grave yard thread where off topic posts can be moved to appease the "freedom of speech protectors"? Then all the debate on "why was this deleted" etc could be in one spot. Or could a jump be created in the thread? As in all off-topic posts would still be in the thread but moved to an area below the "what do you think" and "related articles". Then the "all important information" would still around.
It's a shame that we can not control oursleves, but we are human so it is to be expected.
"BTD: You have not been deleted for being anti Buffalo. You can make accusations all you want, and they don't have to be factual, like the one above because you're not a journalist."
Elena, you think you are a journalist? What the hell was that piece of illiterate nonsense? Atop of that, realize that you write for Buffalo Rising! You are no Connie Chung!! Ha! Newell was very good at selling trinkets on Elmwood and playing Ultimate Frisbee. His journalism skills are adapting to "quite good" status. You, however, my friend, are NO journalist! You are waaaay over-board on this one, kid!
-And, I never said I was anti-Buffalo! I said I wasn't pro-Buffalo...please give yourself a "F" for the day and consider writing children's books...
I also forgot to add that the "moderating police" also emerge to question every single edit or non-edit in the spirit of trying to completely understand the policy. Hence the possible "grave yard thread" for the important debating of such.
If you ever put that troll image up again I'm never returning. It gives me the creeps.
John Martin - dead on. But that's what you get these days at Elmwoo... er... BUFFALO Rising.
If comments are becomming a problem because of racist, homophobic, and other offensive content, perhaps only registered members should be allowed to post, as they are on many forums such as this throughout the web. That way, anyone posting threats, ad hominem attacks, blatantly racist/homophobic/incendiary remarks and the like can have posting privileges suspended or completely revoked if they become habitual line-steppers.
And to those holding BR to any "journalistic" standards, don't hold your breath... despite the introduction of the print version, this place continues to be a blog/forum for people with an agenda, and in no way resembles anything "journalistic." There's nothing wrong with that at all, it just is what it is... the blog of several very optimistic, enthusiastic people obsessed with a small slice of Buffalo, NY.
Perhaps the alternative BR people should be aiming for is a comment-free site that occasionally prints reader submissions, linked to a message board where people can discuss articles, problems, solutions, etc.
It seems that with a star ranking system and an "Avoid User" utility, you gave the people the right to police their own community, as it should be. Deleting comments that are not libelous makes you look small and petty.
After all, who would have thought that a site founded upon a principle of parochial elitism and arrogance would create parochially arrogant, elitist, and condescending commenters?
There is frustration from a community who looks out their doors and sees a city and region that looks strikingly similar to the city that existed in 2005 when this site began detailing a "renaissance".
Sure, some politically connected developers have eked out a few renovations which feature heavy subsidies and/or government tenants and the never ending cycle of business openings and closings on Elmwood/Hertel provide enough fodder for a site. In the end, not much has REALLY changed in this area and the "renaissance", much like the much ballyhooed "county tax revolt" has fizzled. As a natural follow on, people (myself included) have taken this site to task for their myopic view on issues in the region.
You have created the problem and now you are trying to hide the symptoms.
BTD - You are 80% of the problem on this site, with your silly verbal attacks and empty threats of violence. You are just a scared little insecure man. What would you do to keep yourself busy at 1:00 in the morning if you couldn't post several dozen comments under several names? You like the reaction, it obviously gives you some sort of enjoyment in your otherwise empty life.
You take your anonymous shots at Elena, Newell, or anyone else who posts here. Do you have the testicular fortitude to put yourself out there like they do? Do you have what it takes to open yourself up to that level of criticism, after all they put their names and reputations on the line for an anonymous worm like you to bash without any recourse. You find it funny, but we see right through you. You couldn't do what they do if you tried, so you mock them for being more successful and more famous than you.
I agree that you aren't anti-buffalo, and you aren't pro-buffalo, in fact you really aren't much of anything. You are the worst type of bully, one who hits, then runs and hides. You wouldn't say a fraction of what you post here if you had to put your name on it, so cut some slack to those who are brave enough to put their names on their articles.
All I can say is Thank You! The obnoxious comments, extreme negativity, personal attacks, etc all seem to be from the same small group. I'll certainly read more often when they are gone. Good riddance.
John Martin - again, dead on. Couldn't have recounted the life of BR any better.
marketrate - sorry, but people who run a blog about the goings-on in Buffalo aren't "brave" by any stretch of the imagination. Especially when a significant portion of the "writers" post under aliases to begin with. Talk about a poor choice of words...
And simply because they take the time to do what they do doesn't remove them from the realm of criticism, it puts them smack dab in the middle of it. If you're going to take the time and effort to express an opinion through a forum such as this, you're opening yourself up to criticism from all angles... and if the BR folks weren't prepared for it, then I just feel sorry for them.
"You couldn't do what they do if you tried, so you mock them for being more successful and more famous than you."
I don't want to delve into "personal attacks" by any stretch of the imagination, but I think calling Newell or Elena famous or successful is a stretch by any interpretation.
@Marketrate: Unless your full name is Market Rate, criticizing BTD's use of an anonymous screen name is sort of the pot calling the kettle black, no? I don't see any information in your BRO profile identifying who you really are.
As for BTD's "fame", it seems that the last several comments you've left have all been directed to BTD. Maybe you just have a crush on him/her.
I'm glad this is finally happening. I've resisted many times the urge to vent my frustrations at what has become a stage for some people to show how clever they are at bashing everyone. At first I must say that I was a bit leary at the thought of censoring any postings but as I read the comments to this story, some of the offenders seem to have made a case against themselves...just look at some of the immaturity abound in these posts. No need to call anyone out by name. It's obvious who the offenders are and have been.
Good riddance. Now let's get back to enjoying the articles (I could care less who they are written by) and enjoying some healthy debate about them and offering constructive criticism and comments.
With an ‘Avoid User’ and a ‘Report this’ button in every comment, this new policy seems like overkill to me. Upon first reading the post this morning, I instantly made the following comparison: I liken this decision to the three men in a room situation we are subject to with regard to decision making for NYS. Here we have 3 people in a room making decisions for the entire BRO community, of which commenters are a HUGE part.
Announcing this new policy before having this conversation (active input from commenters currently in progress in this thread) is also something that does not sit well with me. It is as if our reactions/opinions are (were) not of concern when crafting this reactionary policy.
I have been checking the thread periodically throughout the day and have made the following observations:
Many comments on this very thread could be edited out based upon the policy as explained in the post. For example, while I laughed aloud at the various Simpson’s Comic Book guy comments (dead on especially when re-read aloud), they were not on-topic and could potentially even be considered to be unsubstantiated claims about an individual.
Living Forge posted “Huzzah!” This does not contribute to the conversation, does it? So why is it still there?
No more foul language, but WTF is allowed? WTF!
Davvid had a valid point in his comment, but was snarkily responded to 8 minutes later by STEEL. Is STEEL’s comment valid for its subtlety or because it originated from one of BRO’s 3 men in a room? Perception is everything.
Terrapin Tim posted about liking the picture. Great, but does not contribute to the conversation. I could go on and on, but then the likelihood of this comment getting booted goes up and up, so I’ll stop soon, I promise.
Please, please, please do not delete this comment because then I will only have 2 strikes left, and well, who knows when I might slip up! And WTF (hey if pundit can do it and not get booted, then so can I, right?) do the stars and ratings mean anyway? Does one wish for more or less stars, higher or lower ratings? Do they signify anything? Anything at all?
PS: Elena also said in the original post:
I ask that all comments worthy of a strike be directed to me at elena@buffalorising.com.
Well, then have one of your techies direct the ‘Report This’ button to that address and be done with it.
I'd like to report lulu. She hurt my feelings with her criticism of this thread. :-(
Great! Thank you!
I like reading different sides to an issue...but 100 posts between a few people being horrible to each other and anyone that gets in their way? No way. And I've stopped forwarding articles too. Its not just the mean content either, its also about there being way too many posts to read.... Maybe everyone can spout (without being racist, swearing, hugely off topic, etc) and then BR can edit down to representative comments that stay online, and then cut off more postings to keep it readable.
Whatever BR does, I think it will be an improvement. Thanks again.
I've always said about BuffaloRising...you could announce that Microsoft is moving their worldheadquarters to Buffalo, creating 10,000 jobs of $100K or more...and the same old BuffaloRising people would just complain and go off on their own tangents.
Hey JohnMartin...if you say the BRO staff is unsuccessful, then you must throw yourself into the "miserable" category...cause that's all your posts reveal.
This is a very slippery slope as al alo said. This is a self policed community (Avoid User), and people are respected based upon their contributions. Some people here I may not respect due to their empty remarks towards others. But the fact remains, they can post what they wish, knowing full well the consequences. I can understand editing comments with racial slurs or threats, but language and other things is a path that the poster can chose. Most of the people who read BR are anywhere from being in High School or Retirement. I don't think our virgin ears will be pierced by hearing someone shout $*&% that! From a business standpoint, bad move. It's all about the clicks, and you're making an assumption (I believe someone said this earlier) that you're catering to a larger crowd than you're losing.
I fully support BR, and have defended writers from blatent disrespect. But that's the internet. This is an online community of people who should know what to expect. Put a warning on your registrar if you must that this is a PG-13ish website.
I can see this going bad, let's hope for the best here and not over censor things.
Perry - great point.
you could announce that Microsoft is moving their worldheadquarters to Buffalo, creating 10,000 jobs of $100K or more...and the same old BuffaloRising people would just complain and go off on their own tangents
Your're right, the same old usual suspects here would complain if Microsoft didn't build right up to the street with 1st floor retail and upstairs residential, or if they had too much surface parking and curb cuts enabling the car culture. Not to mention their carbon footprint, and of course them not being locally owned. And if they put their new headquarters in Amherst...
Moderation is essential to any successful online discussion forum. Too many forums become cesspools of trolls and flames, while those forums and sites which can effectively manage user-generated content (ie, message board posts) tend to be much more successful.
It is really quite a shame to see some of the comments here, but it's not surprising. You'll see virtually the same type of comments made on any other forum about any other subject. Cars, sports, video games, computers, politics, etc. all have their trolls. From a moderation standpoint, it's best to eliminate them as quickly as possible. Ban them by username and IP as soon as they show up, and delete their posts. Do not allow them to establish a reputation or gain a following.
What would make me happiest would be if the community was large enough to be self-policing, for instance somewhere like slashdot or plastic.com. People vote for or against comments (like the stars we have in place) and then users can choose their browsing level. They could choose to only see 5-star comments, or any custom level, including seeing it all, including the nasty stuff down in one-star comments.
Unfortunately, I don't think enough people who want to see real discussion and debate are involved enough in this online community to make it feasible at this point in time.
In any case, I think this moderation is long overdue and will foster civil debate. It'd be nice to see someone complain and be able to pull it off without resorting to namecalling and vulgarity to illustrate a point.
{Deleted for not echoing the affluent white yuppie Elmwood Village sentiments}
Are we now limited to only that which could be uttered on Sesame Street and is approved by a velvet Elmwood Village version of La Costra Nostra?
Wow that troll is prettty ugly, the facial expressions look a tad psychotic. Maybe an appropriate name for him could be Willy; no that doesn't seem to fit.... oh I got it how about Wally
No, ChocolateShake, moderation based on content does not appear to be the objective, only moderation based on presentation. Criticism and disagreement, when presented in a mature manner would be welcome, and if you are interested in serious debate, good moderation is quite important.
http://blog.pentagram.com/archives/PS_Blog_Sm.jpg - Maybe you guys should take a look at this, it's how the Internet works.
This is a good move, in my view, and I think those most affected by it are those who did the most to make it inevitable. As many have pointed out in previous discussions of this, other blogs and forums (such as the blogs hosted by the fishwrapper in My Fair City) have similar decency policies and occasionally have to take the step of banning the recalcitrant - as it's their forum, they have the right. Frankly, I think Elena and Newell aren't getting the credit they deserve for being so tolerant for so long - trying anything and everything short of strict enforcement.
I came face-to-face with the issue last year: after posting a comment that I would never patronize Pano's (and that many of my Buffalo friends feel the same way) I was a flame target of those who told me I was a piece of crap, and to stay out of Buffalo. More recently, I've seen others find themselves consistent targets of attempts to intimidate, and even seen several direct threats of physical harm.
In reality, that's what this is about - can't really see that Newell and Elena had much choice (and they've given plenty of fair warning) - despite any attempt (even by those whose work I respect) to recast this as a 'freedom of dissent' issue. Over the last several years (as described in the George Johnson online article mentioned earlier) BRO has, in fact, become a significant Buffalo institution - I was delighted to see it figure in Mark Goldman's most recent book - and the folks who run it have, and will have, the difficult responsibility of acting accordingly. I think this policy is a sign of positive things to come - and look forward to 2008 being a banner year for BRO, Buffalo, and all our upstate communities.
OK - marketrate and others, you need to realize that their are many types of people in Buffalo and in the world. Everyone doesn't share your view points on every topic. I disagree with the "poisitive attitude will get us there" belief. I believe in never being satisfied. Never satisfied is a quote form our city's one-time wealthiest man; recently deseased, Bob Rich, Sr.
You have the option to report this and/or delete it. It's your site Newell and you gave Elena the journalistic freedom to add/delete as she wishes. However if any of you want to meet to discuss city topics, I will be at Filippos on Hertel @ 7pm. My name is Joe. That's right, the wizard is willing to come from behind the curtain and I'm willing to back up my beliefs. Please do stop by.
Now, go ahead and delete this, Elena, as you most certainly will. I'm done with your crummy site - it only frustrates me to a point that I consider moving back to Tampa every time I'm on.
JohnMartin, RisingDamp666, nonono, I'll miss you guys. gaustad - see you for dinner @ 7p. I'm in the mood for meatballs and gravy.
Report this