Revised Comment Policy

Perhaps it was naivite all along that let me think we could leave our comments wide open.  It seemed to be in the spirit of the blogosphere and was something we were going to endorse in the book.  But, look around the prominent blogsites.  You start seeing some really ugly stuff, more often than not, from people who refuse to identify themselves accurately before they slither back under the rocks from which they came. Scoble has been particularly hard hit recently and it is no secret that it has taken the joy of blogging away from him, and even his most loyal supporters hope that his self-imposed sabbatical will help him to lighten up. I don't know what he will decide to do about Scobleizer. That's all his choice.

Over here, we have not been that hard hit.  But two incidents have left me thinking.  First, were the comments of someone who has started to boycott us, somewhat to our relief.  He prided himself in being harsh on other commenters who took views he did not like.  He often wrote more on this site about his views than either Robert or me. His comments were so abrasive that people started email their thoughts to us, because they did not want to be subjected to his abuses. After thinking it over, those incidents have led me to the first change in our Comment policy:

If you came into my home and were rude to another guest, I would ask you to stop.  If you continued to be rude, I would ask you to leave.  From this point forward, this is what I will do.  If I feel you are being abusive, hogging the conversation or otherwise discouraging the open exchange of legitimate points of view.  I will ask you to be more polite.  If you ignore the request, I will ban you from further Comments. I call the the Living Room rule and I will enforce it subjectively.

Secondly, I am increasingly bothered by Anonymous Comments. If I don't know who you are, I don't know where you are coming from.  Anonymous comments have always bothered me, but they got increasingly disturbing, when we turned this space over to the family and friends of David Koch who was missing on a Vancouver mountainside. An anonymous blogger diverted the conversation to attack the search and rescue teams who were working themselves into exhaustion trying to find the missing editor, who would eventually be found dead. Since that time, I have had little tolerance for drive-by cheap shot artists, who show up on this site.  They are dwarfed by the behavior of a creep named Arnold, who among others, have been attacking Scoble like a pack of Chihuahuas at the buttocks of a blogosphere giant.

From this point forward, I am banning all anonymous comments. If you have something to say, and you want to be credible, you will need to identify yourself, and I encourage you also to identify where you are coming from, so that others may assess how strongly they wish to value your opinions.

If you disagree with this policy, please post a reply--but just a reminder, sign it with a url, so that I can see who you are--or you will just be wasting both of our times.

Comments

[Jeremy Wright]

I'd think you'd be advocating comment policies for companies. Good move.

[Papa G - it's what my grandkids call me]

Bravo!

[Tara 'Miss Rogue' Hunt]

Good on ya!

Personally, I think that anonymous comments demonstrate someone who doesn't actually want to join the conversation, but speaks up anyways - almost stifling the flow.

I think that Robert should remove all Arnold (and other negative) comments from his site. There is opposition to points and then there is that poison. None of them are interested in collaborative efforts. Besides, keeping them there reminds Robert (and others who have experienced this spam) of the negativity of the blogosphere. Removing them is like removing a wart...It will prevent spreading the virus.

T.

[Curt]

Shel:

I think this is a perfectly appropriate policy. On our site, for hopefully obvious reasons, we can't do it. But for most sites, I think it's fine. It's one thing to be somewhat more free online; it's quite another to mouth off in a way that would get you a shot in the chops if you did it on the street.

Never apologize for ruling,
Curt

[Jake]

Sounds fine by me. And I love the new term - Living Room Rule!

Personally, I have never liked anonymous comments at all.

[Eric Eggertson]

Shel: I hope you meant that people should leave an e-mail address or URL. Believe it or not, there are still people who don't have a web site or a blog, and they deserve to be included in the conversation.

[Shaded]

Its a shame that a few jerks can ruin the fun of the rest of us. I choose to keep my identity private, for private reasons, though I will never use it as an excuse to be anything less than civil.

This does not mean I am against your registered comment policy. You have to do what you have to do to avoid the jerks.

Imagine if nobody ever stole a car - there would never be a need for car keys. Arguing against registered comments is just as pointless as arguing against car keys.

I'd like to wish you guys continued success in your endeavors.

[shel Israel]

Shaded left a url and appears to be both real and pleasant. I'm leaving the comment up.

[shel Israel]

Eric,

An email address will be fine, Eric. Thanks for the clarification.

[Shaded]

That's just it Shel, I would not have been offended if you did remove my comment.

First you need to define anonymous because it is simplicity itself to get an email address or a Space on MSN spaces - or probably even a typepad blog. The email address I left is frequently a@b.com or notevenclose@localhost

Instead of defining what is truly anonymous, I recommend a policy that allows you remove comments that you deem inappropriate or destructive, and make comments as complex a sign up process as necessary to avoid the anonymous rude background noise that is the internet.

Sure you may loose comments from myself or Eric here, but if all your time goes into authenticating users, you don't have time to produce content. Our small contribution does not outweigh the value of your time to produce content worthy of commenting on.

Hope that makes sense.

Regards,

Shaded

[shel Israel]

So shaded, why don't you come out from the shadows and identify yourself?

[Geoff]

I like the way that Jason Calacanis handles comments, until you are trusted your comment isnt posted until your email address has been verified.
There are many scenarios where you may not wish to reveal your 'real' name openly.

[Shaded]

Its nice and cool in the shade. I don't care for the spotlight.

If my persona "Shaded" becomes well known it will be because people find value in what I have to say not because of who is saying it.

If my persona "Shaded" becomes vilified, it will never be associated with my actual identity.

In many ways the internet refines who we are into the most important parts. In that sense I've identified my hopes and dreams in my blog more than some that give their real name.

Life is more interesting when seasoned with a bit of mystery.

Before I encourage someone to go to the effort of figuring out who I am from writing style or IP address look ups, I want to say; if your expecting someone famous, you'll probably be disappointed.

Regards,

Shaded

[orcmid]

I'm for it. House rules demanding civility work just fine for me. Well said, too. Thanks, Shel.

[Trevor Cook]

I think anonymous commenting is highly dubious and I also think using someone else's blog to be abusive about the host blogger is plain awful. I'm a highly critical person, as you know Shel, when I don't like something I criticise it, but I never leave anonymous comments and I try to be blunt but not personally disparaging (though I'm sure this is a line I've crossed too often). I also think that people who want to be highly critical of someone or something then they should get their own website and do it there with links etc and if people want to read their stuff then they can do so. I reckon Dave Winer has always been right on this - if you want to be part of the blogosphere, then get a blog and make a real contribution.
I don't know what its like in the US but in Australia what happened to Robert is almost inevitable. When I worked in national politics we called it the pendulum because when ever the media started praising us we knew it was only a matter of time before the same media would started criticising us savagely (among journalists this sort of behaviour which is borderline psychotic to normal folk is called 'balance')
In some ways of course abuse goes with the territory, its the price paid by many people in the public spotlight.
I don't get many comments so I don't suffer from the abuse. Though last night someone did leave a criticism which inter alia said I should get a real job. Which is like being whipped with a wet lettuce.
When I read all this media last year about how Robert was the new human face of Microsoft it was only going to be a matter of time before he got targeted in a big way.
The really sad thing is that of the A-listers, Robert has probably done more to encourage ordinary bloggers than just about anyone.
The other sad thing is that this bad behaviour by anon. bloggers plays right into the 'command and control' corporate types who can say look what they did to scobleizer.
I think he should get rid of comments or edit them and ban the abusers.

[shel Israel]

Trevor,

Thanks. Although we have most certainly disagreed in the past, I have never found you comments to be anything but courteous. I love a good debate. I was raised watching the bebates of William F. Buckley and John Kenneth Galbraith. They shaped who I am and how I think.

[B.L. Ochman]

Bravo shel.
Well stated, necessary and reasonable.

[Eric Eggertson]

I've only read Scoble's comments a couple of times. The comments section is like a big public playground for anyone with a gripe. As with any unsupervised playground, eventually someone gets hurt.

I can understand the desire not to devote time you don't have to moderating comments, etc. I think the policy Shel is introducing is a nice balance between actively moderated comments and a free-for-all.

[Donna Tocci]

Your "Living Room Rule" is perfectly named and thought out. You aren't saying that people can't disagree with you, just that they need to identify themselves in some manner.

When this entry is no longer on the front page, you may want to have a permanent link to the LRR on the right side near your calendar so anyone new who comes across your site can reference it before they post.

[Sid The Fish]

It's not the anonymity that's the problem. It's the content. A determined rude asshole can create fake email addresses till hell freezes over and make your life miserable. An honorable person can have perfectly good reasons for needing to cloak online comments. Unfairly or not, someone may judge me professionally by comments that I leave on a blog or a discussion board. No one should ever have to ask "Why do you want to remain anonymous?" That should be their right. Judge me by my deeds and words, not by my name.

The real point of your rule is to enforce basic civilized discourse. Concentrate on that, not on the anonymity part.

[EricB]

Shel,
Your "Living Room Rule" reminds me of a rule in a popular game room when I was young. Posted on the wall was a sign that said "Treat the pinball machines like they were your mother. If you treat your mother badly, then we don't want you here!" This did and still does strike me as a way of keeping control when arguing/debating things. You can disagree (or even play devil's advocate) and get your point across without being rude or resorting to name calling or making personal attacks. If you feel you must do one of these things, then you are either not trying to make a point, or you have conceeded your position and are now trying to win the debate by causing your opponent pain.

Anyway, I really like your rule and think it makes great sense.

Later,

EricB

[David R]

Makes perfect sense to me!

[Ivan Chew]

Shel -- I, too, advocate using real names or at least an identifier. One thing bothers me alot though: How to do stop someone from faking an identity by typing any URL or ID?

[shel Israel]

Ivan,

Google them. If that person has no online history, then chance are they are trying to dupe you.

[steven streight aka vaspers the grate]

I know that I have often posted comments that were radical and challenging, but I have never flamed, baited, or trolled.

To pampered, insecure people even the mildest question or the sweetest suggestion can seem like "abuse".

A triumphalist tone is sometimes mistaken for super aggression.

Looks like you've figured out how to prevent and eliminate comment and trackback spam fairly well.

I'm cheering you guys on, even when I snarl.

:^)