| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
 Moderation for ICANNWatch?
posted by jon on Sunday July 15 2001, @03:36PM
For about the past month, we've been noticing a bunch of comments posted
to ICANNWatch that are off-topic, incoherent or just plain trolls. This
is causing us to wonder about moving to institute some moderation by the
editors. And, while we have your attention, a few announcements.
|
|
 |
|
|
If we did move to editor moderation, it would work like this: All
signed comments would start out as level +1, and anonymous comments as level 0. The editors, however, would reserve
the right to downgrade to -1 anonymous comments that were (in our opinion)
off-topic, incoherent or otherwise useless. Readers could set their
preferences to display, or to hide, the downgraded comments. The default
threshold setting would be 0, so that folks who wanted to see the
downgraded comments would have to affirmatively set their preferences to
do so. (Our current software has only very limited moderation
capabilities, and doesn't support any sort of workable user moderation. It
does support moderation by editors only, which is why we picked that
option.)
We think that, under the circumstances, taking this step would make the
comment pages a lot more useful and coherent. We don't want to do it,
though, without checking to see whether you think it's a good idea.
So please respond -- let us know whether you support this.
And while we've got your attention:
Please submit stories. We
can't do it without you. If you're commenting on a story, please take the
trouble to register and get a nym (and use it consistently); it's not very
illuminating to see twenty comments on a story, all filed by "anonymous."
Now that some some of the new gTLDs are in the ICANN root, we think it's
time to split the "new gTLDs" category into two parts: "new gTLDs" and "gTLD hopefuls".
Any gTLD actually entered into the ICANN root will be a "new
gTLD"; we consider the others hopefuls, and subject to ICANN's
contractual demands, until they are in the ICANN root. The "new gTLDs" will keep the "Welcome to the Internet" icon, and the hopefuls will get these inquiring little doggies.
And finally, if you run into a software bug, please report it with a
note to webmaster@icannwatch.org. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
[ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]
|
|
| | |
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Moderation for ICANNWatch?
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 11 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
|
|
I support this. My mod level is set at 0 because there are some anon comments worth reading (even without the bug) and I halfways assumed without looking that some were already being modded down to -1. Of course this just means that the netkooks will get fake or throwaway addresses and signup but so be it. At least it will be easier to tell one nutbar from another.
Oh, and the puppies are cute. That's puppies, not puppets. ;-) -g
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
I second the motion. The number of trash postings is clearly out of control.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| - 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
|
|
|
|
Yes, I agree too, and I can certainly do without most of the anonymous postings so far. (Do I get a -1 for "me too" posting? ;))
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
I cannot agree more.
I browse ICANN Watch several times each day. However, I have very limited time. The ccTLD and New.Net marketing/promotion, among other trash postings, wastes my time and does not add to the discussion.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Britney Spears has nice tits and I am not opposed to your irrelevant comment.
But, when the entire post is not germane to the topic, it should be downgraded so I can choose to not view it.
According to the editors' description, you could still chose to view all of the totally irrelevant posts.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| - 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
|
|
|
|
I have used the above comment as a test of our new moderation capability. To see it you will need to set your threshold at -1, either near the top of this page or -- if you want to set your threshold permanently -- go to "login" then click on
"comment", then set the threshold you watn, then click on "save changes".
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| | 2 replies beneath your current threshold. |
Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|
