Since the comments section of a news website is a major source of engagement, why not charge to make comments? Wouldn't this discourage the worst of the them?
Getting Rid of Comments on Vice.com
161–170 of 233 posts
Re: Getting Rid of Comments on Vice.com
#162no comments = fake news
Re: Getting Rid of Comments on Vice.com
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
This does not actually seem to describe the state of the internet generally. I gravitate more and more towards little pocket-universe parts of the network that are essentially invisible, but (apropos of the article) things like comment sections are quite often the functional equivalent of a giant neon ASSHOLES WELCOME sign above the door.
You just have to remind yourself that the assholes are just shadows on the cave wall, the same as you are to them. And again, the cave entrance is never more than a few steps behind you.
BRB, walling off various cave entrances.
Re: Getting Rid of Comments on Vice.com
#164Many sites have been closing their comments section. It seems to me that the purpose is to further constrict dissent and control the message. Rather than finding a technical solution or one that involves moderation, these sites just shut the community out and become a broadcast medium once again. A notable removal of a comments section was NPR's shutdown right around the time of the Democratic National Convention. Th…
> It seems to me that the purpose is to further constrict dissent and control the message. Insofar as "control the message" means "we are tired of anonymous people in our comments section doxxing our authors and other people, and vile, racist attacks on our authors and groups of people", then yes, this is an attempt to "control the message." > Since NPR clearly had a pro-Hillary agenda, the comments section had to go…
1. use the anonymous comment system to post fake threats against yourself and/or racist rants
2. use the comments from #1 to argue that anonymous comment sections should be shut down
3. profit!
Re: Getting Rid of Comments on Vice.com
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It seems to me that the purpose is to further constrict dissent and control the message. Insofar as "control the message" means "we are tired of anonymous people in our comments section doxxing our authors and other people, and vile, racist attacks on our authors and groups of people", then yes, this is an attempt to "control the message." > Since NPR clearly had a pro-Hillary agenda, the comments section had to go…
1. use the anonymous comment system to post fake threats against yourself and/or racist rants 2. use the comments from #1 to argue that anonymous comment sections should be shut down 3. profit!
Internet writers are busy enough without having to maintain fake racist diatribes against themselves in their own comment sections. I don't see what "profit" any writer gets from shutting down the comments section; they clearly wanted to keep it open, despite the numerous accounts they had to ban. This is ludicrous.
Re: Getting Rid of Comments on Vice.com
#166I think there actually might be a market here for Reddit... Create a subreddit for a news site, and each new article on the news site automatically gets a new post on the subreddit. Embed the relevant post on the news site. Since "karma" is transitive across Reddit and across news sites, users are slightly less likely to troll. You could also do this with some sort of reputation system across websites (Disqus could a…
I'm creating something to fill the void left by Vice. Estimated release around Boxing Day
Re: Getting Rid of Comments on Vice.com
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interestingly, this was almost the exact strategy that brought down digg back in the day. They tried to partner with some news sites to auto-submit each of their stories to digg, and their users revolted. Of course, they had a looser structure than reddit does and so the auto-posted "professional" posts began to dominate the main feed, while reddit has the opportunity to keep them within their own subreddit.
Posting to Digg's front page and a new subreddit are completely different beasts, though. EDIT: a non-default subreddit.
yes, that's what the second half of my comment says.
Re: Getting Rid of Comments on Vice.com
#168I don't buy the "troll" argument. Every site has low-value comments and people either ignore them or down-vote them. They're not an issue. Take YouTube for example - they are known to have a cancerous comment section with little-to-no moderation, yet people don't avoid YouTube, they just avoid reading the comments on most channels. The real problem for VICE is when comments aren't from trolls - when they're debunking…
> they just avoid reading the comments
This. But usually when the content is good and thoughtful ,(AKA void of controversy or outrage), the comment can be useful. But otherwise frankly Youtube comment is a worst place than reddit itself.
Re: Getting Rid of Comments on Vice.com
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really haven't seen much evidence that media professionals expressing shock at, for example, Brexit and Trump's election are engaged in some strong form of deception. There's a reasonable set of critiques about media incentives and behavior here, but I think this is a case where cynicism of this kind can obscure observable reality: The majority of people really didn't expect these outcomes.
The point is that the media were in a bubble where everyone they talked to had the same views as themselves.
That is absolutely a true thing you can say about the media and the election. They came to believe that Trump would not win the election, by being in a bubble where everyone they talked to had the same views as themselves.
But that is a totally different point than, and is actually logically incompatible with, the assertion that they privately believed that Trump _would_ win the election, but expressed otherwise to the public.
Re: Getting Rid of Comments on Vice.com
#170I think many people have realized that the costs (filtering & moderation) vs. benefits (community engagement) of comment sections just don't make sense for most websites. I suspect that for comment sections to be good the users need to actually be invested in the 'forum' they're posting in. Without any skin in the game (reputation or fear of moderation) there is little incentive for most users to add value and the sy…
This actually a good argument toward shifting commenting into a paid subscription offering. Give access to the site free of ads and allow you to comment on articles.
This. A lot of news outlets in Europe actually do that. Only paid subscribers can comment. It's a good compromise. It reduces trolling AND finances moderation.