Friday, April 09, 2010

Improving The Enquirer's Commenting

Anybody who reads the Fishwrap's comments or, even the Letters to the Editor, knows that SW Ohio is batshit crazy (not to mention clairvoyant). While I try to bring some semblance of order to the boards,

I frequently feel like I am playing a Bob Kane's Oliver Wendell Douglas in a Marquis DeSade's Hooterville.
Short of requiring Rorschach tests before posting or installing breathalyzers on poster's computers, I think a few other measures could be taken to improve the commenting on the Fishwrap boards.
First off, improve the censoring. It appears to be done by MCSEs. Law students may not be any better. Dunno if theologist types would be any good, either. maybe chickens....
Second, require the poster to answer a question about the original article before posting. This will stop the poster from posting a knee jerk reaction to the headline (which was meant to be elicit a knee jerk reaction in the first place).
Third, post comments in the order posted. If there are more than two pages of comments, require the aspiring poster to, at least, click through them before posting. While this wouldn't guarantee the poster reads the preceding comments, it would be a start.
Fourth, a "Are you SURE you want to post this drivel ?" challenge after hitting the submit button would be in order. A second one could be implemented if certain keywords are detected in the post (or, heck, just automated spell checking).
Fifth, make poster's links active. References are important in social/political discourse. You can make the link open in a frame if you don't want readers leaving your site.
Finally, if a commenters comments are deleted 99% of the time (Lee Greewood ?), just ban the sucker.

1 comment:

BossSexy said...

I think a buzzword/phrase screening would be incredibly invaluable. However, it would totally kill my Tuesday night comment section drinking game if I could no longer take a sip every time I saw "Little Steve Driehaus," "NoBAMA," "soclialist," and "typical wRongnut WACKOS."

Since the paper isn't big on reporting anymore, they should just move some of the writers to comment section moderators and run the site like Gawker where consistently intelligent users (read 1% of readers, present company excluded) get a star next to their names, intelligent posts are "promoted" and and "unapproved" comments show up at the bottom of the page.