Comments on: Chad’s Comment-worthiness Ranking Scale

By: chadmyers

chadmyers — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:27:37 +0000

@Rob: I didn’t do the final tally, but the repeated use of the ‘F’ word tanked your comment, There was no call for it and I didn’t appreciate it.

By: Rob G

Rob G — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:15:12 +0000

Hey Chad,

Well I guess since your next post has gone out, you’ll have had time to review the comments posted here, and I’ve got a sneaky feeling my last one isn’t going to see the light of day. I began to wonder why that was so… I wondered if this Chad guy even had a sense of humour, and then thought, well of course he must – he’s been advocating TDD for ages now…(seriously kidding there man!)

I don’t have a copy of what I posted but I must’ve been in one of *those moods* that day and crossed a line (or two) – OK OK…I admit I used a fair few “naughty” words, and in my defense I was merely trying to test out your system and hopefully poke some holes in it. Either way, I apologise if you feel it was over the top…

Anyways, all jokes aside, I didn’t want you to think I was just some troll on a fly-by comment spree. From what I recall, I was actually quite serious about some of the points I made, mainly because I think censorship in general is becoming a bit of a joke these days and the last thing I need is another nanny looking after my feelings.

But I digress…I’m pretty sure I can put up with your comment filter if it means I can keep coming back for the quality content you post here! Keep up the good work man.

All the best,
Rob G

By: chadmyers

chadmyers — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 22:06:01 +0000

@Sharon:

If it has a point, even if it may be slightly or even way off topic, I’d let it be.

By: Sharon J. Cichelli

Sharon J. Cichelli — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 20:40:45 +0000

I never know what to do with the comments that are, in essence, “I have read the title of your post, and I have things to say about this theme. I will expound upon them. La, la, la.” Y’know, the cocktail-party equivalent of “Enough about you, let’s talk about me.” Sure, they’re on-topic, _technically_, but they aren’t really germane, and they certainly aren’t part of a conversation. Do you have any advice on handling those?

By: Frank Quednau

Frank Quednau — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 21:17:03 +0000

Reminds me a little bit of John Baez’ crackpot index – http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

By: mendicant

mendicant — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 17:40:08 +0000

So…. does this mean that if Oren signed a comment ‘Ayende’ that he’d be at -100 off the bat? :D

By: Kyle Baley

Kyle Baley — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 17:32:39 +0000

“+50 Private email left (for the blog author and site admins to be able to contact this person if necessary)”

The comment form for Los Techies doesn’t have a spot for e-mail addresses

By: Jonathan Oliver

Jonathan Oliver — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 17:28:16 +0000

No comment.

By: SHODAN

SHODAN — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 06:19:44 +0000

There should also be some kind of negative rating for useless/pointless posts as well. (Thus rendering this post well below -100)

By: Siderite

Siderite — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 06:18:54 +0000

I think the scale might good for yuo, but most of your points are lost on me. On the blog I appreciate any comment that is on topic. If need calls, the users can swear all they want, either me or some concept of the post. Some people post off topic comments that are maybe prompted by my failure to make obvious contact details. While I like associating a real person with a comment, I am not much for publishing my real life information so I would be a hypocrite to ask of my users. And the term “meaningful words” is as vague as it gets. Counting them also feels useless, as one better word may be better than 10 good ones.

I would rate high first the on-topic-ness (speaking of meaningful words), then the value added to the blog post (like answering some other comment or doing additional research or linking to a relevant site) and then for how it makes me feel.

Yeah, that’s about it. Some objective value of the comment being on topic, a more or less subjective rating of the value added for all readers and then a real subjective rating of the value added for me personally, either emotionally or technically (like providing extra effort that I would have done).