http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/20/comments-are-worth-the-trouble/ Sun, 23 Aug 2009 21:40:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/20/comments-are-worth-the-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-30 shacker Wed, 25 Jan 2006 19:45:36 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/20/comments-are-worth-the-trouble/#comment-30 There is a flip side to this - I work with some blogging clients who see comment registration as an impediment to the free exchange of ideas. And when we have experimented with registration to combat comment spam, we've seen the number of legitimate comments drop precipitously. Unfortuately, registration is definitely a barrier. Yes, it weeds out the serious from the casual commenters, but it also significantly reduces overall legitimate commenting activity. There is a flip side to this – I work with some blogging clients who see comment registration as an impediment to the free exchange of ideas. And when we have experimented with registration to combat comment spam, we’ve seen the number of legitimate comments drop precipitously. Unfortuately, registration is definitely a barrier. Yes, it weeds out the serious from the casual commenters, but it also significantly reduces overall legitimate commenting activity.

]]> http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/20/comments-are-worth-the-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-29 Washington Post Still Not Getting It | Center for Citizen Media: Blog Mon, 23 Jan 2006 11:22:57 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/20/comments-are-worth-the-trouble/#comment-29 [...] The newspaper didn’t respond to my e-mailed query, but I did hear from someone who read my previous posting on this bizarre controversy has a reason to know what’s going on there. This person wrote: I do not believe post.com has any kind of registration system in place for comments. It’s basically a simple “enter name, enter comment, submit” system. There’s no e-mail check of any kind. And it’s definitely not linked to their site registration system. [...] [...] The newspaper didn’t respond to my e-mailed query, but I did hear from someone who read my previous posting on this bizarre controversy has a reason to know what’s going on there. This person wrote: I do not believe post.com has any kind of registration system in place for comments. It’s basically a simple “enter name, enter comment, submit” system. There’s no e-mail check of any kind. And it’s definitely not linked to their site registration system. [...]

]]> http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/20/comments-are-worth-the-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-28 remove Sat, 21 Jan 2006 18:31:33 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/20/comments-are-worth-the-trouble/#comment-28 correction. actually commenting seems to work on some of the WaPo blogs, sample of the form <a href="http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/worldopinionroundup/2006/01/uk_denies_bushb.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>. correction. actually commenting seems to work on some of the WaPo blogs, sample of the form here.

]]> http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/20/comments-are-worth-the-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-27 remove Fri, 20 Jan 2006 23:38:05 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/20/comments-are-worth-the-trouble/#comment-27 the commenting system that used to be in place over at washington post blogs (i actively used it) was on in which you had to fill out your name (required field), valid email (required field), and web site address (optional). no formal registration existed. i certainly agree with you on the commenting issue, which i blogged about <a href="http://www.thedailybackground.com/2006/01/20/political-blog-trouble-over-at-wash-post/" rel="nofollow">here</a>. the commenting system that used to be in place over at washington post blogs (i actively used it) was on in which you had to fill out your name (required field), valid email (required field), and web site address (optional). no formal registration existed. i certainly agree with you on the commenting issue, which i blogged about here.

]]>