If we're the benchmark, they're in trouble...

[slappy4428]

From the new annarbor.com ...

"We've spent countless hours wrestling with how to moderate the comments on AnnArbor.com. We looked at how other news organizations do it, ranging from The Christian Science Monitor to The New York Times to SportsJournalist.com. We looked at how other online communities do it from Arbor Update to Boing Boing and MetaFilter. "

http://annarbor.com/2009/07/your-turn-to-weigh-in-on-our-moderation-guidelines.html#more

 

[Moderator1]

They must mean some other site.
We're sportsjournalists.com

 

[slappy4428]

Not exactly off to a flying start, are they?

 

[Armchair_QB]

This is the eighth sign of the Apocalypse. It's the one you never hear about.

 

[Moderator1]

In all seriousness, you need to study how comparable operations do things.

You can say "****" on here. I would not tolerate that on a news Web site.
That's just one example.

 

[mustangj17]

In all seriousness, you need to study how comparable operations do things.

You can say "****" on here. I would not tolerate that on a news Web site.
That's just one example.

You can't even say the word "nude" on our site. The auto filter nixes it.

Although the word "asstrick" got in today. I started laughing out loud.

 

[BitterYoungMatador2]

I wonder what threads in particular they were checking out for pointers?

 

[slappy4428]

They still didn't say if we were a good touch or a bad touch...

 

[Mark2010]

They don't monitor anything on this site. It will go down in history as home to some of the rudest people I have ever met.

 

[CM Punk]

Assbirth.

Yep. A real standard to uphold.

 

[JC]

They don't monitor anything on this site. It will go down in history as home to some of the rudest people I have ever met.

People have been rude to you Mark? Shockingly, most people who are so outwardly racist and homophobic usually aren't treated with a lot of respect.

 

[Flying Headbutt]

I wonder what threads in particular they were checking out for pointers?

Anything on the politics board. No question.

:)

 

[slappy4428]

I think the politics board is fine... Of course, all I ever see there are "you have blocked this user"....

Makes things nice and tidy...

 

[sportsguydave]

They must mean some other site.
We're sportsjournalists.com

I checked, Moddy ... sportsjournalist.com is a parked site. They must mean us after all!! :D

 

[KP]

I wonder what threads in particular they were checking out for pointers?

Boots and his lady friend

 

[Jim Knight]

Hey, all. Figured it was time to sign up here since I'm back in the sports world with AnnArbor.com.

We didn't so much look at the witty banter in the threads at sportsjournalists.com as we did at the posting guidelines. We want a site where readers feel they can comment on stories without feeling they either are going to come under attack or have their view buried under a string of off-topic posts.

It's going to require moderation and a lot of time. It's an interesting challenge, especially in sports.

 

[Moderator1]

Jim - welcome.
It is an interesting challenge on every level. Obviously, things are a little more loose around here. The line isn't the same but there's always that question. Is it on the wrong side?

My old paper used to have someone approve before a comment went up. Well, who has time for that in a very thin newsroom? So comments go up and someone can report them if they like. They've shut down commenting (our version of a lock), they've removed posts (our version of a delete). And they've seen some awful stuff fall through the cracks because no one reported it or it hit at a time when no one could take a minute to go look.

It's risky. Like I said, commenting is what we do here. On a newspaper site? You are taking your chances.

Good luck and welcome back to sports.

 

[slappy4428]

Good luck with that the first time a Sparty posts...

 

[Jim Knight]

Thanks, Moddy. It's good to be back in sports ... and a little luck can't hurt. I'm sure we'll learn a lot in the first six months or so.