On Comments
Published 2 years ago, at the end of March under StandardsThere’s been a lot of discussion this week about comments on the web - specifically the inappropriate comments posted on Digg regarding Kathy Sierra. These comments and the death threats Kathy received were tasteless and cowardly. Robert Scoble was disgusted enough to walk away from blogging for the week, and countless others have stood up for Kathy by denouncing the anonymous bullies responsible for this affair. The web should be facilitating diverse and deep conversations — not sadistic, off-color comments at the expense of an incredible and brilliant woman.
I think now is a good time to have a discussion about comments. What is the purpose of commenting? Is there anything we can change about the current system to re-align us with that purpose?
Conversations and Accountability
The purpose of a comment is to express an opinion, reaction, or a fact to further a conversation. Good comments introduce new ideas or outlooks, provide quality criticism, or correct a misstatement by the author. Bad comments insult, spam, troll, or otherwise attempt to disrupt the conversation. However, there seems to be a shortage of good comments and an abundance of bad comments on the web today.
Why leave a bad comment?
It seems obvious why one would leave a good comment — you’re interested in the conversation and want to expand upon it. But why leave a bad comment? It’s a tough question, but I’ve got a few answers:
I think some individuals don’t fully recognize that a real human being sits behind every username. It’s very easy to leave disgusting comments that you would never say face-to-face when you’re protected by the anonymity of the web. The troll, like the sophist, doesn’t consider the humanity of others involved in the conversation.
One-upmanship
Conversations can become competitions when argument breaks out. Debates and argumentation are fine, as long as each individual respects the other and doesn’t resort to ad-hominem attacks. Once that barrier is breached, the flamers and trolls come out of the woodwork. Digg is a perfect example of this. Comment threads devolve rapidly once somebody makes an off-color joke or resorts to name-calling in an argument.
This is one of the more subtle and insidious forms of bad comments. I feel that many of the ‘me too’ type comments you find on popular blogs are motivated on some level by self-promotion. The commenter isn’t adding anything to the conversation, but merely signifying his presence on one side of an issue. This type of comment isn’t damaging like the comments left by trolls, but it is noise.
Spam
Links are a valuable commodity, and that value motivates many to leave bad comments. Spam isn’t limited to what’s left by bots.
I think comments aren’t delivering the promise of real conversations on the web. Because of the added noise and damaging effects caused by bad comments, the conversations worth having are getting lost. How can we change that? I’m not entirely sure.
Unfortunately I think comments will never fully develop into vehicles for deep conversation. But we do have some options:
One criticism of comments is the inherent weak-position into which the commenter is placed. The author of a post speaks with the most authority — the comments are mere footnotes in the conversation. In order to have real conversations, parties need to be on an equal footing. Pingbacks can allow conversations to span across multiple blogs, and they inherently filter out some bad comments as it takes a lot more effort to post a response in a post than to leave a sour comment.
Invite the authors of good comments to write entire posts on the subject for publication on your site as well as their own. This allows you to extend a conversation in a more formal way, and can force people to deeply explore their beliefs rather than just dropping a few lines in a comment. Also, by celebrating the content your readers give to you, you encourage them to write better comments.
hm… luv it..