Here’s a new question for you:
I am hugely grateful for the terrific commentary 98% of you post. For the most part, I leave the comments pretty open ended. The Commentariat here are intelligent, insightful, enormously helpful. Wired magazine calls this process "Crowdsourcing."
Then, there’s that other 2%.
I almost deleted a comment personally disrespectful to me — but I figured I’d let it slide.
Then I pulled up this person’s comment history: a grand total of 8 comments over 3 months, most of which were smarmy, unhelpful, borderline troll behavior — and worst of all, quite frequently wrong:
• I think you’re wrong on the FIRST QUARTER, Barry. It’s going to come in hot! (2/21/06)
• The chart says buy the S&P 500. It is due to catch up (3/21/06)
• CORE inflation is benign. (5/19/06)
So I deleted the comment. Disrespect me in my house, you’re out on your ass.
Here is the Crowdsourcing question: What is the preference for handling these issues?
• Leave the comment intact; The market place will ignore bad ideas/unhelpful posters;
• Respond directly in the comment; (see the last comment here as an example);
• Edit out the offensive part; (Nanny blog lives!)
• Delete the comment; (with extreme prejudice)
• Delete dumb comments and ban the offender! (Long live the Benevolent Dictator)
I’m not sure the best way to go, but I am very curious about the group dynamic.
I’ve been spending alot of time dealing with comment/trackback spam, and ignoring some of the other issues with comments — but I want to clean them up, keep the comment function useful, and also stay vigilant against trolls.
What say ye?