Yesterday, I posted a link to a review of Entrekin posted by Cheryl Anne Gardner at POD People. I’ve gotten a couple of notes from people regarding the fact that the comments on the post in question were shut off, and I thought I’d explain.
When Cheryl wrote to me, she mentioned the kerfuffle that had occurred when a couple of people (or perhaps one with sockpuppets) posted a bunch of anonymous comments attacking me, personally, and saying very little about my writing save that it was great. Cheryl mentioned a certain accommodation she normally wouldn’t, but I told her it was unnecessary, then suggested she or her colleagues might want to moderate their comments. Not censor, exactly, but, you know, keep track of them and ensure they were constructive and contributing to the conversation.
Not, in other words, anonymous and attacking. Flaming and trolling. The difference is usually fairly obvious.
I didn’t ask them to shut the comments off; that was their decision, and I don’t argue with things site administrators choose to do. Perhaps they thought that close moderation would require more work/attention than they wanted to expend.
Regardless, I respect their decision as I respect Cheryl’s opinion.
August 11, 2008 at 5:05 am
Yes, Will … to clarify, it was entirely our decision. We generally like constructive comments, and we also attempt to keep the site professional in tone and texture.
Some people have a difficult time moderating themselves, which is unfortunate for the rest of the community, as it is not our responsibility to moderate the behaviour of other adults, so we don’t. Not to mention that we all have very rigorous full time day jobs, and moderating does not fit into any of our schedules.
My personal policy is and has always been: Critique the work, not the author.