Drupal Planet Guidelines regarding comments

Hi, I'm the author of the post in question and also the site owner. I would like to respectfully request that this requirement be lifted, not only for me, but for all contributors. It's actually a bit ironic that I've been reported for this post because it explicitly deals with why I do not have comments enabled. I'll include a relevant passage below:

"The best way to explain my views on comments is to point to a recent article by Jon Udell on Wired. It's a great post that you should take time to read.

To date, I've made around 1400 tweets, a bunch of Google+ posts, stuff on Facebook, etc. In all that time, I've only had one person be blatantly rude to me. I wish I could say that about the comments I used to receive on this blog. Much worse was when trolls attacked other commenters. I don't know, maybe my blog attracts a bad element (present company excluded, of course)."

Beyond the the point made above, the requirement to include comments seems dated because of the prevalence of social media. I regularly interact with the Drupal community on social media (the post explains the advantage of this) as well as making other contributions to the community.

It would seem unjust to me that an active and, I hope, positive voice in the Drupal community would be silenced on Drupal Planet over this comment rule. I have had comments disabled for over six months with no obvious ill effect to any party. Quite the opposite, I think I've made valuable contributions.

I hope you'll consider the spirit of the rule rather than the letter of it and permit my blog to continue to be read by Drupal Planet readers without forcing me to do something I feel uncomfortable with.

Thank you for considering my position.

Sincerely,

John Hannah

I didn't disable comments in knowing violation of a rule. That said, I still don't think it's a policy that is very in tune with the current social landscape.

Read the reasons I've given for not including comments. Does it seem unreasonable? You are free to disagree with my decision, of course, but who is actually being injured here?

I have a position that I came to after much deliberation. What is gained by forcing me to comply with this rule? Nothing, except compliance.

IMO it's good to have one place to post discussion of the ideas. I think the motivation for this requirement came when there were a few posts in planet that were controversial but didn't have comments enabled and then people were left wondering where/how to discuss the ideas.

@friendlymachine - Maybe you could enable comments for X days after they are posted and do it only for Drupal planet posts? I find that my spam problem mostly happens on posts over a month and the main time to discuss a planet post is within the first few days. Alternately, maybe you could create a post somewhere (facebook, google+, groups.drupal.org) and point from your blog post to that location to have discussion there.

I think comments should be strongly encouraged, but not required and we could update the guidelines to have a footnote with the idea of providing a twin-post on g.d.o for the comments.

I like this idea a lot:

"Alternately, maybe you could create a post somewhere (facebook, google+, groups.drupal.org) and point from your blog post to that location to have discussion there."

If this would pass muster, I would definitely do this, preferably on Google+ because it addresses the reason I choose not to include comments - the often negative tone of anonymous commenters, trolls, etc.

Just let me know if this is going to be cool with everyone and address the requirement, laying the issue to rest.

I like the idea of twin posts-- but -1 to google+ (or facebook, or twitter, etc). I don't think it's acceptable to point to a post on another third party site that requires a separate registration. g.d.o lets users use their current d.o account. Requiring users to register somewhere else, which they not wish to do, shouldn't be a requirement for commenting.

personally i'm sick to death of being required to surrender my privacy on a constant basis and would hate to see drupal.org join that movement.

This is an interesting question - privacy is important, but often used for ill intent on the web. Anonymous comments have become a widespread problem and ruined the discourse on many sites. I guess I would rather just have the policy removed and then there's no problem.

If people want to publicly comment on something, they have many venues to do so, but I'm not sure why any site should be compelled to host that in order to have a voice on Drupal Planet. When this policy was first adopted, social media wasn't much of a factor. It's nearly ubiquitous at this point. I think the original intention of the rule is met by this change in how we use the web.

I personally like it very much when anonymous comments are enabled and use this option frequently.

Not having the option to comment on a post seems like simply shouting something into the community without interest in feedback or discussion. I don't think that is what the Planet should be for.

In general I agree that comments are less and less important UNLESS they concern articles tailored to a specific audience, i.e. on the Planet. Depending on the post comments can be very valuable (easy example: Lullabots Module Monday where commenter s often point out alternatives).

Although @VM does have a point regarding "going social" we do allow solutions like Disqus so which to some degree renders this strain of arguments mood.

Basically I am saying +1 for the status quo.

Hey dddave,

So I hear what you're saying, but even if I'm forced to use comments, I would not allow anonymous comments for the reasons given. I certainly don't want my posts to be perceived as, "shouting something into the community". I love to interact with the community, but what weight would you give to someone shouting their opinion at you from the crowd? As for me, no weight at all. But if I know who I'm speaking with, that's something else entirely.

I disabled comments in response to a real problem. I had several instances of commenters picking on others who had said things they didn't like or thought was stupid. It was usually a Drupal newbie who was being mocked for making a mistake. And honestly, I don't feel obliged to host the rantings of jerks or spend the day after my posts weeding out that crap. Basically, my stance is against bullying. Having dual posts would be cool, but anonymous commenting too often brings out the worst in people. It's not worth it.

John

Anonymous comments are merely encouraged under the current guidelines so that would be a-ok.

OK, so how does this work? I hear that hosting the comments on g.d.o would be cool with the majority who have commented here. Who's the decider? Is there someone that needs to sign off on this?

John

+1 on greggles thought, "I think comments should be strongly encouraged, but not required and we could update the guidelines to have a footnote with the idea of providing a twin-post on g.d.o for the comments."

I manage a number of sites for corporate clients and spammers have caused us to limit comments to authenticated users only. Even with only authenticated users being able to comment, my clients spend a ton of money getting rid of spammy and abusive posts (and yes, we have Mollom installed).

Good content is good content whether I can comment on it or not ... I think the current policy is outdated.

Kevin

There's no single decider. If there's a rough consensus (I agree there is) then we do two things:

Clearly state the proposal - update the guidelines to say:
"Comments must be enabled somewhere related to the post. We highly recommend, but do not require, that anonymous comments be enabled for the content being aggregated. You're sharing your thoughts, so why not let us be able to continue the conversation on your site with everyone else? If you prefer not to have comments on your site, you can create a post on Drupal.org or on Groups.Drupal.org and direct readers of your post to comment in that location."

And then we wait a few days for feedback on that proposal.

OK, sounds cool to me. I like what you've written and would support that change. Thanks for providing guidance.

John

The wording in #18 works for me.

Should we create a 'Drupal Planet' group to host these posts? otherwise they'll probably be spread all over the place.

I think it makes sense for them to be hosted "all over the place" because our community works in different places. Using this example, the combating spam and bots group seems like a natural place to have the discussion.

I can also see closing comments and directing people to an issue queue being a good idea for certain kinds of posts.

I agree with "all over the place" as well. I would like to keep my posts in a single group, however, and since my blog will likely be the first user, I've created a new open group, Planet Discussions.

I'm not familiar with how to submit the suggested rule change, but if someone who does know could pull the trigger, it would be much appreciated. I'll write again next week as usual and I would like to have things settled by then, if possible.

John

This whole "post somewhere else" for comments seems to be a very complicated and unnecessary hoop for our planet contributors to jump through.

I'm very much for the requirement to have comments enabled, but if the alternative is posting somewhere else, then I'd just rather make it optional.

Hi silverwing,

It's totally optional. Posting to groups or d.o only applies to those that are not using comments on their site. If sites already use comments, there's nothing for them to worry about.

John

just for clarification: planet blogs are required to either enable comments or link to a g.d.o. post for a follow up discussion. right?

Yes, that's mostly correct. They can also link back to d.o - a forum or even an issue queue. The point being a single place for the community to discuss the post. The g.d.o and d.o options are intended to reduce the spam and trolling that often occur on blogs.

Does anyone object if I publish a post to Drupal Planet while we're waiting for the change to be made in the docs? I will be providing a post on the group I created so comments can be posted there.

The group isn't approved, so that seems premature. But if you crossposted it to another group that seems fine.

OK, I got an email that left me thinking that group was go to go. I'll find another appropriate group to post to then. Thanks for letting me know.

An alternative to consider is leaving comments open for a short while after publishing the blogpost, like @chx does ... may avoid spam.

My two cents, as an avid Planet Reader (most of you probably saw a comment from me): having a single comment thread to join the discussion is wonderful, but even better is having author feedback (either on the comments or whatever else). Know why we (readers) comment? Because we want to be heard (usually). So regardless of where the thread is, as an author please commit to reading it ;)

Just thought it would be good to post a concrete example of why planet posts should have comments turned on:

http://www.angrydonuts.com/be-careful-of-what-you-get-on-planet

included full guideline

Our new guidelines no longer requires comments.