Blacklisting and Deleting - Is there a better way?

Published on September 7, 2004 By Solitair In Blogging

I've now been reading a few articles where users get responses deleted or get blacklisted. In some cases it for obvious personal attacks or filth (which I have no objections to), but in others it's because they argue a point that the author states is off-topic. What I wonder is whether there is a better way to handle these off topic replies, short of deleting them or black listing the writer. A way that handles these soon enough to stop the antagonism that arises.

Let me give an example,
Lets say that an author writes an article about Iraqi self government, but in doing so comments that 'the Americans have been benign'. The article writer then procedes to delete as off topic any replies debating the benign point because his article is about Iraqi self government.

I see this as wrong. Yes, the article writer is certainly justified in trying to keep the article on the topic they want to discuss, but are others not also justified in correcting what they see as misconceptions or at least letting the general public who read the article know that there is some disagreement? Where does the balance get struck? At the moment there is no balance, any author can make any political arguement seem like there are no dissenting views. Prolific posting from such an author can then turn the entire site into a one sided view with dissenting views being drowned. Surely JU is about debate? I'm not sure about you, but I was thought to debate the points I disagreed with and highlight them when I see them. This means that if someone makes a statement I disagree with I comment on it. What I certainly don't wish to see is my comment deleted because an article writer feels it's off topic, but to allow the original statement I disagreed with to remain.

So what can be done about this?

Well, one possible option is to add an off-topic choice. This would allow the article writer to click a button which marks a reply as off topic. The reply will therefore not be shown when someone reads the article. If that person wants to see all replies they can click another button to reveal off topic comments. This would allow the article writer to keep the discussion on topic, while allowing individuals to object to particular statements, without having the objections deleted for being off topic. It would also allow people to cool down when they see a response marked as off topic, instead of getting wound up and upset because what they saw as a valid reply was deleted.

A final addition, that i would like to see, is an indication of whether replies have been deleted or a user blacklisted. I really don't want to be reading one sided articles where the author fails to allow debate. A way of knowing which articles are like this, especially if they're displayed on the front page, would be useful.

paul.

Comments

Muggaz

on Sep 07, 2004

I like your ideas Paul...

Debating and learning varying opinions, and maybe allowing them to alter my own train of thought is certainly why I come here... I guess you always have the option of writing your own counter though...

BAM!!!

Solitair

on Sep 07, 2004

writing your own counter is fine, but at the moment there is no link between the original article and your counter. This still means that people reading the original article may be unaware of counter arguements from thos that are deleted or blacklisted.

Maybe an ability to link an article to an original article, so those reading the original article can see articles it has swawned?

Paul.

KarmaGirl

on Sep 07, 2004

Surely JU is about debate?

That is where you go wrong. It's a blog, it's not a debate. People don't have to allow anything on their blog that they don't want to, and they don't need to justify themselves. If it is on the forum, it is moderated lightly by the admins, and that is it. Each blog author is the admin of their blog and has the absolute right to run it how they see fit. If it doesn't fit the rules of the site, then an admin will let them know, otherwise, they have the right to delete and blacklist at their own discretion.

Solitair

on Sep 07, 2004

maybe that is where I'm going wrong.

The fact that people who post non debatable blogs and people who post allow debates are treated equally is my issue here. As mentioned before, I have no problem with users deleting or blacklisting so long as it's clear to other users that this is the case. I only have so much time to read articles and replies, and I really would like to know if I'm reading an interesting debate or a one sided point with no opening for discussion. If I see two similar articles I'd rather read and post in the one that allows an open debate than the one that is heavily cencored by the author.

Paul.

Angloesque

on Sep 07, 2004

As far as I know, we all have the option to not post our blogs in the forums area. I see forums as a place for discussion, and I wager that that's a pretty common perception. Otherwise I'm in total agreement that people should be able to control their own blog sites.

But if JU is primarily about blogs, maybe a prominent page should be set up (I know the homepage is sort of like that, but I'm talking about something that catalogs way more than seven articles), with teasers or the opening lines of a few blogs to get people to click on them. For now the only way to see a large sampling of blogs is to go to the forums where it seems very natural to expect discussion.

The point Paul is making seems especially valid not in the blogging category, but in Politics and Current Events, and to some degree in Misc. Perhaps those two could be designated as discussion or debate forums unless otherwise noted by the author (or perhaps a "blog" or "discussion" choice could be marked? If marked as a blog, the author has free reign; if marked as a discussion, the author could, say, blacklist but not delete, or something like that). Personally I'm not likely to take anyone on in blogging or personal relationships or home and family or most of the other categories, and if I, like Paul is saying, knew that someone was opening a subject for discussion, I'd more readily exercise my mind than on a blog.

Solitair

on Sep 10, 2004

Thanks Angloesque,
that is indeed the point I'm trying to get across. Nothing wrong with using the deletion and black list tools, just maybe a better way of handling the whole situation. It wuld be nice to know if articles are open for general discussion irrespective of your views or if they are being censored.

Paul.

Gideon MacLeish

on Sep 10, 2004

The forums are a place for discussion, yes, but not abuse. A blogger should not have to endure a verbal beating for their work, and that's where the tools we are given are appropriate.

Solitair

on Sep 13, 2004

Totally agree.

As mentioned, I would like to know where those tools have been used so that I can then make an informed decision about whether I'm taking part in a discussion or a censored one sided blog.

Paul.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!