OK, I’ve finally had it with my comment section. Frankly, it’s a disgrace.
From now on, Oranckay from Oranckay.net will be policing the comment section. He will no doubt be laying down the law sometime later today.
It’s hoped that with Oranckay enforcing some actual decorum in the comment section, it will once again be safe for good commenters to go back in the water.
UPDATE by Oranckay:
Hi you many readers of the Marmot’s Hole.
For years I’ve teased the Marmot, calling his blog the “Marmot’s Discussion Group.” Usually there’s nothing wrong with online/email discussion groups, of course, unless they go unmoderated for too long and end up becoming, even at best, incestuous debate clubs dominated by a few very active online personalities who, you are made to think, believe that every discussion in life is a big gochu measuring contest. It’s embarrassing to go back and see what you wrote somewhere online and think yourself a jerk. Believe me, I know. Let’s stop embarrassing ourselves, but for these reasons…
First of all, any intense dialogue by people who appear to know each other scares off persons who might make helpful comment and offer a fresh perspective. This, frankly, is probably what lacks most at Marmot’s Hole: an environment where people who have never commented before feel they can do so freely.
Secondly, the generally held perception about Marmot’s Hole is that the commenters come overwhelmingly from a certain racial and generational category. I fall into the same category. I make no apologies, of course, but the nature and tone and even subject of the comments that dominate some posts manage, in my humble opinion, to simultaneously make the atmosphere feel unwelcoming to others and give people in that category (and categories are never fair) a bad name. We don’t deserve it, and, to be sure, sometimes the accusations are racist indeed. My point here is only that the mood of the comment section in general (and I’m not talking about the tone/appropriateness of actual comment content) is something I like to call namtang bunwigi, the atmosphere in the men’s half of a public bath. There’s nothing wrong with that kind of atmosphere – it’s something different from what we call “locker room talk” in English – it’s just not very inviting. The fact that the more prolific commenters talk as if they know each other (I’ve been just as guilty of this) only makes the atmosphere all the more unwelcoming if you’re not in the in crowd.
The reason all this matters is because the Marmot’s Hole matters. Laugh if you must, but it has an influence on international perceptions of Korea and Korean perceptions of how internationals view Korea. It is read by embassies, think tanks, students, journalists, and others around the world. It is also read by functioning members of Korean society, Korean and non-Korean alike, including Korean government officials and members of the Korean media. The Marmot’s Hole is not a club, and it is much more than what most people like to write off as “just a blog.” It is watched, closely. (It would be worth noting that you can get in a lot of trouble in Korea for things said in your comment section or bulletin board (gesipan), and in some cases you can even get in trouble for saying things that are true, depending on how you say them and why, so this is a practical concern as well.) There will always be posts that seem “tabloid” and tabloid posts certainly are just begging to be buried away in the kind of discussion you’d expect to hear in an Itaewon sports bar, with guys telling athletes on the screen how stupid they are. That’s natural, and no one is saying every comment has to be entirely helpful and profound. But for the most part the overall mood in the comment section needs to change, and, judging from the comments that have already been left on this post while I write this here update, most of the faithful regulars seem to agree.
Now Hear This:
The approach will be to be nice and set some vague guidelines then clamp down hard if that’s what it takes. Here are some preliminary rules and a hint at what might be in the works. Keep in mind that I have no intention of reading every comment. It’s a matter of the tone as a whole, and that’s what everyone is hoping to improve.
The Rules (more coming):
1. Stay on topic. Of the initial blog post.
2. Avoid ongoing dialogue. Add clarity. Make your point and be done with it. Don’t have the last word.
3. Ignore inappropriate comments. Don’t react. See Rule #2.
4. Take issue with what’s said, not someone’s “motive” or “right” to say it.
5. Try not to talk as if you have a history with a fellow commenter.
5. Go outside and play before you break the internet.
Policy ideas being considered are as follows:
1. Moderate all comments.
2. Moderate all comments for most posts, but let things run their course in some posts, and maybe even have occasional “open threads” where it runs wild.
3. Limit comments to, say, 20 after each post, then close comments.
4. If there is a blog program plugin that could limit an IP to, for example, two (or however many) comments per post, please let me know. Not something to be done manually.
More coming. Thanks for your patience. Sugggestions welcome. This update was posed at about the same time as comment #22 below.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 131 comments… read them below or add one }
Good move, Robert. Getting someone else to do it also protects you from accusations of partiality.
I promise to try apply better standards for myself. (seriously)…..Before I get irritated and fire back, I’ll count to ten and then wait to see how things develop before deciding to jump into an affray.
Cleaning out the Marmot’s stables, I wouldn’t wish that on anyone
Hope one of the main rules is no more “yeah, so what about in Japan” comments. Like somebody said recently it’s the Godwin’s Rule for Marmot’s Hole.
75% of your commenters gravitate here specifically because it’s a disgrace. it’s like itaewon in that regard. but hey, if you want to turn it into a nice, sparkly, boring myeong-dong, it’s your prerogative.
i personally prefer starbutts to starbucks.
Yeah, it was becoming a full-fledged hate fest.
great idea but it will be only a matter of time before some people accuse the moderator for being anti korean or anti japanese or anti american or anti kyopo or anti expat and etc…
Do you have any specific guidelines/rules about what kind of comments are OK and what kind are not?
I think it’s more like 75 percent of the commenters who remain gravitate here because it’s a disgrace. I’ve lost a lot of good commenters in the meantime.
kimchi2000—No doubt that will be the case. So be it.
James—Oranckay will hopefully elaborate later.
Applause! I want good-natured and useful discussions here, got no time for the cyber-trash always cyber-trashing.
fair enough. but if there are people who can’t see a screen name and just skip over it, or can’t tune out the 5% of comments that may need moderation in the first place, they’re not exactly schooled in the tubes of the internets anyway.
or to continue my itaewon analogy, i’m sure there are some prudes who refuse to eat at many of itaewon’s fine restaurants just because there are a few hookers within earshot…but that minority are just missing out on good food and itaewon doesn’t need to overhaul The Hill to please them.
About time!
‘It’s hoped that with Oranckay enforcing some actual decorum in the comment section, it will once again be safe for good commenters to go back in the water.’
what is your definition of a good commenter? someone who always agrees with you? someone who never challenges you? i have a feeling expat oranky only going to busy himself with korean posters.
I’m no prude, but I’d be happy if only IhearBB gets rid of his NSFW avatar.
Mr. Choe, just curious,
Do you know of anyone who spells is,
Chwae?
Some moderation, sure, but don’t take iheart’s balls away from him
Perhaps Mr. Choe is a 조 and not a 최.
Romanization of family names can certainly be quite confusing.
you’re implementing this policy to silence koreans.
don’t fool yourself, robert. i’ve been here for two years. it’s always been like this.
As an American voice, I assume you [nulji] will continue not to be silenced then.
No, Pawi, in fact, it’s the gyopo-bating that I find most frustrating—the majority number of people I’ve banned have been banished for making racist, anti-Korean statements. But keep making groundless accusations, Pawi, and you won’t be around here for much longer. Your personal attacks are getting quite tedious.
I hereby present Oranckay with the nice cup. May he pour from this cup until it overfloweth nevermore.
Good call, plus it’s your blog so tough shit if not everybody agrees. More than happy to go by the rules if it makes for a better blogging environment. Shouldn’t mean a change in the content of the articles/photos that are contributed, which is what has been the main draw for me at least. For those who want more in the way of shock value in a comments section, there should be no shortage of blog options out there – Korea-related or not – that should do the trick.
‘No, Pawi, in fact, it’s the gyopo-bating that I find most frustrating—the majority number of people I’ve banned have been banished for making racist, anti-Korean statements. But keep making groundless accusations, Pawi, and you won’t be around here for much longer. Your personal attacks are getting quite tedious.’ marmot
fair enough.
I’ve seen 최(崔) written as Choi, Choy, Choe, Chey, Chwe, and Tsche, and now I’ll add Chwae and Chai as well. Any others, in non-English speaking countries?
Oranckay,
About your “policy ideas” at the end of the post; I would certainly vote for #2 (if anyone wanted my opinion, that is). Arbitrary limits on the number of comments per post (either individually or collectively) could potentially limit some interesting discussions.
Pawi,
I myself, and, as I believe, most other commenters have got nothing at all against you personally. On the occasions when you said or did something of real value (like calling upon people to become bone marrow donors), you were universally lauded by all sorts of different commenters.
If you just toned down your language a little bit (BTW the same goes for some other commenters with different ethnic backgrounds, as well), then IMHO you are certainly most welcome to continue to express your bona fide opinions on this blog, even if they run counter to the mainstream.
After all, my own views may sometimes be out of step with the mainstream, as well, due to the obvious fact that I am not an American and have not been socialised according to the American rules of Political Correctness.
But nevertheless, I think, with a little bit more mutual respect, we can all get along here peacefully and without personal insults. After all, a healthy diversity of views is an asset for any discussion…
Also (sorry about the double post), a possible rule of thumb: If the comment is longer than the original post, it should raise a red flag with the comment policy. Some long comments add important information, but they are more often a post-jacking.
Antti wrote:
“Choi”, as written in Cyrillic, is typically romanized as “Tsoi”.
No deleting for the time being, but, just because it’s a perfect example, the comments about how to romanize the surname 최 are both off topic (Rule #1) and ongoing dialogue (Rule #2), fun as the topic may be for many, including myself.
Rules 1,3,4, and 5 sound good, but I don’t like the sound of 2. Very often, commenters cannot express the entire depth of their position in one or two comments, and ongoing debate on a single issue is often much more informative to read that the actual posts the comments have originally responded to. What seems to be the biggest problem recently is the lame name-calling and personal grudge battles going on between users in the comments sections of most posts. I also hope that you take more action against the inappropriate comments rather than punishing those who react to them.
Could we get rid of pictures of testicles too?
I also think that the excluson of dialogue (#2) is ultimately not in the best interest of those who come here to learn and help others learn. Frankly, commentary without dialogue is like a trip to an art gallery with a bunch of art-house newbies – one person describes what she sees, and everyone else tries to think up something ‘new’ to say, but in the end you’re still just walking around with a group of people who lack any depth of thought.
The working out of ideas benfits greatly from interchange, but under the current set of rules that won’t be allowed to happen. I understand the desire to ‘take out the trash’, but do you really want to limit the development of ideas? Surely that’s not in anyone’s best interest.
After reading a long cut-n-paste on another thread, I’d like to add one more suggested guideline: if the content is longer than a few sentences, just give us an intro and a link. Most posters already follow this netiquette.
One more vote in favor of all those rules, including No. 2. Personally, I am in favor of heavy moderation most of the time, with the occasional open post to let people vent (Mardi Gras to prepare for Lent). With a couple of months of re-training, I bet 90%+ of problems would take care of themselves leaving a new blog order that is much more orderly.
Alternate idea — everyone registers to post, then has posts subject to a score system. You start at zero, and as people give you positive votes, you move to 5. If people do not like your posts, you go to -5. As you drop below zero, slowly you lose darkness value to your font, the lettering becomes grey or translucent. Until -5, when your posts are totally white, and no one else has to read them. Sure, a little difficult code-wise to implement, but oh-so poetic.
Re policy ideas #2 thru 4: Here’s a plugin that is a comment timeout. Though it’s primary purpose is anti-spam, it could be useful since it could limit comments for ex. 48 hours. Maybe your current anti-spam plugin has such a feature? Limit Post sets the number of permissible characters. I couldn’t find any plugin to limit the total number of comments nor limit the number of comments per commenter/IP, but most bloggers seem to want to maximize the comments submitted rather than reduce. But I’m not a fan of policy idea #3, so I didn’t search too hard.
Unrelated (sorry, rule #1), but perhaps useful for some who post a second comment to correct typos and other errors, is this Edit Comments plugin or this Preview Post plugin.
If we can abide by rule #1 I reckon half the battle is won. Good luck to all.
Hi. Thanks for the imput. Nothing’s set in stone, but while gbnhj’s comment at #31 is true, it is also that very phenomenon, at least in this case at Marmot’s Hole, that gives the section the atmosphere of a clique.
It ISN’T supposed to be a discussion group where people “come to learn and help others learn” as if it were the “Korea debate club.” I for one think it is presumptuous to assume the many who leave numerous comments every day are any more informed than those who are scared away. When you’re leaving comments here it’s hard to remember that for every comment there are thousands of readers who aren’t leaving anything at all, but that’s the case. Imagine a classroom of 40 students and the same three among them shout out answers and comments to EVERYTHING and then react to each other to no end. The other 37 might even learn something from time to time, but we still wouldn’t call the atmosphere a healthy one and if you went to the “art gallery” with the 37 you might be surprised at what you hear from them. Take a look at Marmot’s site meter. 2,165+ unique site visits a day, and yet most comments are coming from the same few dozen people. If things changed, it might, at first, be a major void for those who comment all the time but the other 2,135 visitors might feel differently and they might speak up more. It would LOOK like a big change but visits would probably stay around the same, so a major loss if you think of it as discussion group but a good thing if you remember that this blog occasionally comes to the attention of the likes of the UN Secretary-General. Note that some well-known and influential blogs (Like http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com for example) don’t allow comments at all. Given Marmot’s Hole’s visit stats, it is likely that if comments were gone altogether (NOT being considered) the readership (remember them?) might like it here even better, and that the blog would actually be seen as more authoritative.
My suspicion is that if Rule #2 were observed, that would automatically mean all the other rules are observed as well. I’m not sure Rule #2 is the best way to go and it could get vetoed, but, “gbnhj,” I’d be grateful to see an example of where there has been an “working out of ideas” here. I’m not being sarcastic, I’d really like to know. I’m sure it has happened and can in the future, I just think that more often than not it’s incestuous and that the “discussion” as it happens now often actually snuffs out the “development of ideas” you’re talking about.
Nothing wrong with working out an idea. But it should be done in the context of the main post. Not cross-chatter between commenters.
LastWorditis is one of the worst afflictions of the Internet. Everyone is almost always better off subduing the urge to make that one more post to get your point across.
Rules 1, 3, and 4 make excellent sense and would probably accomplish the goal of runaway, off-topic free-for-alls.
However. . .
Under “rules,” #2 seems to defeat the purpose of a comments section, as would #4 in things under consideration.
Moderating all comments also retards genuine discourse. Perhaps better to moderate troublemakers on a case-by-case basis, probation to freedom.
The first #5 could also be unnecessarily limiting. Asking someone how the wife and kids are doing should be reserved for another method of communication, but reference to some past comments interaction would sometimes be needed for clarity.
Limiting a post to 20 comments would, in many cases, mean that those joining in from the States would be too late to comment on a post at all. This post is a case in point – over 30 before I even saw it.
Note to Oranckay; my site gets ~900-1,100 unique visitors (IPs) per day and relatively few comments, the point being that the vast majority of viewers don’t comment. I’d be willing to bet that #2 will cause a drop in visitors, although some of those could just be voyeurs of shootouts in the comments section.
Note to Andy on comments longer than posts; good point, with the exception of inline asidescourse, which are usually only 1-3 sentences.
I regularly delete comments from my posts here if they strike me as being “way off-point” and inflammatory. If each thread author would do the same, the results would be about the same as Oranckay having a go at it.
I like this blog. I don’t like the new rules. Not necessary. Also, this talk of visits by Korean government officials and the comment “this blog occasionally comes to the attention of the likes of the UN Secretary-General” reeks of self-importance.
In addition, no intelligent reader is scared away by the comments section.
This sounds like mommies taking all the jungle gyms out of the playground and leaving the kids to play in sand only. Boring.
How about just deleting inappropriate posts (bad words, racism, personal attacks) and leaving it at that? All the self-justification for the new policy is unnecessary.
I’m with iheartblueballs. I wanna see balls in the avatar, and I want readers who have the balls to handle some strong comments. Noboby’s getting hurt.
I don’t think implementing the new rules will open up the comment section to a new generation of bright and fresh commentators.
Ever watch pro wrestlers try their hand at fencing?
Neither have I, but I think I’m about to…
What about your own blogging, Oranckay?
Number 2# and 3# are impossible to police, and here is why. One particular commenter (not naming names!) would say that I had “admitted” to something, like being an anti-semite, or some other calumny. Leaving it at that would certainly look like an admission, so I would have no choice but to violate rule 3#. If rule 1# was strictly enforced, it would not be a problem.
Number 4# and 5# seem like good ideas to me.
Policy ideas 1,2,3 and 4. All bad. I think that 1,2,3 are too top heavy. Rather than this approach, you should simply ban those badly behaved. 4# is bad because it will discriminate against virtually every person from Australia because we are almost all on dynamic IPs that change every couple of days.
I think post limiting would be a great idea.
Eliminate some of the white noise
Moderating (or even totally banning) comments will not necessarily affect readership. I, for one, stopped reading the comments here a long time ago (I just look over the posts that look interesting on my google reader) except for maybe a few posts like this one, and I imagine many other readers to be the same. While I have huge respect and confidence in the capabilities of the Oranckay, I must say this comment-policing attempt sorta sounds like many of the administrative policies in Korea: 어차피 끝까지 실현되지 못할 일을 (여러가지 이유가 있을 수 있음: 맨파워/자원 부족, 의지 상실 등) 정책으로 내세웠다가 용두사미 격으로 흐지부지되는…
This is not my blog, and I will respect the rules as set by the owner of this blog because in general….it’s a good read!
Somehow, that smiley face looks sarcastic. Was not my intention. I mean it, the blog is interesting to read.
I’ll disappear if Shakuhachi will disappear. I won’t lie.
Honestly, the clarification of the new regime gives me much less confidence in it than I had when I read Marmot’s first message about it.
I have confidence in Oranckay and the other admins here in large measure because I’ve been reading their thoughts for a few years now…
but then Oranckay’s #35 got to be somewhat depressing (to me).
#35 seemed to start out populist but ended up elitist.
The whole point of readership vs commentors seemed off the mark to me.
How many of the 2,000+ readers who come here have extensive experience with South Korea? How many expats, Kyopos, and Koreans have the English language skills and experience in Korea to add a lot of insights into a topic?
Most of those dozen or so commentors are people who have lived in South Korea for years, some studied about Korea for years, and the most valuable are those who actually have fluency in reading/speaking both English and Korean and can add stuff they have gathered the vast majority of us can’t bring to the table.
So, I disagree with this next comment:
What percentage of the readership here has as much experience in Korean society and with Korean history as Marmot, Oranckay, Occidenatlism, Bevers, and others, including JK and perhaps even pawikirogi if I knew how much time he had spent in Korea?
I think it might do some good if readers from the UN, US Defense and State Departments, or those same institutions in the Korean government would see what people down in the grassroots have to say about certain issues. It certainly won’t make them screw things up with any more regularlity than they already do.
There are thousands of readers on this site, but how big is the expat and former expat and kyopo and Korean community that has spent significant amounts of time living in South Korea who have the English language skills to read and respond?
Not big. Not in the thousands. I would bet not even in the hundreds.
Most of the expats I met in Korea were short-timers. Most were here for 1-2 years. Of those few who were in Korea for more than 2 years, only a minority of them had spent any time reading about Korean history.
How many of the regular commentors here have shown knowledge of Korean history and society beyond stereotypes and one-liners?
Marmot’s comment section has been a community for a long time, and most of the frequent commenters have been people who have lived in Korea and taken time to learn about it. That is what made it special.
Oranckay said he seriously can’t think of discussions on this site that were informative. That is suprising to me, because I have given kudos to the site for being such a knowledgable community before any of these decorum problems got so bad.
Do we really want to make this place just another K-blog? where you get 5 to 10 comments of 1 or 2 lines each: “Great post. I agree”…..”You’re wrong.” “lmao”…
Is that what we want?
Really…..both the admins here and those encouraging the limits on # of commments, # of com 1 person can made, and length —– go around to the K-blogs right now then come back…
I read Lost Nomad, GI Korea, One Free Korea, DPRK Studies, Oranckay, Big Hominid, Gypsy Scholar, Occidentalism, and USFK Forums daily or a couple times a week unless I’m extremely busy, because those are blogs that post pretty much daily, and the vast majority of posts are on topics beyond “what I had for breakfast today” that I am interested in – and all are run by people with years of Korea-related experience.
(USFK Forums is the exception, and it might be worth comparing that communities open discussions to Marmot’s Hole: it seems to me the vast majority of commentors there are the short-term variety (primarily military) and thus its usefulness in giving an informed discussion about Korea beyond USFK’s environment is limited).
…but go over now and look at the comments sections of those other K-blogs.
Is that what we want to see here at Marmot’s?
I like DPRK Studies blog. I know Richardson in real life. I comment over there from time to time. But, it would be sad to see Marmot’s comments section reduced to the amount of dialog that Richardson gets over there.
Even a great, informative blog like One Free Korea’s, where the posts are more extented than at the other blogs, with more links to primary and secondary sources doesn’t have a healthy exhange or sharing of thought though I am sure of the fact that many very knowledgable readers go there frequently.
If we stuck with “3. Ignore inappropriate comments”, I would understand and applaud.
The fact is, many of us do know each other. Some of you guys actually know each other, or have met each other, outside the realm of virtual reality. Others of us have been reading each other’s thoughts (on our blogs and comments) for years. And if a person has only been around for a few months but comments regularly, you can get a feel for where they stand and who they are – in at least virtual reality.
Limiting the number of comments, the length of comments, and/or the number of times a person can comment in one thread seems like —-
—– community-killing measures rather than moves to enforce decorum.
The fact is there aren’t other places the K-bloggers and readers go for the amount of discussion we have online here.
The Korea Herald forum was a community outlet for a short period of time before the trolls destroyed it. Korea Media Watch started out as community center for people with a significant amount of experience in South Korea, but it faded out — in large measure due to the fact Marmot’s Hole was already offering much the same kind of community interaction.
Policy ideas #3 and #4 will go a long way to destroy that.
Rules #2 and #5 also seem destined to do much damage to it.
It is the exchange of ideas (in a civil manner) that I like about the comments section here at MH.
What is causing the problem is the incivility.
I would think you would want to encourage longer comments where people explain their position and extended debate between individuals who have some familiarity with this or that issue, and simply attack those comments that lack decorum, rather than ending up silencing discussion by rules that basically attack the commenting community as a whole…
If decorum were the yardstick, I know I could go back and easily cut out places where my own comments have thrown decorum to the wind and engaged in heated “debate” to the point that virtually little to no discussion was taking place.
I would gladly go back and delete those comments of mine that jumped into the affray if incivility were used as a guideline for deleting comments.
Oranckay, I hope you are doing all this moderating from a rubber room, because I sense that it’s going to drive you insane.
Heh, that’s the truth.
Moderating uncivil/racist/etc. or off-topic comments would allow maximum legitimate participation, but going beyond that would probably ruin the party.
USinKorea wrote:
“Most of those dozen or so commentors are people who have lived in South Korea for years, some studied about Korea for years, and the most valuable are those who actually have fluency in reading/speaking both English and Korean and can add stuff they have gathered the vast majority of us can’t bring to the table.
“
Yes, but to be honest, US, I scroll past many of your posts while skimming them because of the length.
Do you remember Jackie Peng’s blog? Robert linked to it a couple of months ago in the thread on Korean history books. Jackie’s blog has a feature that imbeds comments in reply to previous comments. On the All Empires history forum, all comments appear with reply and quote buttons. However, the reply still appears at the end of the queue.
One of the Korean messages boards, either Naver or Chosun, allows readers to respond to comments. These responses do not appear directly in the comment list and are accessed by clicking. This is ideal, allowing interested persons to click and read the discussion without cluttering up the main board.
I don’t know if Robert is technologically up to this, but compiling replies to comments in a separate link would make the comment section, which does contain some gems amongst quite a bit of clutter, more reader-friendly. Comments by Marmot readers have been picked up and linked to other blogs; a fairly moderated comment section would attract more readers and enhance the content.
I can’t speak on the formats of those other blogs, because I haven’t checked them out. I know from a site like Newsbusters.com the embedding of comments to comments doesn’t look good if you get any kind of interest in a thread.
And on the length and skipping my long comments, that has generally been sucessful here at the Hole for some time — you just pass by comments from some people you don’t want to read or those that don’t seem worth it within the first couple of sentences and read in full and comment on those that do hold interest.
It is the extended bitch sessions that seem to be the problem, and I can easily end my participation in those, and be satisfied if decorum is enforced.
But “These responses do not appear directly in the comment list and are accessed by clicking.” that sounds good..
Just a note related to Sonagi’s comment:
This plugin for wordpress seems to allow commenters to reply to specific comments, and it organizes the comments in threads which can be minimized so that readers don’t have to look at them. I just added it to my site, and it seems promising, although it doesn’t have a setting that auto-minimizes replies to comments (as far as I know).
http://meidell.dk/archives/200.....ments-159/
I was a bit surprised by that myself.
After all, most of Robert’s posts are summarized translations of Korean wire pieces, easily linked to news.naver.com. Are you saying that Korean leaders have an interest in viewing English-language summaries of Korean news articles they’ve likely already read?
While such posts may be a great boon to those many, many expats here who cannot read newspaper-level Korean, I cannot believe they are that fascinating to Korean opinion leaders. How interested would one of us be in a blog maintained by a Korean in the U.S. that contained Korean-language translations of CNN pieces or Google News abstracts?
Perhaps the perceptions of how “international persons view Korea” come as much from the comments as they do from the posts.
Marmot, my two won:
I disagree with most of the proposed rules–moderation does not mean shaping the debate, which rules 2-5 would do, in ways that would bring about maybe civil but ultimately very dull exchanges.
The limit to the number of comments is also arbitrary. I know we go off on small tangents sometimes, it’s human nature, yet we always get back on topic in the end.
Most of the Marmot-type sites I look at just put a disclaimer at the top and let people say what they want. If that’s too anarchic for your tastes just have Oranckay warn the worst offenders once or twice then ban them. Much simpler and more democratic.
Respect to you and Oranckay both, but if the proposed rules go into effect as is I predict a dropoff in readers.
I think USinKorea and Dogbertt touched on something truly fundamental about this site – why exactly people come here. It’s not for news that can be found on Naver or the big daily’s English translations but for the commentary which accompanies them, most especially here in the comments. I come here for the stuff guys like Iheartblueballs, Brendan Carr, Richardson, and yes even Pawi say in response. This isn’t a hard news site, as Robert stresses over and over. If you’re looking for a fair and balanced perspective on all things Korea, the Marmot’s Hole isn’t the place to come. So don’t pretend that it is. Please do warn commenters when they’ve gone too far and do delete explicitly off topic or racist comments. But don’t gut what makes this site special among K-blogs.
On a technical note, is it possible to introduce the ability for a poster to delete his own comment within a reasonable timeframe after posting – say twenty minutes? Several times I’ve commented and regretted how I phrased my words and wished I could just delete it before others respond to my own poorly articulated argument.
Fact: Marmot is very unhappy. He called the comments a disgrace. He threatened a long-timer with banishment.
Hypothesis: The new rules, if implemented, may result in a drop in readership.
Fact: Marmot has noted a drop in the number of ‘good commenters’, and he clearly misses them.
Hypothesis: The new rules, if implemented, may result in a rise in the number of commenters.
Fact: The future is unknown. The present is known. At present, the Marmot wants to test a hypothesis.
To oranckay, as experimenter in chief, I wish all the best of luck in his new role.
I personally like the blog as it is. Orankay can warn someone if he is too obnoxious. But, other than those extreme commentors, I like the free-associating dialog aspect of this blog.
Marmot posts about two to three articles per day. Sometimes they are not interesting enough. Divergence from the original topic is very interesting sometimes, even though in many case we are going through the same arguments like a broken record. Occasionally, however, new comers or new facts do appear and that makes this blog interesting.
I thought this was a poor idea from the get-go, but now as I read oranckay’s further explanation, rationale, and potential moderation policies…it’s getting exponentially worse and turning into a complete clusterfuck of a disaster.
Seriously, stop with all the UN Secretary Generals, think-tank nerds, embassies, high and mighty journalists, and other influential and powerful assholes you’re listing in your bid to make the average Joe feel like he’s not worthy of giving his opinion here. It’s retarded. This isn’t Foreign Policy Review, no one here believes that the comments section will convince North Korea to surrender, and no one seems to give two flying fucks about making this place “influential” and showing off for the powerful except you. I mean Jesus, who knew Ban Ki Moon was so interested in tits, pot-smoking English teachers, and Mongolia? You’d think he had better things to do. But does the fact that one of his aides may have shown him the page once mean that you need to destroy what made this place popular in the first place?
Is your mission really to turn the Marmot’s Hole into THE destination of choice for diplomats and think-tank interns worldwide? Because that doesn’t sound like a place most Holediggers would want to spend their time in. If you want to be patted on the head by Korean reporters and ambassadors, find another way to do it. If you’re looking to make this place a boring springboard to a think-tank job, just be clear about it, because I don’t know any think-tanks that specialize in Korean nudes.
You seem to have a big overhaul in mind based on the unspoken suffering of thousands of high-class readers out there, who would potentially be contributing ground-breaking and earth-shattering comments about Lee Hyo-Ri’s tits if only they didn’t have to deal with the current crop of pond scum inhabiting the Hole. Get a grip on yourself, seriously. I don’t know where you get that impression, but I know a few people that read the posts and comments here but don’t participate, and that won’t change no matter what you do. Lurkers are lurkers, and I don’t understand why it’s suddenly your job to play mommy and overhaul this place in a misguided attempt to help them overcome their fears and participate.
On the other hand, if Robert brought you in to try and convert this place from a New York Post full of tits, gossip, and controversial topics into a New Yorker full of champagne flutes, policy essays, and analysis of grain distribution in Pyongyang, then let it be known and I’m sure a good many regulars will just stop coming here. If the comment section is a disgrace, then just delete the comments that you think make it a disgrace, plain and simple. No arguments about moderation policies and what is/isn’t good for the “atmosphere.” Just delete them.
If the lowly commenters that get deleted don’t like it, they’ll leave. Problem solved. Then you can have the place all to yourself and your select few influential commenters, and you can turn this blog into the greatest journalistic institution in history. Woop de doo.
P.S. I’m a little disturbed at all the preoccupation with my balls. Especially because they’re not even balls. It’s a strategically placed plum with a few hairs growing out. If you’re afraid of fruit, go see a shrink. If you can’t stop thinking about my testicles, you’ve got bigger problems than can be addressed here. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Amen to the last few comments, especially the mammary-related ones.
Wow, I didn’t recckognised until now that this blog was so highly esteemed. It is even enlisted in wikipedia.
Whether you like it or not, when this blog becames so respected and esteemed then it becomes a kind of media,and it is more than an expression of private interest.
Why don’t give it a go with the new rules and politics and see what happens? I am sure that the moderators will amend the politics and rules in the process.
I will think twice before I will post my comments next time.
Corpy Carly wrote:
“On a technical note, is it possible to introduce the ability for a poster to delete his own comment within a reasonable timeframe after posting – say twenty minutes? Several times I’ve commented and regretted how I phrased my words and wished I could just delete it before others respond to my own poorly articulated argument.”
The only problem is that if other commenters respond and you change your original post, then the comments won’t make sense. Well, actually, come to think of it, a lot of comments don’t make sense anyway.
I do hope Robert adds the comment link plug-in found in James’ post. That would permit commenters to respond to other commenters without derailing the thread.
I think the new Sheriff’s been called out.
The clock ticks down the seconds toward high noon…
Uh, like you noted right after, Marmot invited him to come up with a game plan, and I wouldn’t piss all over Oranckay even though I don’t like the rules so far…
As for your balls, the only time I’ve had trouble with them is when they were immediately followed by Baduk’s baby face. Something about that I find disturbing, but if we’re going to kick ou the blue balls, might we not also have to go after James’ blatant sexistism?(if that’s even a word…)
I’m glad I’m not as alone as I thought in feeling that losing the comments section as it used to be would be a big blow to the K-blogsphere – which is why I wrote so long winded about it.
I come here to read the comment threads on the topics of interest to me and pass by most else.
I would like to also recall the two previous times I’ve wondered outloud about what seemed to me a shift in Marmot’s style of posting — how it seemed to me he had switched to more of a “journalist” style and away from giving his own 2 cents/won about the topic of the post. —
I liked hearing what he had to say on issue x, y, or z. (I miss the days when Oranckay would comment.)
I like hearing what a good number of the others here have to say when they show a familiarity with Korea beyond the typical 6 months-in-ESLer view I used to get at work when I was still in Korea.
And there is no place else right now in the K-blogsphere where such discussions take place…
Hi thanks to all. Like I’ve said I don’t think I have all the answers, so imput is nice. I do have a little experience in the sociology of email lists. I’ve seen them implode for lack of moderation (anyone remember Moogoondhwa List?), and I’ve seen people resist and kick and scream as lists got moderated and productive, helpful, and on topic again.
In my experience, those who feel the greatest sense of entitlement, as if something rightly theirs is being taken away from them, are usually those who were the more unhelpful contributors before moderation set in. For the more prolific types, it is something like the end of life itself when heavy-handed moderation happens. I’m not thinking of anyone specific in our case here, but what I’ve seen happen time and time again is that the majority of email list members, those who rarely posted and didn’t cry “dictatorship” when rules were imposed, were very pleased when action was taken and began posting from time to time. I’m no math whiz, but let’s do the numbers. If say 100 people dominate the comments here and Marmot’s Hole gets 2,100+ unique visits a day, it would be no great loss if – for example – comments were shut down altogether. As I noted in a previous comment above, some very ifluential blogs in the English speaking internet disallow comments completely, but I suspect Marmot would not like this and frankly neither would I. And I must admit that I’m not sure I’ve got a good working theory when I say there would be no significant drop in visits were we to get that drastic, because as someone has pointed out to me in a private email, reading the comments at Marmot’s Hole is like watching the Jerry Springer show. Most of the people who watch that show would never think of actually being on it, but they watch it nonetheless to feel better about themselves, saying “Look at all those (choose your own adjective) people!” It can be fun, too, like when someone throws a chair, and you still get to say you would never be on it, so that you can somehow feel better about yourself. I think there must be some of this happening here as well. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve met an English speaker in Seoul who with a great tone of superiority tells me he never comments on Marmot’s Hole because every time he goes there the comments are “so unruly,” which sounds to me more like a confession about how often he stops by. On the one hand I worry that the comment section scares people away, but I also suspect that Marmot gets a lot of visits from people who enjoy the simple pleasure of watching all the action. So that’s something we’ll have to consider, too.
About the UNSG. Several times when I’ve met Korean government officials and been introduced as a “famous blogger” (which doesn’t happen often, and even less as of late) I’ve been asked if I’m the guy who owns the Marmot’s Hole. Such was the case with Ban Ki-moon when he was FM, and it was painful to have to tell him I am the owner of, um, just some other blog. Please understand that my motives for being willing to be chief moderator and Marmot’s desire to have me do it are not necessarily the same. I have always encouraged Marmot to realize that his blog is influential, an “opinion leader” to borrow an old Chosun Ilbo slogan, but his own motive for wanting some action taken on his comment section might be as humble as not wanting to be wrongly seen as “the guy with that site with all the anti-gyopo (just as one example of what I myself have heard around town) comments.”
The fact that this blog has the same group of commenters actually might also be an advantage in cleaning up the atmosphere. I mean, since it’s not getting spammed by hate groups, I suspect the simple announcement that Things Need To Be Different might go a long way. Even when the comments are civil, however, I am convinced the insular and cliquish appearance created when the same bunch of people comment all the time, even when you can only thank people for commenting all the time, has got to make people who don’t normally comment feel unwelcome and thus not comment. I’m still trying to figure out what can be done about this, if anything.
The idea of limiting the number of comments to each post is out. It would only make matters worse, since only those who check the comments all day long would get to say anything.
One thing is clear. No moderator can read all the comments all the time, so requests that I just delete the really inappropriate comments sounds nice but isn’t practical. What might have to be done is get a few more moderators and just require all comments be approved. This would calm things down considerably, but it would still be a lot of work. It might be a good idea to do this for specific posts, ones we can predict will have some potentially hateful comments that would not reflect on Marmot’s Hole very well. About Robert Kim, for example.
The plan of mine I like best would be to just step in when things get really out of hand at certain posts. I can’t imagine myself deleting individual comments on a regular basis. It’s just too much work, hence the request that people JUST IGNORE hateful or otherwise stupid comments. If you’re a target of the hate just count to ten, think of it as spam, and move on and don’t let a hateful person hijack things. Even if people react comment after comment in a civilized manner to an uncivilized one and the uncivilized one gets deleted you will be left reacting to something that isn’t there anymore, so that’s another reason to ignore such comments. If a whole thread gets out of hand, I’d just close the whole section for that post. This would enact a lot of collateral damage but maybe even that would have a positive effect over the long run.
These are my rambling thoughts… still thinking… thanks for the ideas.
my two cents’ is that a couple of warnings then a ban is effective and efficient for offenders. once you start moderating with actual rules you’ll need to keep amending them as new cases sprout up. it’s much easier to say, “warning one, warning two, you’re banned” and move on.
i highly doubt you’ll pick up any new commentators base on a new policy, but you will necessarily lose some via limits. there are lots of “peepers” on sites who don’t comment-don’t expect to draw them in.
in the immortal words of the descendents, “moderation, moderation, everything in moderation-including moderation.”
I can’t think of a single blog anywhere that doesn’t have an “insular and cliquish appearance,” and so what? Frankly, blogs aren’t popular mediums like newspapers, and if they allow comments online you’ll see precisely the same phenomenon.
Most of us don’t care for all the blathering about bad Japan and kyopo bashing, so just warn/ban these particular boneheads and the blog will improve immensely.
Also, all due respect to Marmot but the Chosun Ilbo and Hankie are “opinion leaders” in Korea, not him or any other blog, especially one 99.9% of the country doesn’t or can’t read.
Would Marmot’s Hole have gained such “prestigious” readership if the comments section had been moderated to the extent it weeded out any insular, cliquish appearance?
Was it a Jerry Springer-type atmosphere that built up readership? I doubt it. The Korea Herald Forum would be doing blockbuster business right now if that were the case.
Maybe it was the amount of expats (and others) more familiar with Korea and East Asia (area studies types) that pulled in people interested in the same area…
But, I’ll back off. Until recently, I was too busy to read the comments or comment that much, and I’ve been doing a ton since my schedule opened up. But I’ll wait to see how the dust settles…
I would think Marmot has enough guest posters and admin that could police most of the trouble.
As this is the Marmot’s Hole (and not the Marmot Commentors’ Hole), I have no problem defering to his ideas about this site. Marm has said repeatedly that he would prefer a more thoughtful comment section, more akin to Coming Anarchy (for example).
And once again, I agree with Oranckay (all hail the new regime!). As the saying goes, big noises come from hollow caves.
I forgot….I noticed recently on the Newsbusters site that more and more of the outrageous stuff those (conservative) US media watchdog bloggers are catching is coming from the blogs being set up by the mainstream media on their official websites where people like Katie Couric will post — apparently without as much regard for what they say as they do when the police themselves for the on-air stuff (but still end up giving us bias news coverage).
Last comment, then I promise, I’ll end my big noise and wait for the hollow cave…
Coming Anarchy blog: # of comments per post: 2, 0, 11, 3, 2, 2, 4, 11, 1, 0,
If that is what Marmot wants, and I have no idea one way or another, that is fine. Big Hominid didn’t allow comments for a long time, and I saw no problem with it. I don’t allow comments on my anti-US website though I do my blog.
But, if Coming Anarchy, or One Free Korea, are the model of what a respectable blog should look like (in regards to comments) – the bad Marmot’s Hole will be sadly (and I mean that) missed…
(One Free Korea’s Comments per latest posts: 10, 1, 13, 3, 5, 0, 2, 8, 1, 6, 6)
usinkorea,
You don’t know when to stop, huh? Now I see why there are rules.
Matt, Shakuhachi, quicktime will play 3GP just fine. I assume you took a cell phone video.
JK, looking at your post, so do I.
Mr. Secretary General, I would like to offer my humble and belated congratulations on the occasion of your selection. I have no doubt you will go down in history as one of the most influential and effective leaders of the United Nations.
Wait a minute, Mr. Ban Your Excellency I beseech you to look with compassion on my humble abode and grant me a penthouse apartment in Richeville from which I will shout praises to Korea every day
(Or the equivalent in cash)
Orankay (#35):
Which do you mean, Orankay – that it isn’t supposed to be a discussion group where people come to learn, or that it isn’t supposed to be centered in an environment of debate?
I agree with the limiting of trolls, yet hate to think that I can’t discuss something here simply because not doing so could offer the opportunity for others to comment – that is, an opportunity to say that they essentially agree or disagree. To me, that doesn’t seem like much of a rich environment either.
I think you know that I’m not a hater. Like you, I don’t want the threads to get tied down in debate either. But I believe that there has to be a place for Q & A. For all we know, that’s what those governemnt officials checked this blog out for in the first place.
http://www.usfkforums.com
It’s a forum. It has a lot of moderators. It has numerous categories and can expand. JK won’t be able to force a new regime over there.
How about a blog where people first make comments and then a post is slowly built from those comments?
i noticed that the comfort women thread was closed due to “inappropriate posting”. would that have not been better to warn those posters deemed “inappropriate” and kept open the thread? it seems to me that inappropriate posters will merely turn to other threads to troll rather than being served their appropriately hot cup of STFU.
you may well have started a game of gopher hole, oranckay.
Could step out of the box and look at this from a different perspective. No more lurkers. If the 2100-and-change lurkers value the site they ought to contribute. Gotta register to read anything beyond the first sentence of the post and gotta comment X number of times a month/quarter or lose the account. I’d rather see this blog with several hundred comments per post, especially from those notables, than see 6.
I have no issue w/ rules #1 – #5, and by the looks of my growing spare tire the second #5 is sensible too.
Gopher Hole won’t happen because trolls will be banned.
Oranckay, I for one firmly support the moderation efforts. For those topics with above 50 comments it was getting really tedious trying to decide what pertained to the topic and what had nothing to do with anything except personal attacks.
For those kinda discussions may I suggest folks AOL Messenger /MSN /Trillian /ICQ /GTALK /SKYPE /IRC /NETMEETING/etc. etc. ?
Dear JudgeJudy and others,
It is expected that a lot of inappropriate comments will get through. The only way to avoid that would be to make it a full time job and that’s just not going to happen. We’ll try sporadical inappropriate comment attacks and hope that’s enough to change the mood. Assume that some inappropriate comments will fall through the cracks…
Note that “the comfort women thread” had 197 comments but now has I think about 110. Most were removed for being inappropriate on their own or for being endless tit for tat between a few individuals and thus being off topic dialogue. A civilized response to an uncivilized comment qualifies as off topic, too, and will either be similarly deleted or be left hanging, responding to something that’s no longer there. Inappropriate comments should be ignored by other commenters or face this “punishment.” Please note that I just skimmed along and sought out four letter words and such and paid no attention to who said what. Undoubtedly many inappropriate comments remain, and some acceptable comments probably got hit as well. Much of the fight that occured will be incoherent and impossible to follow because most of it’s not there anymore. Too bad.
We’re not going to do retroactive weeding on earlier posts. The recent Comfort Women post was chosen because while it came before the present post it was ongoing and hateful in many directions and, more importantly, I needed to experiment a little. Thanks for your patience.
May I take this moment to remind Sheriff Oranckay and the Marmot that highbrow Coming Anarchy and One Free Korea do don’t boobie pics although if you scrubbed the occasional NWS post, those top government officials like Ban Ki-moon would probably quit stopping by.
Here is my perspective as a mostly quiet lurker: I read off and on for over a year and then every day for several months before I posted my first time (and still have not posted anything significant). One reason is that I am a relative newcomer to Korean issues — I am sure I will post more when I feel I can contribute something of importance. Although I am now quite interested and have learned a lot form the regulars, I personally welcome a *bit* more moderation because the infighting between some of the regulars is annoying and trolls are a turn-off. I do have mixed feelings about this and would prefer to err on the side of freedom (e.g., I am mildly offended by the blueballs gravatar, but it is not blatantly obscene so I can ignore it; others may be feel that way about me I guess). I agree with the above “Rules” but I would not be in favor of limiting the number of posts (but warn those who post at great length). Anyway, keep up the good work.
Of course, the easiest and most complete solution would be to require all comments to be submitted for approval before posting. Instantly, all flame wars and inter-comment arguments would disappear. I bet after a week or two of adjusting, you would get something like 20-30 posts a day submitted, with maybe half of those worth posting — not an unbearable workload.
Probably most people here would not like that system, but it would be a pretty thorough solution to the problem.
There are alot of analogies that would come to mind. It reminds me of when we were kids and the adults found out what we were up to. I suppose my most recent favorite hangout is going through a transformation. I’ve never seen this kind of thing before.
The play-by-play of the cyber-stalking and cyber detective work were fairly boring and could be lost. I just hope this will be a modest police action and not a chainsaw job. Most of what I’ve read here has been entertaining and some of it hilarious. It’s sometimes funny to watch people get bendt.
Many of the people who participate on this blog have great insight and I’ve found it extremely informative. My posts are mostly to cajole due to my laziness and lack of knowlege.
I trust the Marmot and will certainly try to abide by what’s enacted. What he’s done so far has been extremely worthwhile.
The Oranckay is a fairly rational human being, so let’s not get too worried. We just need to weed out the personal attacks, race-bating and off-topic bickering. We’re not looking to kill debate or prevent commentators from continuing to provide insight.
I wonder if it would be possible to have some kind of thumps up or thumbs down for comments on this blog, like they have on digg.com. Comments below some minimum threshold would be hidden but could be revealed if clicked on. Also it would provide a way of letting the administrators know which comments people find offensive.
What kind of “trouble” do you mean? Is the meaning of this statement as ominous as it potentially could be?
If someone says something libelous or otherwise illegal in your comment section and you don’t take it down in a timely manner, you can be held responsible as if you wrote it yourself.
Also, if you say things that are true and established fact but a court agrees that there is no social benefit from spreading those facts, you can be held responsible for hurting a person’s reputation. This is the reason why you see people who are not public figures refered to by their surnames only in many Korean language news reports about incidents of crime and their translations. Marmot has had close calls/threats relating to laws like this.
Haisan wrote:
“Of course, the easiest and most complete solution would be to require all comments to be submitted for approval before posting. Instantly, all flame wars and inter-comment arguments would disappear. I bet after a week or two of adjusting, you would get something like 20-30 posts a day submitted, with maybe half of those worth posting — not an unbearable workload. “
A couple of blogs I read hold all comments for moderation while the blogger is offline. Another screens comments from newbies. Oranckay could initially screen all comments and then allow users who follow the guidelines to post automatically, or he could put individual commenters on moderation status until they demonstrate a willingness to abide by the guidelines. The former would require more time but would avoid accusations of unfairness. I agree with you that initial efforts in moderating will pay off with less work later as commenters either conform to expectations or leave.
Oranckay wrote:
“This is the reason why you see people who are not public figures refered to by their surnames only in many Korean language news reports about incidents of crime and their translations. “
That’s not true for foreign nationals. I wish US media would provide some anonymity for the accused, who are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, but who are often tried in the media and public opinion.
@ nerdieboy,
There’s a plugin called Comment Karma (look in the Comment Plugin list) that adds the thumbs up/down feature to a blog.
If you’re REALLY feeling generous yet masochist, how about bringing the law to MY comments section? Hehe. For some reason, I attract the real crazies, even when I pull posts from other blogs!
Grrrrrr.
I get around 500-600 unique visitors per day, so I guess I am 1/4 the man that Robert is.
Yet, I have the same problem of only a relatively few people putting up comments. I’d like to also get those ratios up.
I don’t have the numbers of comments that Robert has, so I can do it by myself, but I do like the idea of a “sheriff.”
Showdown at high noon?
Hey, we have comment ratings now, eh? This is an interesting idea, and one well worth trying. It’ll be interesting to see what kind of consensus emerges over time over what kinds of comments are considered acceptable and what aren’t.
As for myself, these are just more shiny baubles to play with, tempting me to remain ensnared in this viper’s nest! Must…fight…the…urge…to…start…rating…every…single…comment….
Okay, the feature disappeared as soon as it appeared…might be worth a try, though.
It seems all the proposed rules and idea were a false alarm, and the policy likely will (rightly) be to eliminate off-topic/inappropriate/racist type comments. So probably nothing to worry about at this point in time.
I guess I will be able to spend much more time doing real things rather than surfing the comment section if this is indeed true:
I would estimate that the off-topic bickering takes up about 80% of the comment sections. It seems that most of the other two are contained in the off-topic comments as well.
Sewing—the function seemed to be slowing the blog and eating a ton of resources. Looking for other ways to do it.
No doubt comment-rating takes up a lot of processing time and resources.
One thing to keep in mind is that Oranckay—assuming he is a normal, healthy human with a life—cannot possibly be on this blog 24/7 (or even, say, 18/7) policing everything. So whatever approach you guys come up with will have to be one that is effective but requires low maintenance. Maybe something like a precision putting-out of spot fires, such as Richardson suggested—or nipping things in the bud as soon as someone comes swinging out of the blue with an ad hominem attack, and laying down the law before things get out of control. (Although that may again require more vigilant monitoring, in which case perhaps Oranckay alone couldn’t do it…perhaps he can have “sherrif’s deputies” who keep an eye on things when he’s not around—and a clearly enunciated set of rules for consistent application? Then again, this could lead to rule by a bureaucratic “in-group”….)
Oy, no easy solutions.
I’m glad a moderator has been installed, but one of my posts that was written before the last comment that Oranckay chose to delete in a bunch and which did not break the rules he set up has also been deleted, which makes me a bit wary of his impartiality. I only commented that it would be racist if anyone said that a report by a Nisei, a born American, to be untrustworthy just because of his ethnicity; I did not claim anyone to be one. If that rates a deletion, I don’t know what I can write here.
[DELETED. Reason: Personal Attack]
1. i wonder if the readership here at the marmot’s hole has declined.2. i think people read this site in part because the comments section is so lively.
3. i agree that important people read this site. for instance, i’m sure the author whose xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx. that, btw, is why the xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx the first place. oh, and i’m sure bruce cummings comes here too. how ya doing, bruce? loved your book. a classic!
4. i hope oranky’s intention is not an attempt to dictate style of writing.
5. xxxxxxxxxxx
Oranckay, how about a “report this comment” button on each comment. Then people would be less likely to violate #3, as I am itching to do now.
For the most part, I agree with Marmot and Oranckay’s intentions in instituting these rules. However, I urge you caution before you make sweeping changes.
As informative as the original poster’s materials are, I personally get as much inslight (if not more) from comments that follow the original article. I understand that the noise to signal ratio is quite high in the comments, and it can be frustrating wading through the sea of crap to find that gem. But there are gems, and they are more gems here in marmot’s hole comments sections than any other general audience bulletin boards out there. In general, I find that Marmot’s Hole commenters are very intelligent and well-meaning.
Of course, the administrators know this and their intentions in these new rules are not to frustrate the intelligent and well=meaning readership but rather the few blacksheep who make mostly hateful noises. I’m afraid, however, that some of these new rules are so encompassing and broad that it’ll discourage EVERYONE from commenting, if they are strictly enforce.
For example, regulating the number of comments (per commenter or per post), or regulating tone of voice seem very counter intuitive to me. Some of the best comments I’ve read were passionate discourses (that featured some strong languages), and the most important subject matters would elicit most number of comments.
Another example, forbidding running dialogs and enforcing on-the-topic-only policy. I usually enjoy it when a post devolves into a dialog/argument between two well-informed and eloquent commenters with opposing views. Often, a good dialog will also naturally lead to loosely-related or tangent topics that are also informative and entertaining. These comments are an integral part of what makes Marmot’s Hole worth reading: the original posts, intelligent comments, and occasional passionate flame wars (as long as they are well-argued and coherent). In my opinion, ANY SWEEPING MEASURE THAT DISCOURAGES COMMENTING WILL DIMINISH THIS WONDERFUL SITE.
Instead, may I suggest that Marmot and Oranckay evaluate offending comments on a case-by-case basis? I find the Supreme Court’s Principle of Porn Recognition works well in policing obnoxious comments in bulletin boards: bad comments, it’s like porn, you’ll know it when you see it. Instead of requiring everyone to adhere to certain stylistic restrictions, why not just kill bad comments when you see it? It probably be less work for the administrators, and it won’t affect those who do not offend.
There are some telltale signs of offensive/generally-crappy comments. For example:
1. “You-don’t-know-better-because-you’re-Korean” and “You-don’t-know-better-because-you’re-foreigner” type of comments. Truly a harbinger of crap that’s to follow.
2. Any comment that corrects the previous commenter’s spelling and punctuation. Especially ones that use the previous commenter’s lack of spelling prowess to invalidate and trivialize the comment.
3. An ongoing dialog/flame-war where all well-researched information have been exhausted on both sides, but they are still arguing. If you have nothing intelligent left to say, the argument is over. Anything more you say at this point will be by definition unintelligent, and very likely to be a banal personal attack. (I suppose this is the Oranckay’s “Don’t get the last word in” policy, which I wholeheartedly agree with.)
These are just a few examples that I could come up with just now, but I think it’s fair to say that most people will be able to recognize these type of comments and other similarly offending ones as crap, even in the absence of a specific rule that requires everyone to adhere to a style that reduces crap. We will know it when we see it. And when we see it, we can delete it.
I’ve come to love this site for the informative posts and intelligent and passionate readership. These are just my two cents, hoping that the site remains an entertaining and enlightening venue of lively debate for a long time.
Thanks, admins!
RE: Danson’s post #104
Rather than “rules,” perhaps “guidelines” would be a better word. I agree with you that offensive posts obviously deserve to be deleted, but quite a few commenters, including myself, have made posts that are at least partly off-topic.
I agree with you that thoughtful comments add to the discussion and are especially valuable when they express disagreement or add information to the OP. However, I live in the US, and there are some mornings when I wake up, check back at a thread to find 50 more comments posted, 30 of which are off-topic or personal attacks. The addition of gravatars does help people pick out the sages from the mudslingers and talking heads.
Finally moderation.
Knowing the moderator, I am pretty sure that he will be fair. I can not imagine him being anti-Korean as one person suggested – and I think that the Marmot chose the right person to do so…..far from here.
yes, and hes less likely to be a blinkered expat that never learned to leave his cultural bias at home either. with orancay’s input, i look forward to the new and improved hole
there wasn’t any attack in there. you’re trying to control speech and only MY SPEECH. i ain’t changing my style of writing. go ahead and ban me. i’m going to keep writing the way i do.
[DELETED. Reason: Personal Attack]
1. i wonder if the readership here at the marmot’s hole has declined.
2. i think people read this site in part because the comments section is so lively.
4. i hope oranky’s intention is not an attempt to dictate style of writing.
where’s the attack in these comments? why did you cross them out?
it seems the personal attack is against me. finally can get me, orankey, huh?
This appears to be on topic, given the post, so to address some of the very appropriate concerns expressed in the comment immediately above:
1. I’m not sure about readership right now, but do check the site meter (linked at bottom of page) a few weeks hence.
2. This is probably true, so thanks for participating and making the Marmot’s Hole what it has become today. Hopefully you will continue to contribute with your many insights.
4. That is not the intention. Dictating style would involve editing comment text word by word, instead of just deleting entire comments.
There were no personal attacks in items 1,2, and 4 from the comment that was deleted.
Can’t remember if this plugin has been mentioned before, and I am not sure what plugin it actually is, but, this very popular conservative media watchdog blog:
http://newsbusters.org/node/11253
has it set up so you can moderate all comments.
Beside each comment not your own, you have a moderation button where you can select what bothers you about the comment (including 2 good things to say about it — as well “troll” “irrevelent” “offensive”)…
I don’t know if it could be set up so that membership isn’t necessary to moderate or not…..but I bet it could.
This would allow readership to give an idea of what kind of commenting is bothering them.
[DELETED. Reason: Off Topic]
Okay, this is off-topic, but it’s a quasi-related, wacky technical issue that’s been bugging me. I changed my gravatar at gravatar.com a week ago, and every since then, only the generic Gravatar logo has been showing up here. Finally, my gravatar showed up for the first time today…I made an off-topic comment about it in another thread, the comment got struck out, and now the gravatar’s disappeared again! Has anyone else changed their gravatar lately and run into similar problems?
[DELETED. Reason: Off Topic]
Can’t I at least ask a question about a technical issue? Where else can I post it, exceptin a direct email to Robert?Technical issues are allowed. And as for the gravatar issue, let me look into it. Sounds weird, though.
I accept Oranckay’s deletion of a couple of flippant comments I made regarding gravatars in another thread, but my new gravatar has disappeared, the same day it first appeared after not being visible for a week. Coincidentally, it disappeared when Oranckay deleted those comments. I’m sure it’s purely a coincidence, and maybe it’s a Gravatar issue—but then again, the Gravatar looks a bit like yours (a samtaegeuk), although that wasn’t my intention. Maybe someone thought it was impersonation?
Okay, problem identified, hopefully. We’ll see if the change propagates correctly. I’ll choose another gravatar if it looks too much like yours (whenever it finally shows up).
Oranckay, will you be telling us your email address, so we do not mess up threads with queries/complaints?
I don’t mind keeping things on-topic, but per Oranckay’s suggested policy option #2, perhaps we could have the occasional “open thread” in which we could run amock (with restrictions on unacceptable comments)? The most interesting threads are the ones that go constructively (not destructively!) off-topic….
shakuhachi – Not sure yet, but thanks for the idea.
I’m generally with the libertarian approach, delete only personal & offensive attacks. I would even leave the off topics alone, as whilst sometimes annoying they can be easily passed over, and on some occasions the string of comments flowing from the off-topic one has been longer and more interesting than the original topic. (also as seen from Sewing technical query, most of us can’t start an off topic as a separate new post as most commenters aren’t allowed to post)
I am also personaly of the opinion shared by many others above that it is exactly the lively debate and exchange, in the korean context that gives the Hole is large readership. Also the “class partcipant” theory earlier is IMHO valid, most people will never participate and are happy to be comment voyeurs.
Some others possibly don’t have the time. There are many occasions when I pop in for 10 minutes or so on a lunch break, but really don’t have the time to get involved in a debate, so just check up on it from time to time.
[DELETED. Reason: Off Topic]
Hello, my senior told me come to here. It is my first time. Here is very safety.
Do you know L.A. Dodger? Park Chan Ho 파이팅! There have new sheriff, too. Please watch this:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports.....majors.htm
His ending not good.
I like your picture. 많이 있어요. I saw picture from 벗퍽동 and 분닥스. But little bit boring. Frankly speaking, I wish you will write many story about Hallyu and Bi. I expecting to see.
Thank you erase bad man writing. This blog is very fresh blog.
I am new poster. I am Marmot’s Hole!
[DELETED. Reason: Off Topic]
Gentlemen,It is my pleasure to come across such a fine blog as yours. This is my first time posting. In the past, I stopped by occasionally, but did not deign to post my comments among those of the hoi polloi. I see you have made changes for the better, and it is a pleasure to salute your new policy, which I look forward to reading forthwith. To wit, “A formal comment and moderation policy will be published in the coming days.” Joy. That will make for scintillating reading, one can be sure.
I, too, am an author of self-appointed note. Allow me to introduce myself by posting my curriculum vitae?
“Post-Structural Concerns in the Age of Globalization: A Primer” in Journal of Academic Paradigms, Seoul.
“Ubiquitous Pomposity: A Danger When One Wears the Badge” in Asian Dynamics, Tokyo.
“The Overuse of the Semi-Colon: A Graduate School Cliché” in Obahada, Osaka.
I have six graduate degrees. As such, I can appreciate topics in your blog such as “The Problem of Cultural Context in Reporting.”
I trust that my qualifications will be sufficient to allow me an occasional comment? It is my pleasure to come on board and join the meta-conversation. I think that together we can make the blogosphere and the ex-patriot community in the capital city a better place to live and meta-reside.
Like your obvious predecessor, The Asia Pages, you post well-researched investigative pieces on a variety of topics related to the Asian continent. I commend you for having the foresight to name yourselves masters of this domain – one that can only become more important as we delve further into this, the 21st century.
Sirs, one hardly knows when to stop praising you. Under the terms of the new policy, we are not allowed to acknowledge each other; however, I hope you will allow me a small expression of thanks: Well done, gents. I look forward to participating here.
I am a new poster. I am the Marmot’s Hole!
Hmmm, shouldn’t there be a policy against excessively smart-alecky comments as well?
[DELETED. Reason: Off Topic, Inappropriate Language]
no, you cunts asked for it…and whitey gave it to you in spsdes
eat it up
122> smart-alecky, irreverant, but surely not off topic! It highlights the concern that this place will become too highbrow & ultimately boring.
Even if you get 100% of UN Secratary Generals interested it only increase the readership by 1. Meanwhile the existing readership….
Thanks so much for this new policy on comments section. Maybe I will comment more often after that.
Oranckay, could you send me your email address? Mine is occidentalism@gmail.com
Hello shakuhachi,
Thank you for your concerns and ideas. I’ve given this a little thought. And while I wouldn’t mind corresponding with _you_, I think I need to make a policy of not pussing myself in a position where I (and other future moderators) are asked to defend decisions or face “why me and not him” types of questions, because I’d feel bad for not responding and people might be offended when they don’t get answers.
One way to keep oneself out of that kind of trouble is to be avoid being contactable by email. It would be nice and maybe even helpful for people to be able to “flag” inappropriate comments but opening up a user hotline is not the answer, since I already lead several lives already. However, I’m going to be posting an email address anyway: guessthispart@fastmail.jp. I use this _only_ to log in to MSN Messenger and don’t check the inbox. As a matter of fact I think I have it set so all mail is rejected.
I use this address to let people get a piece of me online, in realtime, as if to stop me for a minute in the hallway. I use this email address for the same purpose at another forum (one about frame design for mamachari, if you can believe that) and it has served me well by making sure that conversations either happen or they don’t, and there are not piles “work” left for me that I would never get to.
Oranckay, I would like to ask if I was off-topic or perhaps at all involved in the decision to close comments on this thread. I don’t think I was, but since the thread was closed only a few moments after I posted a comment, I have to wonder.
I’m not going to protest either way, I just would like some clarification so I can better know how much to say in comments, and where it needs to be turned into it’s own post on my own blog.
PP
Peter Pan -
As noted, the comment section to the post in question is not closed permanently. It was closed temporarily, and it was closed temporarily shortly after your comment because I was authoring my “moderator comment” at the same time you wrote your comment.
Hopefully, more appropriate discussion may continue when comment section for that post is reopened.
I am generally going to make a point of not giving clarification, but as I’ve written here and there (on Marmot’s) on the subject, untangling long off topic tit-for-tat arguments and games of who-called-who-what-first is just too much work to do unpaid and it probably not possible anyway, and furthermore it is expected that there will be collateral damage. That is, people who do nothing but contribute to healthy discussion will also fall victim to moderation actions, and if I/we take action like this from time to time it is going to be because of overall tone, not because of a single individual or comment, because that would be simple: we’d just delete. We’re sorry (really) but for now the social atmosphere is more important than individual justice, so please don’t take anything personally. Hopefully when we open the thread again you will have already set things in the right direction.
Okay, fair enough. Thanks for the quick response!
You must log in to post a comment.