Site update to display of comments

You may notice we have changed the way comments to articles are displayed. If you want to know why and how, please read the full article.

((i))

Indymedia is an open publishing platform for alternative grassroots news. The comments functions allows everybody to correct or add to posts. Quite often, comments are used for quick discussions or rants, in a way that would be more suited for a discussion forum like libcom or urban75. Some comments seem to be designed to discourage, disinform and undermine activists. Constructive additions that correct or add to articles often get lost in wider debates. Some regional collectives have found it difficult to develop a local news site when articles immediately get hit with large numbers of bad comments.

To address this problem, we have introduced a feature that allows imc uk site admins to promote comments to "additions". A comment can now be manually "promoted" to an addition when it adds information or thoughtful criticism. We hope that displaying constructive and focussed comments underneath the articles will add to the quality of imc uk news. Additions will be displayed with their full text at the end of each posting. The titles of all other comments will be listed after the additions. Clicking on a title displays that comment along with all the others.

Discriminatory or disruptive comments will continue to be hidden according to our editorial guidelines. From now on comments that are hidden will be accessible in the same manner that hidden articles are.

imc-uk-process
Homepage: http://lists.indymedia.org/imc-uk-process

Download this article in pdf format | Email this article to someone | Comment on this article

Comments

Hide the following 35 comments

Good idea

20.11.2005 20:25

...for all the reasons given above.
Good articles were getting trashed too often by flamebait and disinfo in the comments.
Even better, hidden comments are viewable now from the "view all posts" pages, same as hidden articles.

Thanks.

Agree But

20.11.2005 22:13

The proof of the pudding will be in how additions and comments are determined.

Observer

Even better...

20.11.2005 22:26

...would be to fully explain why something is being hidden along with the article or comment, not in a separate discussion group that is *extremely* difficult to cross-reference. And to give a proper reason for hiding, like which Editorial Guideline is being contravened. Accountability starts at home IMC.

Radjel

good move

21.11.2005 01:11

This is a good move forward to deal with the troll problem. It gets my vote. Indymedia is a news site not a rant/blog site.

However, I do agree with the Radjel that more transparency is needed as to what guidelines are being breached when the posts / comment are being hidden. Helps posters to learn as well, so will also contribute to the site's quality.

-@-

Selective reading

21.11.2005 08:16

And so it begins. The beauty about an uncensored site is that you have to wade through some difficult and unpalatable opinions, which sometimes challenge your own. It helps you understand how other members of this population are really thinking and that can sometimes be quite scary! Sometimes fascinating. But real.
So instead, we first have anything really dodgy removed and then we get to only read what we select from a sub-title. We make sure our unchallenged views stay entrenched.
I believe nothing at all should be censored for adults. We live in the real world and can cope with the choices we make. Anything else is patronising at best, a lie at worst and we already have enough of that in mainsteam reporting.

Sam

NEWSWIRE NEWSWIRE NEWSWIRE

21.11.2005 09:12

Radgel wants hiding "fully explained" - at best we can hope for a tickbox which shows which editorial guidelines have been breached - there isn't an office full of wage slaves to write an explanation for every hidden comment. Perhaps Radgel would like to submit the coding to enable the accountability he seeks?

Sam would like "an uncensored site" - this site has had to develop editorial guidelines and has never claimed to be free of an editorial bias. Perhpas Sam would like to start an uncensored site?

It's easy to complain about what others are doing - but if you're not getting what you want here then nobody is stopping you from setting up your own site, or getting involved in improving Indymedia by getting involved with a local Kollective.

This site is a newswire, not a bulletin board - and many of the "difficult viewpoints" encountered here can be obtained in any tabloid at your local newsagent.

Digital Future

Explanations on hiding

21.11.2005 10:16

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/static/mission.html
quote: "While the mainstream media conceal their manifold biases and alignments, we clearly state our position. Indymedia UK does not attempt to take an objective and impartial standpoint: Indymedia UK clearly states its subjectivity."

Full transparency is a fine idea, but in practice explaining all moderations to the satisfaction of all critics would increase the volunteers' workload many times over, and spare time isn't something they have too much of these days. There are too few volunteers doing too much work.

People's ideas vary widely about what ought and ought not to be hidden from the main pages. Some people say absolutely nothing should be hidden, which has been tried before: IMC Portugal and others got buried in racist and fascist postings, adverts, spam, etc. and the site actually had to shut down for a while until they put a system in place that could handle moderation and anti-abuse measures.

As for "accountability begins at home", well, Indymedia is a collective, accountable to its members. If you want accountability, then join up and work to influence the consensus on editorial policy. Teach yourself the tech stuff, as many IMC volunteers have, and put some hours in making it better. Propose, get consensus for, develop, test and implement a feature on IMC's content management system that puts up flags feeding back why it's been hidden, and include an "other" flag for those articles and comments that don't breach any of the written guidelines precisely to the letter, but nonetheless the collective's consensus is that they don't belong on this site.

Every single time I've suggested in the past few years to critics of IMC UK that they actually roll up their sleeves and do something about it, the response has been a shrug and a mutter from these (mostly anonymous) critics. Then a few months later, they'll come back and have another go at the volunteers.

No matter how hard IMC works at this, there will always be people who insist the measures haven't gone far enough, and that IMC UK should repeat the IMC Portugal fiasco. I think these new features strike an excellent balance. Big thanks to the developers who made this happen.

not a good idea

21.11.2005 15:55

Not a good idea.

Instead of being able to read original post and comments in one go, have to mess about pulling up additional pages. A retrograde step.

But agree, we have people abusing the Open Publishing nature of Indymedia.

They are causing serious problems.

keith

Good move IMC

21.11.2005 15:56

Good move IMC. I know that your work has been made harder over the past 6 months by a small number of persistent fascist trolls. If anyone wants to read the views of these individuals there are plenty of fascist sites they can look at, they have no place on Indymedia. Moreover, fascist postings have often not been an 'honest exchange of ideologies', which may appeal to some liberal idiots, but they have been attempts to misinform - Fascists pretending to be Asians in order to stir up racism; fascists pretending to be liberals in order to attack and undermine militant antifascists; fascists circulating false rumours of non-existant antifascist actions; fascists spreading lies about the arrests of antifascists; fascists trawling for information by pretending to be antifascists, and fascists impersonating the organisers of events in order to claim that they have been cancelled. It will be hard for Indymedia to solve the problem completely, fascists are ruthless and belligerant individuals who will use whatever means at their disposal to undermine antifascism and promote their foul ideology, but this is a start. Good luck IMC.

Auntie

Good work people

21.11.2005 17:38

I like the update, the site's looking tighter all the time... Now where that spinning globe of the world with all the little ((i))'s flashing all over the place :) Maybe it should be called 'Indymedia Earth'?

predictible

21.11.2005 22:52

the beginning of the end.......

crystal ball

Funny

21.11.2005 23:30

I think these changes are a reasonable start in addressing some of the problems arising in the comments section but only by adding the option for contributors to register nicks or validate email addresses can the problem of impersonation be solved and there are no obvious acceptable solutions to disinfo trolls posting under multiple nicks to give the impression of support for their own views.

seed

I support the changes

22.11.2005 01:45

I think the changes create a bit of psychological distance between the articles and the "crazy" comments, which is good for IM's credibility.

I am probably guilty of a bit of opinionated ranting in response to news articles, but isn't news-led debate a part of Internet culture? Slashdot was one of the first sites to experience this USENET-style chaos, and they started a complex moderating system with karma etc. But I would definitely not be in favour of that for Indymedia.

The really insidious problem is that the newswire is just as open to abuse as the comments, and many of the most ridiculous flamewars are a consequence of maliciously posted newswire articles.

I think the trolls exploit the fact that political activity is social as well as ideological. Unfortunately a lot of activists still haven't fully absorbed their own egalitarian, anti-chauvanistic ideas, and they end up getting drawn into egoistic sarcasm pissing contests. The answer is to concentrate on theory and facts, and ignore anyone who treats serious political issues as a joke.

anon

Excellent News

22.11.2005 06:39

The Indymedia UK collective have my full support in implementing their new procedures. Indymedia is designed to be a site to facilitate progressive political activism. Unencumbered by flame wars or misuse by macho axe-grinders, it can get back to reflecting left, anarchist, anti-racism, environmental, womens and pro-tolerance activism across the UK.

Caz

nice one.

22.11.2005 11:58

This measure seems a good way to tackle spamming and trolling, which could potentially cripple the site. I find the new layout easy to use, and I appreciate all the work you techies put into indymedia - many thanks.

activist

good job!

22.11.2005 14:34

Just to say I agree with this new measure totally!

After several years support for Indy, I was really starting to get turned off by the all the bullshit etc. But hopefully now it can get a lill better and be a decent grassroots newswire again. The changes are nice and clear too, well done.

I also agree with what someone above says about creating mental distance between articles and comments, cos yeh I was starting to read Indy like a debating board (and a bad one at that) when it was and should be a newswire! The distinction between additions and comments is great for this reason too - additions to an article should be up there cos essentialy they are continuations of the article. But comments should be seperated like this, so it is a conscious choice to read them or not. Good stuff.

I am allways in two minds about censorship. On one level maybe I agree that there 'shouldnt be any censorship for adults' BUT this is not Indymedia's remit, it never has been and never should be. It is ideological and biased and thats great! It does what it says on the tin folks!

If you want uncensored stuff, start something else! Surely this movement is built on autonomy and decentralisation, not homogenous mass society where everything is the same and under the same 'rules'? As a collective Indy is accountable to the collective, no one else, If you dont like it, go somewhere else or join the collective!

Anyway, yeh, well done admins, this is great and hopefully can sort out some of the problems, thanx!

See ya in the streets!

lovenrage

Editable comments

22.11.2005 19:56

I agree with the idea of keeping the comments seperate from the main article- they are a distraction. And clicking a link to access the comments hardly amounts to 'censorship' as far as I can see.

One thing that I think would be a good idea is the ability to edit or even delete ones own comments after they've been posted, as per many discussion forums. I'm sure people have sometimes fired off a comment in the heat of the moment, or wished they'd worded themselves more clearly, and regreted postings that they've made. An 'edit' feature could prevent may of those 'I wish I hadn't said that' or 'I wish I'd waited til I was sober before i sent that' moments...

Herby Spiral

On balance, an improvement

22.11.2005 21:06

Firstly, credit where it's due: to the IMC volunteers that produce the code for the site and take the trouble to moderate it. No-one should take them for granted. Whatever our varying points of view, we're all here because we get something out of it and without their continuing efforts it simply wouldn't exist.

I welcome the fact that unsuitable comments are now hidden rather than deleted. As someone who's occasionally been on the wrong end of what I'd consider to be over-zealous "moderation" (surely a misnomer here?), any move towards less effective forms of censorship is welcome.

Of course, censorship is a matter of absolutes, not a matter of degree. One cannot practise "moderate" censorship any more than one can be slightly pregnant. Nevertheless, putting "difficult" comments in the naughty box is an improvement to throwing them on the fire. Rome was not built in a day.

It is, of course, IMC's right to police this site as it wishes. It's private property. No-one has a "right" to space here; we're here through suffrance, not entitlement. However, I hope I'm not in the minority here that thinks that a progressive society is best achieved by defeating our opponents' arguments, not by eliminating our opponents or stifling their voices. Thus, this website can become more like the kind of society we'd like to create, rather than the one we currently oppose.

I'm amused by the idea that some activists might be "discouraged, disinformed and undermined" by anything they'd read here. Activists need to be made of sterner stuff if they're going to take on the might of the state and global capitalism, rather than cry into their milk because an astute poster undermined one of their quasi-religious beliefs. If you disagree with something, say so. If something is inaccurate, correct it. It's not hard.

I'm still of the opinion that the best way to encourage high quality posting here is to implement a membership system and require that all posters sign in before commenting. This would go a very long way towards encouraging people to eschew mischief, particularly impersonation, without requiring any positive action on the part of IMC's volunteers. I do, however, understand that there may be reasons in principle why this hasn't happened, and reasons in practice even if the principle is accepted.

Still, onward!

Zorro

How do we know...

22.11.2005 22:27

How do we know if the comments allowed to be shown here, reflect the real opinions of posters?

Fluff

" It's private property"

23.11.2005 06:12

well its social property in so far as editorial decisions are made on public lists and can be proposed/blocked by anyone. Good job IMC peeps, keeps it NEWSwire without doing away with the comments. Good stuff.

im fan

Disinformation

23.11.2005 12:24

"I'm amused by the idea that some activists might be "discouraged, disinformed and undermined" by anything they'd read here."

A couple of examples of fascist disinformation are the posting of a fake e-mail address for the 635 Group asking antifascists to contact that address (a trawling exercise to obtain details of antifascists), and posting that members of the same group had been arrested for throwing a brick at a child, with anothr e-mail adress for antifascist supporters to contact.

Auntie

good work

23.11.2005 17:23

We have felt it nesesarry to impliment a similar system in bristol, i like your idea of 'additions' though - we will watch to see how it works..

mayler
Homepage: http://www.bristol.indymedia.org

More examples

23.11.2005 17:41

More typical disinfo:
"(event) has been cancelled"
"meeting point for (event)has been changed, to (BNP regulars pub, other side of city, etc)"
"the meeting time for (action) has been changed to: (one hour after real meeting time)"
"(strongly-worded activist message, followed by) I've been working almost fulltime trying to stop (corp activity, animal rights abuse, etc), and everything we've tried so far has failed. We're getting nowhere, we need to change our tactics."
"squat at (location) has been shut down, residents have all scattered"

You get the idea. It's stuff that you usually can't really argue against, and the information might have been accidentally wrong. No abstract argument needed, just a correction. Think news, not theoretical discussion.

You get disinfo all the time on this site from the far right, and from arseholes with too much time on their hands. But the comments feature is very good at correcting that, and as readership has grown Indymedia has gained a whole army of proofreaders.

All the corporate press offer is a letters page, and maybe a two-line retraction on page 19, two days later. The only time you'll see live edits on the fucking Guardian website are when they've offended somebody powerful.

David

Bristol 2

23.11.2005 19:56

Yes, a similar scheme has been adopted in Bristol Indymedia - and it's a totally shite site as a result! The calendar gets used - full stop. (You idiots let Zaskar 'win'!)
Wonder if this 'negative' attitude will make the comment list... ooh, here's hoping!

Fluff

hoorah hoorah - good move techies

24.11.2005 19:15

Fluff - you seem to like to misunderstand what's happening.

> I'm amused by the idea that some activists might be "discouraged, disinformed and undermined" by
> anything they'd read here. Activists need to be made of sterner stuff if they're going to take on the might of
> the state and global capitalism, rather than cry into their milk because an astute poster undermined one of
> their quasi-religious beliefs. If you disagree with something, say so. If something is inaccurate, correct it.
> It's not hard.
Many 'activists' (I don't like to use the term about myself as it aids oversimplification (see your comments quoted above!) get easily sucked in to replying, like I am here, when my own sense says, "no, don't bother, it doesn't matter". So. There is the whole world in it's glorious technicolour that is infinitely discouraging etc - when you've opened your eyes to that, read about it, feel it, and try and act on it, you need support and as much balance as you can find to the fundamental undermining nature of the society we all live in - it's not a question of sterner stuff. It's not about astute posters undermining beliefs, and if you read Indymedia enough you'd see it's not. From you saying quasi-religious beliefs, I take it that: you are not an 'activist' (why visit this site then?), you don't know many in their diversity, you don't really listen or try to understand different views to your own etc etc. No, it's not hard, but it's a fucking waste of time when I should be using my energy to live and get out there, fighting for life itself, alongside all of you. End of pixel dancing.

blatherer

I Could Be Wrong But....

24.11.2005 22:59

...there doesn't seem to have been a single posting by PsyOps, Twilight, or any other Jordan clones since the new regime began - a success all round!

Paranoid Pete

disappointed so far

25.11.2005 00:48

Disappointing if Twilight has been censored - those posts were often interesting.
Comments are very often more interesting than the original posted 'article'. Also have not noticed any improvement to the quality of articles posted yet. Maybe those who were too afraid of the opinions of those they disagreed with will take a while to come back although not sure there is any proof that has happenned.

bugle

twilight et al

25.11.2005 01:18

This temporary reprieve from the spook/fascist/troll bullying and abuse isn't something that ought to be "won" over and over again by progressively making Indymedia more heirarchical and closed. This change isn't a concession to the repressor's agenda, just a minute clean up.

anon

Bristol

25.11.2005 11:55

Not sure why my brief comment sympathising with the Bristol situation was removed. 'Zaskar' is not the real name of the person involved, and he has brazenly boasted about being a police informer, so it is hardly contentious. He has also admitted calling an IMC volunteer a 'nigger' and threatening to rape a young female contributor, so again these are hardly contentious subjects. I know that this was a difficult situation for Indymedia, with Bristol being effectively closed down because of Zaskar, but censoring all posts on the subject, however innocuous, seems as spineless as your decision to censor the original story (which even Freedom covered in print.)

Spartacus

mis-quote

25.11.2005 19:26

er.. don't remember writing any of the above, Blatherer.
But it's quite encouraging, reading you. Just shows that the new comment format can't keep a good blatherer down!

Fluff

I agree

29.11.2005 12:33

I agree

Mike

Problem with website

12.01.2006 18:08

This isn't related to the above, but not sure how else to comment. When you look up the articles on the right hand column and then use the back button, you really are transported back - to November last year - weird. You have to refresh to rejoin the present.

Silly fluff and others

24.01.2006 12:34

Ha, thats funny.

I did of course use the word 'nigga' in a venacular taunt that was entirely in context. And?

Threatening to rape.... Now that is just silly and shows very poor powers of reasoning. Did you read the glorious thread concerned? I doubt it.

The reason my posts dont appear on bim are several.... The site is rubbish and run by fools so I no longer read or post and the word 'zaskar' is blocked by thier s ware, censored if you like, rahter ironic innit?

My expirience of bim is that any dissent or debate, however put, is likely to be quashed.

Shame.

Zaskar
Homepage: http://www.zaskarfilms.com

Pitty it wasn't done earlier

17.02.2006 11:07

I've stumbled upon this realy, because I so rarely looked at this site - and why?
- Not so much trolls, but the fact that commenters often made the mistake of getting into 'arguments' with them...... that too, in combination had ruined the site (i.e. for me)
Of course I agree with the move - otherwise it is (already) a waste of time!
We'll have to get on with it and wait and see if some 'good' criticism/exchange develops (and not just 'making right noises' &c.) I'd look forward to this.

James

people being real and not anonymous would help, good idea tho

24.05.2007 04:36

when i 1st read this i thought it was a bad idea, but now i read the comments i agree. like peeps say too many fascists,etc were being dodgy and messing things up, and indymedia admits its biased-your not gonna print an article arguing the merits of sexism for example. and esp after reading what happened in portugal and bristol.
i also love how, and someone else said this, its always the peeps who don't wanna D.I.Y. and get involved that tend to make the most bitching about how messed up everything is.
and agree its a newsite, not a forum, tho i enjoy most comments, and it helps developa community.
nuff respect for all the work youse do.
also if peeps had 2 print their real name or something they would not be so bold to talk the talk' lol

m.caroline F.T.S.
mail e-mail: kj10680@yahoo.co.uk

Links

IMCs