Posts tagged with ‘commenting’

Gawker Reimagines Commenting with Kinja
Blog network Gawker unveiled an additional reblogging feature on Kinja, its blog aggregator and discussion platform. Now each time Gawker readers re-blog or share articles on the platform, they can rewrite the headlines and lead paragraphs, Nieman Lab reports:

The reframing functionality…allows several versions of the same story to circulate under different headlines. So where one reader might write the headline “Cat Neckties Are Things That Exist; Are Popular,” another could share that original post but reframe it as “Nutty cat owners forcing pets to wear ‘cat neckties.’” An original post with the headline “The Truth About Being Broke” might be reframed as “How to survive being totally broke.”

Gawker CEO Nick Denton launched Kinja in 2004 and sees comments as content, not just noise attached to content. “The whole point of Kinja is to turn the conversation into news — on a grander scale than we do already on the Gawker blogs,” Denton told Nieman Lab. 

“For instance, say a story was written for gamers — they can translate it for a more general audience,” Denton said. “And, if that URL is shared, it is shared with the new headline and intro.”
So a reader gets to repurpose and share an article in whatever context she chooses, with the original article appearing in full below her headline and introduction, but the original story gets the traffic. Gawker editors can also snap up original reader contributions to Kinja, reframe them, and share those reader-generated posts with the wider Gawker network. Staffers can aggregate commenters; commenters can aggregate staffers; at some point, the distinctions start to dissolve.
Wresting this kind of editorial control from the professionals may make some journalists uneasy, but it’s already how people are interacting with content (and with one another) on other platforms. Denton calls Kinja “by far the most significant tech investment” that the company has ever made, with 30 tech staffers working full-time on the project for the past year.

Image: Kinja logo, Wikipedia

Gawker Reimagines Commenting with Kinja

Blog network Gawker unveiled an additional reblogging feature on Kinja, its blog aggregator and discussion platform. Now each time Gawker readers re-blog or share articles on the platform, they can rewrite the headlines and lead paragraphs, Nieman Lab reports:

The reframing functionality…allows several versions of the same story to circulate under different headlines. So where one reader might write the headline “Cat Neckties Are Things That Exist; Are Popular,” another could share that original post but reframe it as “Nutty cat owners forcing pets to wear ‘cat neckties.’” An original post with the headline “The Truth About Being Broke” might be reframed as “How to survive being totally broke.”

Gawker CEO Nick Denton launched Kinja in 2004 and sees comments as content, not just noise attached to content. “The whole point of Kinja is to turn the conversation into news — on a grander scale than we do already on the Gawker blogs,” Denton told Nieman Lab. 

“For instance, say a story was written for gamers — they can translate it for a more general audience,” Denton said. “And, if that URL is shared, it is shared with the new headline and intro.”

So a reader gets to repurpose and share an article in whatever context she chooses, with the original article appearing in full below her headline and introduction, but the original story gets the traffic. Gawker editors can also snap up original reader contributions to Kinja, reframe them, and share those reader-generated posts with the wider Gawker network. Staffers can aggregate commenters; commenters can aggregate staffers; at some point, the distinctions start to dissolve.

Wresting this kind of editorial control from the professionals may make some journalists uneasy, but it’s already how people are interacting with content (and with one another) on other platforms. Denton calls Kinja “by far the most significant tech investment” that the company has ever made, with 30 tech staffers working full-time on the project for the past year.

Image: Kinja logo, Wikipedia

Gawker lets us name ourselves again - the return of screen names with numbers (but more importantly: anonymity)
Gawker has implemented a new comment system that doesn’t ask you to link your Facebook, LinkedIn, Airbnb and Pinterest profiles before you comment. You can now pretend it’s 2004, and you’re ready for heated discussions about whatever it was you were into then.
Here’s how they’ll keep it civil:

Each contributor — whether anonymous or not — will now be given the power to moderate the conversation they spark. Interesting questions might warrant a response; corroborating responses can be accepted; and harassers can be dismissed. Give the source the ability to tell us what they know, then let the reader determine whether they’ve satisfied the critics, just as one would in judging a panel debate or a courtroom cross-examination.

And here’s how it’s worked today — not too bad.
But Gawker isn’t the only site doing this, and the other one isn’t just Reddit. 4chan  founder Christopher Poole has long claimed that his site, which, among other descriptions, has been called “[the] web’s most bewildering — and influential — subculture,” thrives on its users’ anonymity. Think content, not creator.

Gawker lets us name ourselves again - the return of screen names with numbers (but more importantly: anonymity)

Gawker has implemented a new comment system that doesn’t ask you to link your Facebook, LinkedIn, Airbnb and Pinterest profiles before you comment. You can now pretend it’s 2004, and you’re ready for heated discussions about whatever it was you were into then.

Here’s how they’ll keep it civil:

Each contributor — whether anonymous or not — will now be given the power to moderate the conversation they spark. Interesting questions might warrant a response; corroborating responses can be accepted; and harassers can be dismissed. Give the source the ability to tell us what they know, then let the reader determine whether they’ve satisfied the critics, just as one would in judging a panel debate or a courtroom cross-examination.

And here’s how it’s worked today — not too bad.

But Gawker isn’t the only site doing this, and the other one isn’t just Reddit. 4chan  founder Christopher Poole has long claimed that his site, which, among other descriptions, has been called “[the] web’s most bewildering — and influential — subculture,” thrives on its users’ anonymity. Think content, not creator.

Less Trolls, Less Comments, Better Conversation →

TechCrunch has gone through a number of commenting systems in its life. This includes WordPress’ default, Disqus and IntenseDebate. After a week with Facebook, they say that comment quality is improving while overall quantity is falling.

While we’re apprehensive about turning over comments to Facebook, the results thus far speak for themselves. Comments are, after all, where the conversation’s at. The less spam, the less trolling, the better.

Via MG Siegler:

Since we flipped the switch on for Facebook Comments last Tuesday morning, you’ve probably noticed that the overall number of comments have fallen dramatically. This is completely expected and definitely not a bad thing. Previously, many of our posts would get hundreds of comments (and sometimes more), but at least half of those would be of a quality best described as weak to poor. And of those, about half would be pure trollish nonsense.

Simply put: with the previous system, roughly half of the comments were more or less useless.

With the Facebook system, the most popular posts are only touching around 100 or so comments (obviously, the ones about the commenting system have more). But of those 50 to 100 comments, many of them are actually coherent thoughts in response to the post itself — you know, what a comment is supposed to be.

That’s not the case across the board, of course. We’re still seeing a lot of commenters talking about their hatred of the new commenting system. But those are easy to discount as we saw the same comments when we switched to Disqus, and InstenseDebate before that. It’s a symptom of change. Those comments will dissipate quickly, if we stick with Facebook.

Seems people think twice before commenting when their identities are known.