1 Interesting article, but...

No, only joking. A really good read, and on a theme I can wholeheartedly get behind! Comment pages often reek of missed opportunities – my particular pet hate is the four or five identical posts by authors who haven’t even thought to read the existing comments.

That said, as someone whose interests include video games, I still find the web community to be a much friendlier and more accepting place than the rest of the internet – guerilla validation aside…

posted at 10:00 am on August 12, 2008 by andi farr

2 Making discussions a nicer placer to be.

I try to make sure that I never reply to a discussion immediately after reading it, ingesting the topic and thinking about it as I go about my daily business. This usually allows me to reply with clarity and with the oh so important suggestion to bring the discussion forward (as you wrote in the article). In my opinion the reason why discussions on the web breakdown in to slanging matches very often is because of misunderstanding, usually borne out of the disparity of knowledge level between writer and reader. I’m not trying to advocate elitism, but we all work at different levels in a very large industry and it’s obvious that someone who has been working in the industry for 5-10 years has a completely different outlook to a university graduate. I’d really like to see a web where replies to blogs/forums had to be in a format worthy of the article, a properly constructed argument that shows that the respondent has understanding of the case in point and can offer valuable personal insight. So often it is obvious that the article or blog post hasn’t even been read properly. This is really an ideal world situation, but a little closer to this would be really helpful.

posted at 10:14 am on August 12, 2008 by Drew Shapter

3 Beautifully written

Wonderful piece, Carolyn. Now, instead of just praising you for a thoughtful, engaging article, I’m supposed to ‘contribute to the discussion’, right?

I’ve read many comment guideline documents in the past: from small pointers on blogs, to large, carefully crafted corporate mandates on user participation. This article is, without doubt, the most approachable guide to interacting with a wider audience in a comments section. Not only from the position of the simple guidelines, but in explaining why thoughtful participation is so valuable.

Everyone who runs a comment section, or forum, with a set of participation guidelines, needs to read them, then read this, then re-write theirs. It’s that simple. Don’t just explain what you should do, but why. The bar has been officially raised.

Oh, hang on, that was a compliment again wasn’t it? Damn comment guidelines.

posted at 10:18 am on August 12, 2008 by Mark Boulton

4 What can I contribute?

»If more of us are thinking “What can I contribute?” instead of “Did I like this article?” the entire conversation is transformed.« – this is what really got me. One of these oh too simple statements carrying oh so much wisdom. Thank you for this, Carolyn.

Would be perfect to adapt ALA’s comment section to this, changing the »Was it good for you, too?«!

posted at 10:45 am on August 12, 2008 by Julia Soergel

5 Untitled

Lately I attended a course on transactional analysis and I think your article points out some fundamental aspects of it. At the root of clear communication is our ability to understand a message without being distracted by the form it takes—not only on the web, that is—and reply with a message formulated with the appropriate tone and words.

The value you bring to the conversation is directly related to how you can empathize with your reader’s comments and build upon it. As Drew I also try to think about it for a while before giving an answer and this is valid for communications that happen “in real life” as well.

Some may hire you, collaborate with you, or even visit your site and purchase something through one of your cleverly disguised text ads

Nicely said :-) Very good read, thanks a lot.

posted at 01:06 pm on August 12, 2008 by Régis Kuckaertz

6 What are those places?

Very nice read. I wonder what these places are that you write about. Of course they are specific for different subjects, but it would be nice to get a few suggestions – on different issues, just to get a feel of the more continueus (sp? actual word? obviously I’m not a native) part of the web.

(I’ve been reading ALA om and off for at least five years, this is actually the first time I wanted to comment/ask something)

posted at 02:07 pm on August 12, 2008 by t sr

7 In it something is

“Despite the overwrought nature of some of our online conversations, there is, indeed, something important at stake. The great phenomenon of our times, this global network of voices and places and missions is something you and I have the power to shape. What a privilege. As fast as the web races forward, it’s clearly still in its infancy. We have time to make it grander than it is, and that better web is likelier to arrive through open doors, not those slammed shut.” – In it something is…some pride

posted at 02:21 pm on August 12, 2008 by Ruslan Katronov

8 This line said it all for me

Carolyn – this was really great, and I’ve been looking forward to reading it for a while.

The hairs on the back of my neck raised a little when I read this line:

If more of us are thinking “What can I contribute?” instead of “Did I like this article?” the entire conversation is transformed.

That, to me, is the big takeaway here, and I only hope that that simple phrase can guide more of us in our interactions online. Thanks so much for a great start to the day!

posted at 02:38 pm on August 12, 2008 by Derek Featherstone

10 great stuff

Here at work we are in the midst of bitter discussions around internal development standards. Having read <a href=”http://books.google.com/books?id=sjH3emOkC1MC&dq=getting+to+yes&pg=PP1&ots=3jJ9F7Dp78&sig=7F7KkkTNKlcb5UT80Ziorr93ktg&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result”>Getting to Yes</a>, has really helped our team. Here is a small excerpt:

“In 1964 an American father and his twelve-year-old son were enjoying a beautiful Saturday in Hyde Park, London, playing catch with a Frisbee. Few in England had seen a Frisbee at that time and a small group of strollers gathered to watch this strange sport. Finally, one Homburg-clad Britisher came over to the father: “Sorry to bother you. Been watching you a quarter of an hour. Who’s winning?”

In most instances to ask a negotiator, “Who’s winning?” is as inappropriate as to ask who’s winning a marriage. If you ask that question about your marriage, you have already lost the more important negotiation – the one about what kind of game to play, about the way you deal with each other and your shared and differing interests." ,  Roger Fisher, The Harvard Negotiation Project

posted at 06:22 pm on August 12, 2008 by daniel lopez