Engadget Latest To Try Comment Cooling Off Period; I Can't Figure Out Why

from the sorta-missing-the-point dept

Last month, we wrote about a local news website in Illinois that was getting frustrated with the dialog in its comments, and it instituted a "cooling off period" where it shut down its comments for a while, hoping that it would drive away the less desirable comments. The whole thing made no sense to us. Those types of commenters would eventually come back, and the solution should be offering better incentives and better overall discussion for commenters, not blocking out everyone. And yet... (without giving credit to the site that led the way last month), it looks like super popular gadget blog Engadget has done the same thing, apparently after comments over the whole iPad thing got too heated. Engadget, of course, is owned by AOL -- and you would think that if there were any company out there that understood group dynamics online by now, it would be AOL. Honestly, I'm still really confused as to what this will actually do, other than make Engadget a lot less interesting for those readers who took part in the community.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    scarr (profile), Feb 2nd, 2010 @ 9:56pm

    Doesn't "things getting heated" mean people are interested in what you're writing about? What do they have to lose?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 3:56am

      Re:

      exactly. sites like FML, lolcats, and many other usergen sites order by vote count, not vote magnitude/sum/average.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Rahul, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 4:15am

      Re:

      Actually, "things getting heated" means flame wars going on in the comments, usually not even related to the article content. Mindless and childish personal attacks to the point where it is detrimental to the "Engadget Community" as a whole.

      If it was just people arguing passionately about information in the article, that would be ok. But this is obviously a completely different issue.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Brendan (profile), Feb 2nd, 2010 @ 10:03pm

    Live in a Van, by the River (under a bridge)

    Fudge you, beach.
    (Just pretend I posted this hundreds of times).

    On a more serious note, it sounds like they just need better moderation and filtering...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Brad Hubbard (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 2:20pm

      Re: Live in a Van, by the River (under a bridge)

      That's actually what they're doing. Reviewing all the lowest-ranked users, deciding if they should ban them from commenting. Sure, they can create a new user ID and come back and pick more fights, but since the more frequent users actually know one another on that site, it would take a while to build up the reputation as being a particular company's "fanboi (sic)" again.

      Also, they were probably getting a lot of off-site traffic, since they had some of the more comprehensive coverage of the device. The comments may have been negatively affecting their ability to sell more premium advertising space, so they turned them off for the time being.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    ProfessionalGun, Feb 2nd, 2010 @ 10:07pm

    Two words. . . .

    Publicity stunt.

    This won't solve a commenting problem. At least, not the commenting problem they claim to have. It will get people talking about Engadget, and more specifically, it will draw attention to the supposed drama within the reader community. Engadget claims that only a small percentage of its readers are commenters. I'd say that percentage is likely to increase thanks to all this new talk - and that was the plan all along.

    Engadget is guilty of flame baiting their reader community with headlines designed to incite wars within the comments. It's good for business because it increases traffic and page views and ad impressions. The ONLY reason to shut that down is to bet that it will increase those numbers when it comes back.

    It's enough to inspire me to remove them from my RSS feeds. I don't like being manipulated so blatently.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Negrito, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 1:50pm

      Re: Two words. . . .

      I agree. I deleted them from my iGoogle, and thats how i came across this site. Needed a new Tech gadget.

      Honestly if there werent 15 of the 20 stories a day about the iPad. I doubt there would have been any controversy. They shut the comments down because the readers/commenters were right, they favor Apple way too much, and this comes from someone who owns a Blackbook, an Apple TV, and iPod Touch, and a Time Capsule.

      Apple failed miserably to live up to all the hype, lets move on shall we?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 2nd, 2010 @ 10:25pm

    I had to give TAM's mom a cooling off period. Things were getting a little heated. TAM filmed everything, he holds the copyrights.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    JalenJade, Feb 2nd, 2010 @ 10:26pm

    Check your facts

    Engadget has done this a couple times in the past, why does everyone act like its some big new thing?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    dssstrkl, Feb 2nd, 2010 @ 10:50pm

    Not the whole story

    Engadget stopped allowing comments while they use the banhammer on known troll and spammers. They're also checking their usage stats to see if there's any correlation between no comments and traffic. I have to say that the comments have become increasingly stupid and vitriolic lately, so I'm glad they did it.

    http://twitter.com/joshuatopolsky/status/8388684730
    http://twitter.com/joshuatopolsky/status/85 76687513
    http://twitter.com/reckless/status/8521002987
    http://twitter.com/reckless/status/85486250 79
    http://twitter.com/reckless/status/8549142308
    http://twitter.com/reckless/status/8550561765
    ht tp://twitter.com/reckless/status/8553624846
    http://twitter.com/reckless/status/8573278429

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Mike Masnick (profile), Feb 2nd, 2010 @ 10:58pm

      Re: Not the whole story

      They're also checking their usage stats to see if there's any correlation between no comments and traffic

      Eh, my guess is if there's more traffic, it's only because people went to check out the story about why they have no comments.

      I'll say, from my experience, comments are most certainly not the main driver of traffic (stories with the most comments do NOT correlate well to stories with the most traffic), but they do account for a non-trivial amount of the traffic.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Comboman (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 5:31am

        Re: Re: Not the whole story

        I'll say, from my experience, comments are most certainly not the main driver of traffic (stories with the most comments do NOT correlate well to stories with the most traffic)

        That seems counter-intuitive. I suppose most comments are posted when a story is new and most are posted by "the regulars", whereas stories that get a lot of views are older (relatively speaking) stories that get wider exposure (linked to from other websites). I'll bet that stories with the most comments correlate well with traffic for the first two or three hours after a story is posted, but that the correlation decreases over time.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Alan Gerow (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 3:02pm

          Re: Re: Re: Not the whole story

          Also, there's a difference between visits and views. A highly commented article would have a lot of "views" but not a lot of "visitors" since one person constantly refreshing the page adding more comments would increase a page's "views" but not its "visitors", and flamewars are usually between a small number of people.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      DS, Feb 5th, 2010 @ 7:44am

      Re: Not the whole story

      "To the Engadget commenters mad about Apple coverage: you are not the voice of reason or the center, you are the irrational fringe."

      Then you're doing it wrong.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Allen (profile), Feb 2nd, 2010 @ 11:09pm

    I suppose I can understand it as some sort of temporary measure to douse a flame war. On the other hand a good part of the value is the comments - whether or not I choose to make a comment myself, other peoples comments are often as compelling (in not more) than the article itself.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Negrito, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 2:21pm

      Re:

      Agreed. IMO, 90% of the time the comments are much more interesting than the actual article.

      Like today, Thank Apple for there higher prices??? GTFO

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Lil. Allen (profile), Feb 2nd, 2010 @ 11:59pm

    We were on a break!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    TFP, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 12:47am

    Flamebait

    Apple fanbois are stupid, fact! Windows fanbois are laughing at stupid Apple product, Apple fanbois are screaming that they're gonna buy one for their mum - unless they're over 40 with failing eyesight who commute... a lot, then it is the perfect iPod replacement (tho obviously not for wide-screen films or long stretches of reading eBooks or writing long emails with a virtual keyboard).

    Virtual keyboards are a pain and if you buy the wireless keyboard doesn't that kind of make it a crippled netbook? text and voice recognition are the way to go. Does the iPad do either?

    'Why my mum will love the iPad.

    My mum will love the iPad because I have to buy it because Apple made it. I will have to give it to her, because it's useless to me, being neither a phone, real computer (multitasking), or multimedia device (wide-screen, ebook, Flash - loathe it or indifference, it's still part of the web media experience for a couple years yet), and offers no onboard HDMI or even DVD watching abilities. So, I will give it to my mum who shall be pleased that one her offspring actually remember her, and whenever I go round (once a year at Xmas for four hours so she can give presents to the grand-kids), it will be sitting there on the coffee table, pristine and untouched.

    Apple happy, me happy, mum happy, 3000 more starving kids in never-heard-of-it-stan.

    And my disconnect from reality shall finally be complete. Thumbs up Apple.

    Copyright Franc Kaos.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      harbingerofdoom (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 1:22am

      Re: Flamebait

      sadly this is a pretty accurate description of what endgadget has become.

      and its not all the fanboys faults either. you can not expect people who have been reading a site for years to idly sit by while the tenor and quality of their site changes and very much for the worse.
      and when you add the taunting, flamebait riddled articles and overall ridiculously poor product evaluations by their so-called experts who's articles have been called out even by some in the fanboy crowds, what else can you expect than this as the outcome?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The Anti-Mike (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 2:21am

      Re: Flamebait

      ...and this is different from techdirt fanbois how exactly?

      Currently I am stalked by a troll (he will appear in a few moments, I am sure). He tends to destroy threads and kill discussion. I tolerate it.

      While much of what you discuss is Apple related (for Engadget), the reality is that the same thing can be said for almost every discussion area. Call them fanbois, kool aid drinkers, suck ups, syncopates, whatever... it's the nature of the game. Like minded people glom together and pat each other on the back, telling each other how smart they are.

      Communities like that need disruptive outside forces, as Mike says those sorts of posts make him think about his views a little bit and sharpen them. Without that, most discussions would just be back slappers. Not entirely useful, and certainly not intellectually challenging.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Dementia (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 3:32am

        Re: Re: Flamebait

        Currently i am stalked by a troll,


        Why would anyone bother stalking you TAM? At most your comments are slightly humorous while continuing to be misguided and less than insightful. Really doesn't seem much worth stalking over.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          The Anti-Mike (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 4:39am

          Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

          I have no idea, ask them.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Mike Masnick (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 4:48am

          Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

          Why would anyone bother stalking you TAM? At most your comments are slightly humorous while continuing to be misguided and less than insightful. Really doesn't seem much worth stalking over.

          No one is stalking TAM. He's only recently figured out the first rule of trolling: turn every argument against you into an argument against everyone else. So, lately, he's started calling anyone who actually asks him to respond to a direct question "a troll" and claims that others "stalk him" despite his eerie stalking of this site. I find it amusing that he claims his stalker will "appear soon" when his own comments flood this site and "appear soon" on just about every post. But the really funny part? Claiming that it's his "stalker" who "destroys threads" and that he "tolerates it," when he knows darn well that it's he who has a habit of taking threads here way off on tangents and that it's I who "tolerate" it since I could easily ban him. Of course, it's not that I "tolerate" it. I'm just fascinated to see the ridiculous lengths that he will go to in his comments. If you only knew his backstory, you would realize that TAM is a really sad case, so we might as well let him have his fun.

          So, basically, just take those claims with a grain of salt. It's just more TAM trolling. Funny stuff, but nowhere near serious.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            The Anti-Mike (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 5:32am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

            Sorry Mike, you are not correct.

            I don't answer people who call me "industry shill" or somehow think I am some sort of spokesman for the music or movie industry. I am neither, nor do I work in either industry.

            http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rlz=1R1GGGL_en___CA350&h s=CX0&q=site%3Atechdirt.com+that+tammy!&btnG=Search&meta=&cts=1265203877021&aq=f &oq=

            You don't have to be too smart to see a trend, do you?

            Mike, please: expose my back story. you are the guy who claims he doesn't know how to reach me, yet you know my backstory? PLEASE!

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 7:38am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

              Still waiting for you to answer this question:

              http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20100127/0622237940#c501

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                The Anti-Mike (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 8:43am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                If you mean:

                The Canadian numbers also vary greatly depending on the questions asked.

                you can search techdirt and find them yourself. It's all out there.

                have a nice day!

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 10:19am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                  You're the one who made a statement saying the numbers were wrong. I asked you to back your statement up, show me where the numbers are wrong and what does TAM say?

                  "You can answer your own question!" says TAM.

                  Obvious troll is obvious.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    The Anti-Mike (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 4:56pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                    Sorry, once again, I am giving you the EXACT same answer that Mike gives me. Check the site, it's all there.

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    •  
                      identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 7:50pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                      You said: So in the end, we are back to pile of opinion on opinion on opinion pieces with little real science or real numbers to back it up. Congrats!

                      And then I said: Moreover, the UK estimates are consistent with a 2006 Industry Canada commissioned study on the costs of Internet provider notification schemes. The study concluded that the cost of a single notification was $11.73 for larger Internet providers (more than 100,000 subscribers) and $32.73 for smaller Internet providers. Considering the sheer number of notifications - last summer Bell Canada acknowledged receiving 15,000 notifications each month - the costs quickly run into the millions of dollars.

                      The disparate impact between big and small Internet providers highlights another hidden cost of three-strikes systems - the negative effect on the competitive landscape for Internet services. The UK estimates that the costs on small Internet providers are so great that consideration should be given to exempting them entirely, since the additional burden would result in decreased competition. The same report identifies the disproportionate harm to wireless carriers, who would face massive capital costs and be placed at a competitive disadvantage.

                      With a link the Canadian governments findings: http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20100127/0622237940#c245

                      Then I said: Did you check out those numbers from the Canadian government yet? How about those UK estimates?

                      Then you said: The Canadian numbers also vary greatly depending on the questions asked.

                      And I asked where in the Canadian goverments numbers vary greatly?

                      Then you said: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100202/1839308015.shtml#c524

                      you can search techdirt and find them yourself. It's all out there.

                      have a nice day!

                      Obvious troll is still obvious.

                       

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                      •  
                        icon
                        The Anti-Mike (profile), Feb 4th, 2010 @ 2:37am

                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                        Then you said: The Canadian numbers also vary greatly depending on the questions asked.

                        And I asked where in the Canadian goverments numbers vary greatly?


                        See, there is your problem. I said Canadian numbers, and you added the word government. I wasn't talking about Canadian government numbers, I was talking about surveys done in Canada or on Canadian users.

                        The most common one (that Mike often refers to) shows about 20% of users as downloaders, by defining downloaders as "people who have downloaded in the last 30 days". That is what I mean about when you adjust the question, you get different answers. By moving the parameters, you get different answer. Previous surveys from one the major ISPs (BELL) had them claiming 40% of people running P2P, and other studies had that number as low as 10%.

                        The UK numbers are the same. One study showed as low as 10%, others much higher. It comes down to the question, the methodology, who was asked, etc.

                        These are all studies that have been on techdirt in the last couple of years.

                        So I am sorry, I cannot answer your question because you are asking something I didn't say. I have no comment on Canadian GOVERNMENT numbers, because I have never talked about them to start with.

                        I trust this settles the issue for you, and NO, I am not going to go back through techdirt for the last couple of years to find you links for each survey. I am not your research intern, sorry.

                         

                        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                        •  
                          identicon
                          Anonymous Coward, Feb 4th, 2010 @ 9:53am

                          Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                          You stated that the Michael Geist article was opinion. I showed you where he got his numbers from, in this case, the Canadian government's website. So it was not opinion. You were wrong and you cannot admit it.

                          Terrible troll is terrible.

                           

                          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              AJ, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 8:06am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

              TAM,

              I enjoy your posts. You do go straight to Flame mode in alot of cases, and i do not agree with most of what you say, but it's very entertaining. Instead of waiting for Mike to "Out" your back-story, why don't you enlighten us with some history. You don't have to be specific. I think it would be interesting to know what your story is, and why you are so interested in these discussions. Or, you could go straight into flame mode and slam me, either one would be fun reading.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                The Anti-Mike (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 8:31am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                Flame mode is a little in my nature, my father says I don't suffer fools very well (and I too am sometimes the fool).

                My backstory isn't much to tell, except to say that I am not in the riaa or mpaa or any of their related companies, nor do I produce movies, music, or write books. I am however very interested in space where economics meets legal, and in particular how it intersects with the internet and the various business models being tried. Let's say that marketing is more or less what I do, and that does involve understanding business models from various industries, to see how they play out.

                So far the only slam I have for you is that your name is too short, buy a couple of extra letters, okay?

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 10:19am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                  That's our TAMMY!

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  AJ, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 10:29am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                  Thanks for taking the time to respond TAM, I think I'm starting to get the picture here, and by all means correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you do almost the same thing as Mike (or similar).

                  If that is indeed the case, your constant disagreements with Mike, and what "appears" to be a flagrant attempt to discredit him at every turn, makes absolute since. If indeed you're in competition with him, and it "appears" by your backstory that you are to some degree, then you would have a personal interest in seeing him discredited.

                  If I'm wrong, fine, would'nt be the first time, but that's what it looks like to me.

                  Your right, my name is short, but it's easy to type and remember. I do plan on getting on the email list here, so I will be adding some letters. The blog gods don't seem to like short names......

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    The Anti-Mike (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 1:22pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                    AJ, I have not benefit or loss specifically in seeing Mike succeed or fail, except perhaps that some people will come away from this site with a more open view of the world rather than a more closed one.

                    When we look at any system (from copyright to the monetary system, from evolution to how the lineups work at the grocery store) you can always find some bad in them. Where I tend to comment against Mike's views is that he plays the game of looking very closely at one grain of sand on the beach, or pulls back way far and you can't hardly see the beach. Copyright, trademarks, and all that get abused all the time, but so does the tax system, speed limits, and heck, some people jump the turnstiles to get on the subway. We don't shut down the subway because of a free people jumping in and not paying, nor do we suddenly make the subway free (even if there is clear public demand for free transport).

                    So I don't compete against Mike in any way, I am not trying to be a guru, I haven't given a panel discussion of any sort in about 8 years (unrelated to anything discussed here, for another business), and Mike's success or failure won't change my life directly one iota.

                    This is a good place to try to shine some light into the dark corners, and I hope that I get a few people to think about their views a little more before committing to them. Then I have succeeded :)

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    •  
                      identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 1:43pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                      By attempting to simplify a complex situation that tends to ignore history or culture or human nature?

                       

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            The Anti-Mike (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 5:37am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

            I do also have to ask Mike: Why suddenly on the big offensive against me? Did I strike a nerve somewhere? It seems that since Billboard called you out, you have been a little upset. Is there something you want to get off your chest?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 10:20am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

              I do also have to ask The Anti-Mike: Why suddenly on the big offensive against me? Did I strike a nerve somewhere? It seems that since I called you out, you have been a little upset. Is there something you want to get off your chest?

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                The Anti-Mike (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 4:59pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                The "big offensive" against you is because you are no longer attempting any sane discussion, and are down to dismissive comments, name calling, and expecting me to act as some sort of spokesman for an industry I am not part of.

                Sorry, but your comments for the most part of not on topic, and involve mostly attempting to bait me into a non-relevant discussion, or are a direct attempt to insult me or call me out as a fool.

                So I don't tend to react to them, except to point on when you are doing so (such as you are doing now).

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, Feb 4th, 2010 @ 9:56am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

                  You rarely resond to me, personally. I ask questions and you ignore them. You make statements and I show you how you're wrong and you still think you're right.

                  Oh TAMMY.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            senshikaze (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 6:34am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

            actually there is this one annon that seems to be throwing around basless comments about TAM.

            I might not agree with him, but i do think, for the most part, TAM gives a fairly good devils advocate stance on most subjects.

            (i, of course, have no idea his real beliefs)

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Alan Gerow (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 3:07pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Flamebait

            "If you only knew his backstory, you would realize that TAM is a really sad case"

            I claim you don't need to know his backstory to realize that.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Troll, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 5:23am

        Re: Re: Flamebait

        Someone is trolling me - Someone is trolling me !

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Comboman (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 5:35am

        Re: Re: Flamebait

        A guy who calls himself "The Anti-Mike" is being stalked by a troll? That's precious. What's his name, "The Anti-Anti-Mike"?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 9:31am

        Re: Re: Flamebait

        Good job respecting others, hypocrite of enormous magnitude.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Jason (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 3:04am

    Misinformation is being spread by Engadget staff regarding the root cause of disabling comments.

    While I choose to use a Mac, I’m comfortable using my XP work laptop as well, and like to get a “balanced diet” of gadget news.

    Engadget has historically provided both, which I naturally enjoyed. But recently Engadget was posting nothing but dozens of hollow adoring iPad articles for weeks, at the sacrifice of other content, and the few non-iPad articles were littered with pointless references to the iPad or iPhone in some way, with flame bait such as citing (actually quite unjustified) why Windows 7 is a poor operating system for tablets and slates. This caused the “regulars” (even myself) to voice annoyance over the trend.

    “Enough already” was the sound of the chorus.

    Their “solution” was to insult the readership and create an “iPad” free version of the website, only to kick up the ridiculous iPad over-coverage and adulation, which of course only invoked more poor commentary.

    If you could actually see which comments were up and down ranked, the up-ranked comments were quite understandable in their complaints and not “trolls”.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Sean, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 11:30am

      Re:

      "But recently Engadget was posting nothing but dozens of hollow adoring iPad articles for weeks..."

      You mean in the weeks running up to an Apple event a gadget blog was running more articles about the highly anticipated product from a company that changed the direction of music players, then phones, and now was making a foray into tablets?

      Yeah, it sounds pretty god damn standard to do this. Beieve it or not, they may have been running those articles because PEOPLE WANT TO READ THEM and there's this crazy belief that having readers is better than not having readers.

      Bitching about gadget blogs going 'Pro-Apple' in the weeks before one of their events is beyond stupid, it shows a complete lack of any common sense or basic understanding of reality and I pity you for being so stupid.

      Cheers.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        DS, Feb 4th, 2010 @ 8:45am

        Re: Re:

        Thanks for pointing out the reason for the comment war..

        Yes, you can read them, on the APPLE ORIENTED BLOG that they also run.

        And no, not everyone wants to read an article that says NOTHING 8 times a day. But the thing is, to find that one that says something, you have to look at every frakin one.

        They've also pointed out how to block all Apple stories from the RSS feed, which nobody liked either, because that also blocks LEGITIMATE news regarding Apple.

        This, combined with a site update that made a lot of people frustrated, really made a lot of people turn. And we're angry, because we LIKE the site. If we didn't LIKE the site, we wouldn't be angry.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Androidawg, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 5:10am

    Flamewar

    Example of high quality blog posts.

    Posted by Toolbag1:
    Apple sucks. All Apple fanboi's suck. UR all fags. lol. rofl.

    Posted by Nuthugger2:
    @Toolbag1 YOU ARE THE FAG!! if u h8 apple so much then get out of here. UR a fag and you suck it!!

    Posted by Toolbag1:
    @Nuthugger Yo momma suck it. She needed an iPad after last night.


    Such wit and insight is overwhelming. No wonder they killed the comments. Their readers are all retarded.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    bob, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 5:16am

    Engadget

    The only reason I have ever gone to Engadget' web site was because I clicked a link that took me there.

    Most people have their own skew, what ever the topic is.
    That will be reflected in any comment area.

    Where I really have problems are the instances where the person is attacked for their views, and the views are not discussed.

    Thank god that in High School I had an episcopalian reverend who taught a critical thinking class. It was the most difficult and rewarding class I have ever attended.
    His class room had three walls of sliding blackboards, each always covered with text.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      DS, Feb 4th, 2010 @ 8:46am

      Re: Engadget

      "I had an episcopalian reverend who taught a critical thinking class"

      **Irony detector becoming overloaded**

      **Ptang!**

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Cohen (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 5:29am

    I didn't understand the need to shut down a thread except that Engadget said they did it because the need to moderate the thread had become too difficult.

    And given the nature of the attacks in the forum, the need for moderators was great.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Ben (profile), Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 5:43am

    Problems Deeper than commentators

    They are suffering a lot of blow back regarding the degarded quality of their coverage and response from the authors of the articles. Unfortunately they went the childish way: took their ball and went home.

    Over-hyping the iPad leading up to the announcement, in combination with dozens of pointless articles about the iPad after announcement and including references to Apple products in a lot of the other articles, as well as defending themselves poorly led to a large revolt within the comments.

    The issues a lot of people had were their bias in general of Apple and their skew towards overloading their site with one product (something ridiculous like 60 iPad articles in a couple of days). A lot of people were calling them out.

    Instead of tackling the issue head on, they mocked/taunted the commentators, and threw up a article asking if people hated Apple news and added a way to filter Apple news. But that was not want many wanted. Most people liked Apple coverage in general, and were not calling out that but mostly the pointless articles about the iPad and perceived bias. After continuing this back and forth, it just exploded in their face.

    Let this be a lesson to CwF + RtB = $ implementers. The CwF comes with some caveats (and I know Mike never said otherwise). If you do it incorrectly, you can have the people who build your community turn on you if you're not interacting with them in a way they like. The reader input is extremely important in building a fanbase with the web today, and it is best not to piss them off too much.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      kelly, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 9:09am

      Re: Problems Deeper than commentators

      readers have had the option to filter all apple news for a long time (well over a year, more like 2 iirc).

      they post it every time apple has a new product release because people that didn't want apple news, contrary to their expressed self interest, insisted on reading and commenting on said articles complaining about apple news.

      don't like a post? don't read it. don't like the attention to apple in general? too many references in other posts? find another source for gadget news. there are many, many other options out there.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Feb 4th, 2010 @ 8:51am

        Re: Re: Problems Deeper than commentators

        A: People don't want to filter ALL Apple news... What if Apple created a cure for cancer, the iCure, and was announced exclusively on Engadget? Granted, a rather extreme example, but it does sort of make my point.

        B: Because if you wanted REAL news about what the iPad was, you had to filter through an s-load of articles a day to get real information.

        C: We like(d) it there. We got angry when things were being taken too far. The only people that complain are the people who care.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    NAMELESS.ONE, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 8:27am

    slashdot sucks

    does same stuff

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 9:27am

    They probably troll their own blog.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 3rd, 2010 @ 10:30am

    all they did was turn off the comments so they could ban some IP's and accounts of the few trolls and instigates. (AKA swing the banhammer in our downtime)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    herodotus (profile), Feb 4th, 2010 @ 12:07pm

    "If you only knew his backstory, you would realize that TAM is a really sad case..."


    Oh, we don't have to know his backstory to know that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    kevin (profile), Apr 18th, 2011 @ 1:44am

    Thanks for sharing such an article where education of people matters the most.Your way of expressing articles through words is excellent.he way of expressing things is best and informative. wood pellets machine

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This