We will soon be making some changes to PT, including moving it to a new server.
If you have any constructive ideas on how to improve the site, please express them in the comments.
78 Comments
SWT · 16 June 2011
I'd like to see a couple of things:
1) An improved search function, so that I can search for comments by specific usernames with specified keywords.
2) An edit function available for perhaps the first 10 minutes after a comment is posted. I preview my comments except when my fingers are going fast, but come across typos anyway. The edit function should turn off automatically to prevent mischief ("I would never post anything like that!").
3) A block user function to make it easier to avoid feeding trolls (mea maxima culpa)
Overall, I really like the site -- the balance of technical posts, relevant political/legal posts, and humor is quite good.
I don't know how often you're told this, but your work here is truly appreciated. Thank you for all you do to keep PT interesting and informative!
Mike Elzinga · 16 June 2011
Overall this is generally an interesting and informative site. One can lurk here as well as comment; and I do both.
Even a few of the mindless troll infestations bring out some good technical and scientific rebuttals from those with the expertise to respond; and I like to see the responses of those with other expertise.
The Bathroom Wall is a good alternative to outright banning; however, not all exchanges that need to be shipped there actually get shipped there soon enough. I realize the crew members are busy.
And there is also the problem of the BW slowing down browsers by some of the script that is running; especially after the page count increases significantly. Normally that would not be an issue if the off-topic exchanges that get sent there are not interesting.
But there are too many occasions where the troll infestations are so annoying and inane that I don’t enjoy this site at all.
It would be nice to have some kind of “voting” system that would alert the crew to ship a particularly annoying set of exchanges and trolls over to the Bathroom Wall much sooner than happens now.
Maybe an "Annoyance Meter" that counts the number of "no votes." Unfortunately that could be easily abused by trolls, I suspect.
I'd start by making this place a LOT less tolerant of Creationist trolls that make a mockery of this cause the blog was made for. In particular, FL and IBelieveInGod should have been banned a loooooooooooooooong time ago. Let the bigots when they arrive here rant for a few weeks, never delete their posts or move them to the Bathroom Wall (unless the posts contain profanity), but BAN then like P Z Myers does from his Pharyngula blog.
ben · 16 June 2011
Dale Husband said:
I'd start by making this place a LOT less tolerant of Creationist trolls that make a mockery of this cause the blog was made for. In particular, FL and IBelieveInGod should have been banned a loooooooooooooooong time ago. Let the bigots when they arrive here rant for a few weeks, never delete their posts or move them to the Bathroom Wall (unless the posts contain profanity), but BAN then like P Z Myers does from his Pharyngula blog.
You are more tolerant of mentally ill creationist trolls than virtually anyone here; you seem to think their "arguments" are worth addressing endlessly. I bet 5-10% of all comments on PT are made by you, in response to them. If PT banned them, what would you do with your time?
The 'recent comments' box on the main page: Why not have it on all pages? Also, this feature might be more useful if it contained pointers to the most-recently-updated threads. If one particular thread has gained umpty-leven comments in the past half-hour, that one thread will monopolize the 'recent comments' box as it stands, crowding out all other threads. Wouldn't it be better if each thread could only appear once in that box? It might also be appropriate to note the time at which the latest comment in a thread happens to have been posted.
SteveF · 16 June 2011
This may be out of control due to time constraints etc, but I'd like to see a bit more detailed science and ID rebuttals being posted. There's still good stuff, particularly from Steve Matheson, but I remember a few years ago when there were more regular (or so it seemed) and very good essays from the likes of Nick Matzke or Ian Musgrave or Art Hunt. Perhaps this was because there was more stuff to critique but the ID crowd haven't gone away, particularly now that the Biologic institute appear to actually be doing something, so perhaps a shift back towards detailed critiques could be in order? Obviously if those involved are no longer able to, that's fine.
Other than that, more troll control. To some extent that could be self policing, though some people have an insatiable need to respond to trolls.
Frank J · 16 June 2011
I second the request for a better search function.
As for the trolls, what works for me is to avoid answering PRATTs about "weaknesses" of evolution (that only gives them more facts to misrepresent) and instead ask for details about their "theory." If they regurgitate any Behe sound bites I make sure to ask if they agree with Behe on common descent. ~90% of the time they evade my questions and troll for those better at feeding them. When they do answer them, I follow up with more questions. By the 3rd round they all ignore me completely.
Ron Okimoto · 16 June 2011
Can you provide access to an archive? Links will be broken, but it would be nice to be able to search for the old posts somewhere. A lot of the intelligent design fiasco links are broken, and it would be nice to have some searchable archive. It was over 9 years ago that the ID perps began running the bait and switch scam on their own creationist support base and most of those web links are broken.
It is hard to believe that there are still IDiot supporters when the bait and switch has been going down for nearly a decade. No IDiot rube ever got the intelligent design science to teach in the public schools. The switch scam that they were given by the ID perps from organizations like the Discovery Institute or Intelligent Design Network doesn't even mention that ID ever existed. The ID perps sold the rubes the science of intelligent design, but what did they ever deliver?
The ID perps are still selling the intelligent design junk, but all the IDiots ever get when it comes time to put up or shut up is the bogus switch scam. We seem to all accept that as normal, but it wasn't normal 10 years ago. Really, the ID perps began running the bait and switch on their own creationist support base several years before they lost in court in Dover, so they didn't even have that excuse for not putting forward their own ID junk to teach. Just that fact should have dropped the IDiot population to zero, but now it is normal business as usual. A lot of IDiots are bending over and taking the stupid switch scam from the same guys that they know lied to them about the science of intelligent design. There isn't really any legitimate excuse for that, but even the PT regulars accept it as normal.
For the past 9 years the science side hasn't had to do much to keep intelligent design out of the public school classroom. The ID perps are among the first responders when some IDiots want to teach intelligent design, and they make sure that the bait and switch goes down. Most of the activity for the last decade has been countering the obfuscation switch scam that doesn't even mention that ID ever existed.
There have been several times when I wanted to go back to some old posts around the time the bait and switch went down on the Ohio rubes back in 2002 and all the links are broken and the archive only goes back to 2004.
IW · 16 June 2011
When we visit the new site, will we get a sound bite which says, "I'll be your server today"? C'mon, do it!
SWT · 16 June 2011
Cubist's comment reminds me of something else: exclude Bathroom Wall comments from the "recent comments" on the front page. They're rarely useful and often obscure what's going on in the non-BW threads.
eric · 16 June 2011
Mike Elzinga said:
And there is also the problem of the BW slowing down browsers by some of the script that is running; especially after the page count increases significantly.
I also have this issue. If PT could throw in a feature that automatically archives after, say, 50 screens, that would be useful. (Yeah, I know a human could do that too, but this is a thread about website features.)
mrg · 16 June 2011
SWT said:
Cubist's comment reminds me of something else: exclude Bathroom Wall comments from the "recent comments" on the front page. They're rarely useful and often obscure what's going on in the non-BW threads.
Yeah, if people want to feed trolls, fine, but they don't need to pollute the rest of the site doing it.
And would REALLY REALLY REALLY appreciate a killfile capability ... I have people ALREADY IN MIND for that feature. A voting feature would be nice, but that's more of a "like" than hot item.
mrg · 16 June 2011
SteveF said:
To some extent that could be self policing, though some people have an insatiable need to respond to trolls.
If there was a prize for understatement, you'd be rich. Some will tell you they're all but saving the world by giving nutjobs the arguments they came here to provoke. "Think globally, screw up locally."
Dale Husband said:
I'd start by making this place a LOT less tolerant of Creationist trolls that make a mockery of this cause the blog was made for. In particular, FL and IBelieveInGod should have been banned a loooooooooooooooong time ago. Let the bigots when they arrive here rant for a few weeks, never delete their posts or move them to the Bathroom Wall (unless the posts contain profanity), but BAN then like P Z Myers does from his Pharyngula blog.
I mostly lurk here, but I find this site incredibly valuable and appreciate the effort expended by the maintainers.
I must disagree with the concept of banning posters. Moving off-topic discussions to the Bathroom Wall is a far superior alternative. Providing each user with the tools to killfile posters they don't find valuable is even better. Yes, trolls are annoying, but it's better to put up with the irritations that come with free speech than to take the risk of becoming like the censors at Uncommon Descent.
phhht · 16 June 2011
Patrick said:
Yes, trolls are annoying, but it's better to put up with the irritations that come with free speech than to take the risk of becoming like the censors at Uncommon Descent.
I agree with continuing the policy of moving trolls and troll-responses to the Bathroom Wall, rather than banning people. But I have found that, as I post as a Guest Contributer, it is frustratingly hard for me to get any comments moved there. There should be someone on the Team who can be asked by a Guest Contributer to intervene and send comments to the Bathroom Wall, and who will respond quickly. When I have tried to get this to happen you (Reed) have been too busy and nothing much has happened.
mrg · 16 June 2011
Joe Felsenstein said:
I agree with continuing the policy of moving trolls and troll-responses to the Bathroom Wall, rather than banning people. But I have found that, as I post as a Guest Contributer, it is frustratingly hard for me to get any comments moved there. There should be someone on the Team who can be asked by a Guest Contributer to intervene and send comments to the Bathroom Wall, and who will respond quickly. When I have tried to get this to happen you (Reed) have been too busy and nothing much has happened.
I will throw out a proposal that I don't think will fly, but rather than not bother to say it ...
I hang around here quite a bit, and if someone's been tagged as a nuisance I would be only too happy to deal with them. That requires giving me permissions, but I wouldn't act against anyone on my own initiative, and if I broke the rules my privileges could be yanked.
We might be able to set up a little unit of police for the site. OK, lots of issues here; if it doesn't fly at all, no need to comment further.
kk · 16 June 2011
I would like to see an option where people can keep a debate going after Panda Thumbers who support the mindset of a Michael Newdow can keep getting their butts thrashed after they have lost the fight and resort to name calling and mob mentality.
Newdow just lost another court battle to have "under God" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance. it is important that Panda Thumbers have their noses rubbed in this and that their only power in our culture happens via leftists who violate actual law and scientific information
"Ditto" was in response to swg's suggestion that the Recent Comments list exclude those to The Bathroom Wall.
Henry J · 16 June 2011
The ‘recent comments’ box on the main page: [...] this feature might be more useful if it contained pointers to the most-recently-updated threads. If one particular thread has gained umpty-leven comments in the past half-hour, that one thread will monopolize the ‘recent comments’ box as it stands, crowding out all other threads. Wouldn’t it be better if each thread could only appear once in that box? It might also be appropriate to note the time at which the latest comment in a thread happens to have been posted.
Seconded!
Henry J · 16 June 2011
Cubist’s comment reminds me of something else: exclude Bathroom Wall comments from the “recent comments” on the front page. They’re rarely useful and often obscure what’s going on in the non-BW threads.
Seconded!
Henry J · 16 June 2011
Maybe put a link to the Index of Creationist Claims in a prominent place on the side bar.
eric · 16 June 2011
Henry J said:
The ‘recent comments’ box on the main page: [...] this feature might be more useful if it contained pointers to the most-recently-updated threads....
Seconded!
Negatived!
I like seeing the author listed rather than the thread. There's people who's thoughts on any thread are likely to peak my interest, and conversely, a number of people who I'm not interested in reading no matter which thread they post to.
Our spam filters are nearly perfect. I turned them off yesterday for a minute and got 5 Chinese spams instantly. In otherwords, we are constantly bombarded with spam that you do not see.
The spam that is getting through is put in there manually. I can look at the logs and watch someone use google to find us, load up the page, find the comment area, and the copy and paste their spam text.
I'm working on some tricks to slow them down, but the only "real" solution is force everyone to register in order to post comments.
SWT · 16 June 2011
Reed A. Cartwright said:
I'm working on some tricks to slow them down, but the only "real" solution is force everyone to register in order to post comments.
I would be very OK with that!
Mike Elzinga · 16 June 2011
SWT said:
Reed A. Cartwright said:
I'm working on some tricks to slow them down, but the only "real" solution is force everyone to register in order to post comments.
I would be very OK with that!
That would be fine with me also.
SWT · 16 June 2011
mrg said:
I will throw out a proposal that I don't think will fly, but rather than not bother to say it ...
I hang around here quite a bit, and if someone's been tagged as a nuisance I would be only too happy to deal with them. That requires giving me permissions, but I wouldn't act against anyone on my own initiative, and if I broke the rules my privileges could be yanked.
We might be able to set up a little unit of police for the site. OK, lots of issues here; if it doesn't fly at all, no need to comment further.
I help moderate a music site -- most of the moderation activity is simply (a) enforcing the usage agreement for the site, which is more restrictive than the agreement here, (b) moving junk out of dedicated forums, and (c) banning spammers and trolls that break the usage agreement. The moderation team was hand-picked by the site owner; the owner and other moderators hold moderators accountable for their actions.
The system works well, but only because the original choices for moderators (full disclosure: I was not on that original team) were excellent.
However, it is, if you'll pardon the expression, a leap of faith for the site owner if you don't know the moderators in real life.
mrg · 16 June 2011
Mike Elzinga said:
That would be fine with me also.
I second your ditto and raise you a ditto! Registration is no big burden for anyone and it really holds down on spammers.
Reed A. Cartwright said:
I'm working on some tricks to slow them down, but the only "real" solution is force everyone to register in order to post comments.
Strong support for this solution. Would truly be interested in the arguments against this, given the obvious plusses and apparent lack of minuses.
harold · 16 June 2011
Joe Felsenstein said:
I agree with continuing the policy of moving trolls and troll-responses to the Bathroom Wall, rather than banning people. But I have found that, as I post as a Guest Contributer, it is frustratingly hard for me to get any comments moved there. There should be someone on the Team who can be asked by a Guest Contributer to intervene and send comments to the Bathroom Wall, and who will respond quickly. When I have tried to get this to happen you (Reed) have been too busy and nothing much has happened.
1) What about granting regular non-troll accounts with some minimum number of comments the right to rate other comments as belonging on the BW? If a threshold of negative ratings is reached, an automatic process could send the offending comment to the BW.
Something like the reddit system, but less anarchic. (On reddit, anyone can vote any comment or submission up or down, and anyone can have multiple accounts. If a comment goes to -5 (five more downvotes than upvotes) it becomes invisible, although there are ways to save them.)
Multiple accounts are banned here already, and they also wouldn't matter if the voting was purely negative, since unlike on reddit, a troll with multiple accounts wouldn't be able to do anything that "canceled out" the negative ratings.
The system would have to be somewhat elitist. I was thinking at first that a threshold number of comments that don't get booted could grant voting privileges. But then trolls would submit enough sneaky comments to get privileges. So it would have to be restricted to known commenting accounts that exist as of right now, with privileges extended only very selectively.
The advantage would be that regular readers could vote the usual suspects to the BW before the article contributor had to get involved.
2) More important - this may be a browser issue, but sometimes I do click "this comment has been sent to the bathroom wall", and instead of going to that comment, I end up going to wherever I looked at the bathroom wall last time, which in my case is often days ago. It can be a nightmare to find even an hours old post on the BW. Clicking "this comment has been sent to the bathroom wall" should link to that comment, not the BW in general.
Henry J · 16 June 2011
How about giving each "recent comments" a "(new)" link like the threads have on the main page, so that somebody can go straight to the next unread entry on that thread.
ben said:You are more tolerant of mentally ill creationist trolls than virtually anyone here; you seem to think their "arguments" are worth addressing endlessly. I bet 5-10% of all comments on PT are made by you, in response to them. If PT banned them, what would you do with your time?
Make love with my wife, among many other more pleasurable things.
Seriously, you don't debunk falsehoods by ignoring them. But once a falsehood is debunked ONCE, we need not repeat the debunking every time a new troll shows up to repeat the lie. Just point to the debunking and if the new troll does not apologize, ban him!
Look at this nut:
kk said:
I would like to see an option where people can keep a debate going after Panda Thumbers who support the mindset of a Michael Newdow can keep getting their butts thrashed after they have lost the fight and resort to name calling and mob mentality.
Newdow just lost another court battle to have "under God" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance. it is important that Panda Thumbers have their noses rubbed in this and that their only power in our culture happens via leftists who violate actual law and scientific information
She lies constantly, and the only reason she dares to do so in public forums like this is because her lies appeal to the prejudices of a great many brainwashed people whose only conceptions of American history and culture is what they were spoonfed in their fundamentalist churches. Critical analysis always debunks such myths in the end. If Deists like Thomas Jefferson lived today, they would be evolutionists, liberals or libertarians, and they would be scorned by Religious Right bigots like kk here.
David Fickett-Wilbar · 16 June 2011
When I post a comment, it would be convenient if I were taken back to where I had been reading (i.e., the post I had commented on) rather than the end of all the comments.
I have to disagree with the dislike of trolls. I've found reading both their posts and the ones in respose to them very educational; in the arguments from Creationists, the responses from those in the know, and the scientific data and arguments behind those responses. I know that there is always the BW, but that gets so filled up that I'd fall into it and never get out if I tried reading it regularly. On the main board the trolling seems more limited.
Henry J · 16 June 2011
David Fickett-Wilbar said:
When I post a comment, it would be convenient if I were taken back to where I had been reading (i.e., the post I had commented on) rather than the end of all the comments.
You could open the thread a second time in another tab (or another window) and use that for the reply.
I wanted to suggest using right click on "reply" and then select new tab, but on trying it discovered that it doesn't carry the quoted material over to the new tab; apparently "reply" has to be kept in the same window to work properly.
raven · 16 June 2011
Whatever you do, don't forget troll control.
Internet Rule Zero. Any popular forum will be overrun by demented trolls.
Whole internet domains have disappeared under the onslaught of short, warty skinned, green entities. Usenet, AOL, and Yahoo were three of them.
When the troll density gets too high or the wackiness gets too much, a lot of people just stop reading.
Just Bob · 16 June 2011
I have suggested before creating a thread or other posting of Your Brain on Creationism, featuring the wackiest of fundy postings. How about an alternative to the Bathroom Wall, called, maybe, Under the Bridge, where thoroughgoing trolls can be sent--without rational responses. They could growl at each other there.
SWT · 16 June 2011
Another site enhancement I think would be cool is email notification of comments, like what Steve Matheson as set up at Quintessence of Dust for people via Disqus.
John Kwok · 16 June 2011
SWT said:
Another site enhancement I think would be cool is email notification of comments, like what Steve Matheson as set up at Quintessence of Dust for people via Disqus.
While that might be desirable, even better I think would be allowing e-mail notifications sent either individually or in digest form, depending on the receipient. I had ceased my enrollment in SAS-L when I was getting e-mail notifications on every comment posted; I opted to return when I could get them in digest form daily.
As for a killfile "switch", I am opposed simply because it is useful to read comments of those you find disagreeable, not merely delusional creo trolls. I have forced myself to consider such comments BTW, and without naming names, I think it would be useful if certain people would consider mine.
I do not know the correct terminology, but what about nesting comments so that replies to a given comment follow that comment directly?
Susan Silberstein · 16 June 2011
@Matt Young, do you mean comments threads, like Usenet?
Mike Elzinga · 16 June 2011
Matt Young said:
I do not know the correct terminology, but what about nesting comments so that replies to a given comment follow that comment directly?
I've always wondered why you use a photograph of a panda's head to illustrate a blog called The Panda's Thumb.
I've seen panda's heads, but I have never seen a panda's thumb.
Your site is informative, clear, and deals with important matters. Your contributors are expert and write effectively.
Just show me a panda's thumb, please.
Misha · 17 June 2011
Shebardigan said:
Strong support for this solution. Would truly be interested in the arguments against this, given the obvious plusses and apparent lack of minuses.
Like
Henry J said:
How about giving each "recent comments" a "(new)" link like the threads have on the main page, so that somebody can go straight to the next unread entry on that thread.
Like
Matt Young said:
I do not know the correct terminology, but what about nesting comments so that replies to a given comment follow that comment directly?
DISLIKE: I usually don't read message boards with nested replies because I'm unable to follow the entire conversation chronologically.
No, this. For one thing, it obviates the need for a
blockquote.
eric · 17 June 2011
Matt Young said:
No, this. For one thing, it obviates the need for a
blockquote.
I actually like the current system, because it allows me to pull one or two relevant sentences out of a long post and show what specific point I'm responding to. And if I'm responding to multiple points, I think it makes it much easier to read and understand the response if one shows it as a series of point-counterpoints.
However, I wouldn't be terribly upset if PT moved to a nested system. This site seems to have an inordinate number of people who seem to think the 'quote' feature is a license for repeating other people's posts in their entirety.
harold · 17 June 2011
Eric -
This site seems to have an inordinate number of people who seem to think the ‘quote’ feature is a license for repeating other people’s posts in their entirety.
This happens to a large degree because of the "Reply" feature, which does that automatically. It might make sense to get rid of that feature. I almost never use it. For example, I didn't use it here.
I prefer the current system because nesting works best in a system where many people make short comments unrelated to other comments on the thread, and where nested threads are not too long. I think the current system works well here.
eric · 17 June 2011
harold said:
This happens to a large degree because of the "Reply" feature, which does that automatically.
Err, yes, I was referring to that feature and used the (wrong) word "quote."
I almost never use it. For example, I didn't use it here.
I use it all the time. For example, I did use it here. :)
It's probably just a matter of preference. Some folks prefer to copy old text into a new message, others like having it there to begin with and deleting the bits they don't use. I like the latter because I don't want to be bothered rewriting '[b]Someone said:[/b]' every time.
But, like you, I think both systems work well. I'll be happy whichever one the PT overlords choose to implement...just a bit happier with the current system. :)
Toni · 17 June 2011
Nesting has a way of messing up the coherence and continuity of long conversations. Please keep the current style.
Can you number the responses in chronological order? I find it much easier to address a reply to "#8 raven" (for instance) than to go back and search for a specific comment embedded in a long series of long comments.
John Kwok · 17 June 2011
harold said:
Eric -
This site seems to have an inordinate number of people who seem to think the ‘quote’ feature is a license for repeating other people’s posts in their entirety.
This happens to a large degree because of the "Reply" feature, which does that automatically. It might make sense to get rid of that feature. I almost never use it. For example, I didn't use it here.
I prefer the current system because nesting works best in a system where many people make short comments unrelated to other comments on the thread, and where nested threads are not too long. I think the current system works well here.
I strongly endorse your recommendation, harold. Let's not change it yet.
Frank J · 17 June 2011
I'm OK with registration too. I only post one "advertisement" on occasion, for which I am neither paid nor stand to make money: Join NCSE.
John Kwok · 17 June 2011
Frank J said:
I'm OK with registration too. I only post one "advertisement" on occasion, for which I am neither paid nor stand to make money: Join NCSE.
Yours is an advertisement I strongly endorse Frank J. NCSE is the only effective national anti-creationist science advocacy organization I know of, and if you should doubt this, then consider its superlative work with respect to the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial back in 2005 and other prominent cases too.
Henry J · 17 June 2011
Maybe in addition to the current reply with embedded quote of the earlier note, there could also be a reply with embedded link to the earlier note - somebody could use that if they don't want to clutter the thread with a duplicate of something from a few replies ago, but do want readers to be able to get to the source reply easily.
Another thought: Insert the date and time of the reply being replied to.
Mike Elzinga · 17 June 2011
Although I try extremely hard to avoid math in any posts, it is nice to see it can still be done even though it is a pain in the neck.
Keep this feature.
∫CF⋅dr = ∫∫σ (∇×F)⋅ndσ
Henry J · 17 June 2011
That's γρεεκ to me!
SWT · 17 June 2011
harold said:
Eric -
This site seems to have an inordinate number of people who seem to think the ‘quote’ feature is a license for repeating other people’s posts in their entirety.
This happens to a large degree because of the "Reply" feature, which does that automatically. It might make sense to get rid of that feature. I almost never use it. For example, I didn't use it here.
I prefer the current system because nesting works best in a system where many people make short comments unrelated to other comments on the thread, and where nested threads are not too long. I think the current system works well here.
Perhaps it would be possible to have both a "quote" and a "reply" function, depending on whether one really needed or wanted to quote anything or not. Sometimes I do just want to reply and have no need for the automatically quoted material.
I'd like to keep the "quote" functionality because it saves me work ... and that's what's most important, right?
eric said:
This site seems to have an inordinate number of people who seem to think the 'quote' feature is a license for repeating other people's posts in their entirety.
Yeah, it drives me bats to see a 300-word blockquote with an 8-word remark at the bottom because someone didn't edit the blockquoted chunk.
Mike Elzinga · 17 June 2011
RBH said:
Yeah, it drives me bats to see a 300-word blockquote with an 8-word remark at the bottom because someone didn't edit the blockquoted chunk.
It often appears that some of the trolls - along with their copy-and-paste “rebuttals” - do this deliberately just to eat up bandwidth and annoy people.
Linda Seebach · 17 June 2011
A small thing, but I dislike the little photos wasting space over on the left.
Do not fall into the trap of thinking that exercising reasonable standards for censoring those who refuse to engage in rational, on-topic, quid pro quo discussion is the equivalent of what goes on at places like UD. People like IBIG who are happy to ask questions but refuse to answer them should be banned. There's nothing productive that comes from letting him clog up 60 pages with nonsense. Anyone paying attention got it in the first 30.
I prefer "latest thread" to "latest post".
I'd also like to see a limit on the number of posts someone can make consecutively on a thread (2?), and a limit on proportion of posts on the thread (50%?). There have been many threads on this site that had potentially interesting conversations strangled by the excessive pedantic posting of the few.
Mark me down as another person annoyed by those who quote 60 lines to post two.
mrg · 17 June 2011
I think exile to the BW for obnoxious trolls should do the job, if links to the postings don't show up on the main PT page. Add a killfile mechanism, and I don't believe there will be any real reason for concern any more. Once I killfile the standard trolls and most of the people who habitually feed them, the noise level will drop precipitously.
mrg said:
I think exile to the BW for obnoxious trolls should do the job, if links to the postings don't show up on the main PT page. Add a killfile mechanism, and I don't believe there will be any real reason for concern any more. Once I killfile the standard trolls and most of the people who habitually feed them, the noise level will drop precipitously.
I agree. Provide users with the ability to control who they see and there is no need for banning and the associated risks of censorship (perceived or real).
Scott F · 17 June 2011
Two suggestions:
1. Visibly number the comments per thread post. I realize the internal comment number is hidden in the date reference, but it would sometimes be easier to refer to a related comment by number, especially when the reference might not be in a direct reply chain. (eg: "Re: mrg @32")
2. Allow the comments to be sorted by comment-reply thread. I don't know what facilities like that might be available.
Thank you, everyone, for the continuing education and thoughtful stimulation.
Scott F · 17 June 2011
Scott F said:
Two suggestions:
2. Allow the comments to be sorted by comment-reply thread. I don't know what facilities like that might be available.
Sorry, I was *not* voting for a site organized by reply threads, which I generally do not prefer. Rather, I was suggesting the ability to *optionally* sort the posts by thread, similar to what most mail programs can do. It would be very handy to be able to change the sort order from "date" to "thread" at will. Though, AFAIK that is probably impractical for a web site.
Scott F · 17 June 2011
mrg said:
I will throw out a proposal that I don't think will fly, but rather than not bother to say it ...
I hang around here quite a bit, and if someone's been tagged as a nuisance I would be only too happy to deal with them. That requires giving me permissions, but I wouldn't act against anyone on my own initiative, and if I broke the rules my privileges could be yanked.
We might be able to set up a little unit of police for the site. OK, lots of issues here; if it doesn't fly at all, no need to comment further.
Could there be a wiki-like solution to that problem? With a few trusted editors, and herds of less-trusted editors? That would probably also benefit from a registration process, though I *do* dislike sites requiring registration.
D. P. Robin · 18 June 2011
mrg said:
I think exile to the BW for obnoxious trolls should do the job, if links to the postings don't show up on the main PT page. Add a killfile mechanism, and I don't believe there will be any real reason for concern any more. Once I killfile the standard trolls and most of the people who habitually feed them, the noise level will drop precipitously.
I agree with this, with the proviso that the Crew should have the ability to send trolls to the BW both for a thread and for all threads. I also like the idea of personal killfiles. Finally, I'm for the idea of monitors and registration of poster. Let anyone read, but only those registered comment.
dpr
mrg · 18 June 2011
Scott F said:
Could there be a wiki-like solution to that problem? With a few trusted editors, and herds of less-trusted editors? That would probably also benefit from a registration process, though I *do* dislike sites requiring registration.
I think it's worth consideration. After all, if the owners don't have time to do the watching, they cannot simply reject the idea of delegating the watching to others. Then the task for the owners becomes the simpler one of watching the watchers. Make sure the watchers have clear rules and, if they don't stick to them, get the boot.
Marilyn · 18 June 2011
Panda's Thumb has shown a tendency to be harsh if a commenter does not share their view on certain subjects, often both opinions are passionately fought for on both sides. I think it would be a shame if this opportunity given by Panda's Thumb to air your view were not given provision for, I think on one hand this is one of Panda's Thumb assets, as well as the theme of its vocation. I think a lot is achieved from these discussions and on occasions they are fought for right to the bitter end, though sometimes the point of the post has been lost entirely. The role of the bathroom wall is a good idea. If there was an easier way to find and comment on past posts perhaps by numbering that would be a help.
Marilyn said:
Panda's Thumb has shown a tendency to be harsh if a commenter does not share their view on certain subjects, often both opinions are passionately fought for on both sides.
Actually, other commenters tend to be harsh when a commenter makes stupid statements or is a troll. Do not be foolish enough to confuse that with unhospitality
I think it would be a shame if this opportunity given by Panda's Thumb to air your view were not given provision for...
points to the Bathroom Wall
mrg · 18 June 2011
Come now, Stanton, after intrusions by kaykay, in comparison Marylyn seems relatively pleasant -- merely somewhat illucid.
Frank J · 19 June 2011
Panda’s Thumb has shown a tendency to be harsh if a commenter does not share their view on certain subjects, often both opinions are passionately fought for on both sides.
— Marilyn
Do you think that PT is more, less, or equally "harsh" as those who come here denying (or pretending to deny) evolution?
I would like to see more civility from all parties, but more importantly I see much too much "bait taking" (answering PRATTs, accusations of "lying for Jesus" etc.) from the PT "side" (same for all boards devoted to evolution/creationism/ID). I would like to see many more questions of the evolution-denier about their "theory," especially the "whats, whens, where's and hows."
John Kwok · 19 June 2011
Frank J said:
Panda’s Thumb has shown a tendency to be harsh if a commenter does not share their view on certain subjects, often both opinions are passionately fought for on both sides.
— Marilyn
Do you think that PT is more, less, or equally "harsh" as those who come here denying (or pretending to deny) evolution?
I would like to see more civility from all parties, but more importantly I see much too much "bait taking" (answering PRATTs, accusations of "lying for Jesus" etc.) from the PT "side" (same for all boards devoted to evolution/creationism/ID). I would like to see many more questions of the evolution-denier about their "theory," especially the "whats, whens, where's and hows."
Agreed. Moreover there is no need that we need to emulate Uncommon Dissent in its posting policies, which is why I am opposed to killfiles or any other means to ignore or restrict commentators. Of course trolls and others who post obnoxious comments - of which I know I am guilty of on occasion - need to have their comments moved immediately to the Bathroom Wall (no exceptions please).
Frank J · 19 June 2011
Moreover there is no need that we need to emulate Uncommon Dissent in its posting policies...
— John Kwok
Not only "not emulate," but frequently remind everyone how much less tolerant UcD is. And how many evolution-deniers have the incredible chutzpah of complaining about PT's "censorship" while ignoring UcD's real censorship.
Let's face it -- every blog runs its own show and has its own policies regarding trolls. There's no "fairness" rule, and the policies of one blog have no effect on those of another.
Some blogs seem to love the action and the traffic. My own humble blog won't tolerate creationists. I don't care what creationist blogs do; my policies aren't a response to theirs. PT seems to be steering a middle course. It's all fine with me.
I must say that I lose interest when when trolls (and those who respond to them) start to dominate a thread. But others may find that's when the thread gets interesting. It's a big internet out there, with something for everyone.
patrickmay.myopenid.com · 21 June 2011
I am opposed to killfiles or any other means to ignore or restrict commentators.
It is important to distinguish between killfiles, which give control to individual participants, and banning, which imposes the decisions of one or a few people on all participants. I encourage the administrators to empower individuals and eschew censorship.
Science Avenger · 21 June 2011
Marilyn said:
Panda's Thumb has shown a tendency to be harsh if a commenter does not share their view on certain subjects...
Who is "their" above? I ask because Panda's Thumb proper, and those of us who merely post, represent a wide variety of opinions on just about every subject where opinions can be had. We have atheists and Christians, Republicans and Democrats, militants and accomodationists, and everything in between. There is no one "view" on anything, and good for us on that.
Can you give an example or two of a "view" that was dealt with unfairly here merely because there was disagreement, as opposed to the various forms of dishonesty, or manipulative obtuseness?
78 Comments
SWT · 16 June 2011
I'd like to see a couple of things:
1) An improved search function, so that I can search for comments by specific usernames with specified keywords.
2) An edit function available for perhaps the first 10 minutes after a comment is posted. I preview my comments except when my fingers are going fast, but come across typos anyway. The edit function should turn off automatically to prevent mischief ("I would never post anything like that!").
3) A block user function to make it easier to avoid feeding trolls (mea maxima culpa)
Overall, I really like the site -- the balance of technical posts, relevant political/legal posts, and humor is quite good.
I don't know how often you're told this, but your work here is truly appreciated. Thank you for all you do to keep PT interesting and informative!
Mike Elzinga · 16 June 2011
Overall this is generally an interesting and informative site. One can lurk here as well as comment; and I do both.
Even a few of the mindless troll infestations bring out some good technical and scientific rebuttals from those with the expertise to respond; and I like to see the responses of those with other expertise.
The Bathroom Wall is a good alternative to outright banning; however, not all exchanges that need to be shipped there actually get shipped there soon enough. I realize the crew members are busy.
And there is also the problem of the BW slowing down browsers by some of the script that is running; especially after the page count increases significantly. Normally that would not be an issue if the off-topic exchanges that get sent there are not interesting.
But there are too many occasions where the troll infestations are so annoying and inane that I don’t enjoy this site at all.
It would be nice to have some kind of “voting” system that would alert the crew to ship a particularly annoying set of exchanges and trolls over to the Bathroom Wall much sooner than happens now.
Maybe an "Annoyance Meter" that counts the number of "no votes." Unfortunately that could be easily abused by trolls, I suspect.
Dale Husband · 16 June 2011
I'd start by making this place a LOT less tolerant of Creationist trolls that make a mockery of this cause the blog was made for. In particular, FL and IBelieveInGod should have been banned a loooooooooooooooong time ago. Let the bigots when they arrive here rant for a few weeks, never delete their posts or move them to the Bathroom Wall (unless the posts contain profanity), but BAN then like P Z Myers does from his Pharyngula blog.
ben · 16 June 2011
Cubist · 16 June 2011
The 'recent comments' box on the main page: Why not have it on all pages? Also, this feature might be more useful if it contained pointers to the most-recently-updated threads. If one particular thread has gained umpty-leven comments in the past half-hour, that one thread will monopolize the 'recent comments' box as it stands, crowding out all other threads. Wouldn't it be better if each thread could only appear once in that box? It might also be appropriate to note the time at which the latest comment in a thread happens to have been posted.
SteveF · 16 June 2011
This may be out of control due to time constraints etc, but I'd like to see a bit more detailed science and ID rebuttals being posted. There's still good stuff, particularly from Steve Matheson, but I remember a few years ago when there were more regular (or so it seemed) and very good essays from the likes of Nick Matzke or Ian Musgrave or Art Hunt. Perhaps this was because there was more stuff to critique but the ID crowd haven't gone away, particularly now that the Biologic institute appear to actually be doing something, so perhaps a shift back towards detailed critiques could be in order? Obviously if those involved are no longer able to, that's fine.
Other than that, more troll control. To some extent that could be self policing, though some people have an insatiable need to respond to trolls.
Frank J · 16 June 2011
I second the request for a better search function.
As for the trolls, what works for me is to avoid answering PRATTs about "weaknesses" of evolution (that only gives them more facts to misrepresent) and instead ask for details about their "theory." If they regurgitate any Behe sound bites I make sure to ask if they agree with Behe on common descent. ~90% of the time they evade my questions and troll for those better at feeding them. When they do answer them, I follow up with more questions. By the 3rd round they all ignore me completely.
Ron Okimoto · 16 June 2011
Can you provide access to an archive? Links will be broken, but it would be nice to be able to search for the old posts somewhere. A lot of the intelligent design fiasco links are broken, and it would be nice to have some searchable archive. It was over 9 years ago that the ID perps began running the bait and switch scam on their own creationist support base and most of those web links are broken.
It is hard to believe that there are still IDiot supporters when the bait and switch has been going down for nearly a decade. No IDiot rube ever got the intelligent design science to teach in the public schools. The switch scam that they were given by the ID perps from organizations like the Discovery Institute or Intelligent Design Network doesn't even mention that ID ever existed. The ID perps sold the rubes the science of intelligent design, but what did they ever deliver?
The ID perps are still selling the intelligent design junk, but all the IDiots ever get when it comes time to put up or shut up is the bogus switch scam. We seem to all accept that as normal, but it wasn't normal 10 years ago. Really, the ID perps began running the bait and switch on their own creationist support base several years before they lost in court in Dover, so they didn't even have that excuse for not putting forward their own ID junk to teach. Just that fact should have dropped the IDiot population to zero, but now it is normal business as usual. A lot of IDiots are bending over and taking the stupid switch scam from the same guys that they know lied to them about the science of intelligent design. There isn't really any legitimate excuse for that, but even the PT regulars accept it as normal.
For the past 9 years the science side hasn't had to do much to keep intelligent design out of the public school classroom. The ID perps are among the first responders when some IDiots want to teach intelligent design, and they make sure that the bait and switch goes down. Most of the activity for the last decade has been countering the obfuscation switch scam that doesn't even mention that ID ever existed.
There have been several times when I wanted to go back to some old posts around the time the bait and switch went down on the Ohio rubes back in 2002 and all the links are broken and the archive only goes back to 2004.
IW · 16 June 2011
When we visit the new site, will we get a sound bite which says, "I'll be your server today"? C'mon, do it!
SWT · 16 June 2011
Cubist's comment reminds me of something else: exclude Bathroom Wall comments from the "recent comments" on the front page. They're rarely useful and often obscure what's going on in the non-BW threads.
eric · 16 June 2011
mrg · 16 June 2011
mrg · 16 June 2011
Patrick · 16 June 2011
phhht · 16 June 2011
Joe Felsenstein · 16 June 2011
I agree with continuing the policy of moving trolls and troll-responses to the Bathroom Wall, rather than banning people. But I have found that, as I post as a Guest Contributer, it is frustratingly hard for me to get any comments moved there. There should be someone on the Team who can be asked by a Guest Contributer to intervene and send comments to the Bathroom Wall, and who will respond quickly. When I have tried to get this to happen you (Reed) have been too busy and nothing much has happened.
mrg · 16 June 2011
kk · 16 June 2011
I would like to see an option where people can keep a debate going after Panda Thumbers who support the mindset of a Michael Newdow can keep getting their butts thrashed after they have lost the fight and resort to name calling and mob mentality.
Newdow just lost another court battle to have "under God" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance. it is important that Panda Thumbers have their noses rubbed in this and that their only power in our culture happens via leftists who violate actual law and scientific information
Cheryl Shepherd-Adams · 16 June 2011
Ditto.
Henry J · 16 June 2011
More effective spam filters?
Cheryl Shepherd-Adams · 16 June 2011
Ditto.
Cheryl Shepherd-Adams · 16 June 2011
"Ditto" was in response to swg's suggestion that the Recent Comments list exclude those to The Bathroom Wall.
Henry J · 16 June 2011
Henry J · 16 June 2011
Henry J · 16 June 2011
Maybe put a link to the Index of Creationist Claims in a prominent place on the side bar.
eric · 16 June 2011
Reed A. Cartwright · 16 June 2011
SWT · 16 June 2011
Mike Elzinga · 16 June 2011
SWT · 16 June 2011
mrg · 16 June 2011
Shebardigan · 16 June 2011
harold · 16 June 2011
Henry J · 16 June 2011
How about giving each "recent comments" a "(new)" link like the threads have on the main page, so that somebody can go straight to the next unread entry on that thread.
Dale Husband · 16 June 2011
David Fickett-Wilbar · 16 June 2011
When I post a comment, it would be convenient if I were taken back to where I had been reading (i.e., the post I had commented on) rather than the end of all the comments.
I have to disagree with the dislike of trolls. I've found reading both their posts and the ones in respose to them very educational; in the arguments from Creationists, the responses from those in the know, and the scientific data and arguments behind those responses. I know that there is always the BW, but that gets so filled up that I'd fall into it and never get out if I tried reading it regularly. On the main board the trolling seems more limited.
Henry J · 16 June 2011
raven · 16 June 2011
Whatever you do, don't forget troll control.
Internet Rule Zero. Any popular forum will be overrun by demented trolls.
Whole internet domains have disappeared under the onslaught of short, warty skinned, green entities. Usenet, AOL, and Yahoo were three of them.
When the troll density gets too high or the wackiness gets too much, a lot of people just stop reading.
Just Bob · 16 June 2011
I have suggested before creating a thread or other posting of Your Brain on Creationism, featuring the wackiest of fundy postings. How about an alternative to the Bathroom Wall, called, maybe, Under the Bridge, where thoroughgoing trolls can be sent--without rational responses. They could growl at each other there.
SWT · 16 June 2011
Another site enhancement I think would be cool is email notification of comments, like what Steve Matheson as set up at Quintessence of Dust for people via Disqus.
John Kwok · 16 June 2011
Matt Young · 16 June 2011
I do not know the correct terminology, but what about nesting comments so that replies to a given comment follow that comment directly?
Susan Silberstein · 16 June 2011
@Matt Young, do you mean comments threads, like Usenet?
Mike Elzinga · 16 June 2011
Left Coast Bernard · 17 June 2011
Please include a photograph of a panda's thumb.
I've always wondered why you use a photograph of a panda's head to illustrate a blog called The Panda's Thumb.
I've seen panda's heads, but I have never seen a panda's thumb.
Your site is informative, clear, and deals with important matters. Your contributors are expert and write effectively.
Just show me a panda's thumb, please.
Misha · 17 June 2011
Matt Young · 17 June 2011
eric · 17 June 2011
harold · 17 June 2011
eric · 17 June 2011
Toni · 17 June 2011
Nesting has a way of messing up the coherence and continuity of long conversations. Please keep the current style.
Can you number the responses in chronological order? I find it much easier to address a reply to "#8 raven" (for instance) than to go back and search for a specific comment embedded in a long series of long comments.
John Kwok · 17 June 2011
Frank J · 17 June 2011
I'm OK with registration too. I only post one "advertisement" on occasion, for which I am neither paid nor stand to make money: Join NCSE.
John Kwok · 17 June 2011
Henry J · 17 June 2011
Maybe in addition to the current reply with embedded quote of the earlier note, there could also be a reply with embedded link to the earlier note - somebody could use that if they don't want to clutter the thread with a duplicate of something from a few replies ago, but do want readers to be able to get to the source reply easily.
Another thought: Insert the date and time of the reply being replied to.
Mike Elzinga · 17 June 2011
Henry J · 17 June 2011
That's γρεεκ to me!
SWT · 17 June 2011
RBH · 17 June 2011
Mike Elzinga · 17 June 2011
Linda Seebach · 17 June 2011
A small thing, but I dislike the little photos wasting space over on the left.
Science Avenger · 17 June 2011
Do not fall into the trap of thinking that exercising reasonable standards for censoring those who refuse to engage in rational, on-topic, quid pro quo discussion is the equivalent of what goes on at places like UD. People like IBIG who are happy to ask questions but refuse to answer them should be banned. There's nothing productive that comes from letting him clog up 60 pages with nonsense. Anyone paying attention got it in the first 30.
I prefer "latest thread" to "latest post".
I'd also like to see a limit on the number of posts someone can make consecutively on a thread (2?), and a limit on proportion of posts on the thread (50%?). There have been many threads on this site that had potentially interesting conversations strangled by the excessive pedantic posting of the few.
Mark me down as another person annoyed by those who quote 60 lines to post two.
mrg · 17 June 2011
I think exile to the BW for obnoxious trolls should do the job, if links to the postings don't show up on the main PT page. Add a killfile mechanism, and I don't believe there will be any real reason for concern any more. Once I killfile the standard trolls and most of the people who habitually feed them, the noise level will drop precipitously.
Patrick · 17 June 2011
Scott F · 17 June 2011
Two suggestions:
1. Visibly number the comments per thread post. I realize the internal comment number is hidden in the date reference, but it would sometimes be easier to refer to a related comment by number, especially when the reference might not be in a direct reply chain. (eg: "Re: mrg @32")
2. Allow the comments to be sorted by comment-reply thread. I don't know what facilities like that might be available.
Thank you, everyone, for the continuing education and thoughtful stimulation.
Scott F · 17 June 2011
Scott F · 17 June 2011
D. P. Robin · 18 June 2011
mrg · 18 June 2011
Marilyn · 18 June 2011
Panda's Thumb has shown a tendency to be harsh if a commenter does not share their view on certain subjects, often both opinions are passionately fought for on both sides. I think it would be a shame if this opportunity given by Panda's Thumb to air your view were not given provision for, I think on one hand this is one of Panda's Thumb assets, as well as the theme of its vocation. I think a lot is achieved from these discussions and on occasions they are fought for right to the bitter end, though sometimes the point of the post has been lost entirely. The role of the bathroom wall is a good idea. If there was an easier way to find and comment on past posts perhaps by numbering that would be a help.
Stanton · 18 June 2011
mrg · 18 June 2011
Come now, Stanton, after intrusions by kaykay, in comparison Marylyn seems relatively pleasant -- merely somewhat illucid.
Frank J · 19 June 2011
John Kwok · 19 June 2011
Frank J · 19 June 2011
The Curmudgeon · 19 June 2011
Let's face it -- every blog runs its own show and has its own policies regarding trolls. There's no "fairness" rule, and the policies of one blog have no effect on those of another.
Some blogs seem to love the action and the traffic. My own humble blog won't tolerate creationists. I don't care what creationist blogs do; my policies aren't a response to theirs. PT seems to be steering a middle course. It's all fine with me.
I must say that I lose interest when when trolls (and those who respond to them) start to dominate a thread. But others may find that's when the thread gets interesting. It's a big internet out there, with something for everyone.
patrickmay.myopenid.com · 21 June 2011
Science Avenger · 21 June 2011