On posting comments
I've seen several criticisms of how quickly (or not quickly) comments get posted here. The fact is that it's the paper's policy to moderate the comments before posting them for obvious reasons. There are three, sometimes four, of us who who check this for comments that need to be posted. I post them when I see them, but if I spent all my time checking for comments there would be no time to write stories for the paper, to post my own entries to this blog or to live the rest of my life.
posted by bill koch at 7:57 PM
36 Comments:
at 8:40 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 8:44 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:14 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:51 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:57 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:16 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:26 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:36 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 7:57 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 8:11 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 8:16 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 8:22 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:18 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:13 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:30 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:08 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:09 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:13 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:20 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:42 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:49 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3:06 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3:46 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 5:04 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 5:06 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 6:05 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 8:20 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:19 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:18 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 8:34 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:06 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3:06 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4:07 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4:50 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 5:34 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 5:37 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*Good idea to have more than just you checking. My only suggestion would be you have to be kind of adaptive to the situation that's going on. So the day after a game, you might check it much more frequently than more dead times. Not being able to see new comments when we're feeling kind of excited the morning after a big game is kind of a drag. No biggie, but I'd like to see this blog go on in a big way, post-Josh, and I also like that you monitor comments. Just saying if you could monitor comments more frequently at a few times that it would feed those of us who like this blog.
Totally understand. Rivals.com says that the bearcats have signed another player for the football team, any idea who? You have to have insider access to be able to read it.
at least we know your screening policy now. Just means i will check your blog less often because i now know my post may take hours to list.
Screening loses flow of conversation and spontaneity. You run the blog like you run a Newspaper, Once a day. Oooppss!
Is that what happens when you take one business model and slap it on another? Enquirer will join the Post soon, if you don't change with the times.
What a bunch of hooey.
You eliminate the anonymous postings and require people to register and you eliminate the vast majority of problems.
Then you allow people to comment freely and remove one when it's offensive. Usually the rest of the bloggers will scream when there's a post out of line and do self policing. That way you don't have to continually perform updates that interfere with your work and life.
The lack of live posting ruins the spontaneity of the blog, especially during games. You'll never build an audience. People want to see their posts right away and respond to the course of the game and other comments, which is why most all newspapers allow live posting.
But then, the Enquirer thinks that by not posting updates on the sports pages during the day that everyone is just sitting by waiting for the next morning's paper to hit their doorsteps.
Most newspapers allow unedited comments to all articles and blogs, again "most". The Enquirer, and their communist leaning ways, needs to "edit" unworthy language.
had a comment delete, but understood at the time that although i believe that the comment was right on, it could have been demoralizing for some members of the team and caused an attitude problem for others. but you asked the question, so i answered it.
it is good to know that Alvin does not have an attitude problem! i was concerned about that, his talent was obvious in summer league. Now lets hope he can do a Hicks!
n team improvement, the plyers still arent gritting their teeth and showing true determination at the foul line thru the game. until they realize that they must shoot at least 70% to be competitive with top teams and if they shoot 80% it loosens up the defense
To have the power of censorship for your blog means that only the ideas you wish to see in print may be published. Are you asking for the fans ideas you wwant to agree with or is this newspaper strong enough to even publish the criticism it sometimes deserves? Let's revert to instant publication.
Ricknmd are u serious? Who is ricknmd? You could be anybody.
Posting with a blogger id is just as anonymous as anonymous posting. Anyone can have 1-10 posting ids.
Please review your lack of thought before you post.
blogging is suppose to be quick and easy. Not a leason in how a newspaper ran a monopoly over 100 years ago.
Allow instantaneous posting and delete the posting you find offensive. It worked for over 1 year with Josh's Blog. He had 3 times the following of Kock's 2-8 hour delay blog.
You're censorship is Oppressive!
I posted a link to a nice article on andy kennedy's success. All positive news for most UC fans. And you screened out the post, becuase I listed and gave reference to a competing source. What silliness!
The Enquirer will never rule the web, in spite of your failing efforts.
i suggest you make your posts quick and short with little thought.
I've posted 10 messages and only 5 made it thru the editorial board of this blog. What a waste of time.
So what you and the The Enquirer are saying to the customers is for us to blog when it's convenient for you. Nice. And really, really dumb.
I think you all should give poor old Bill a break. It takes a lot of time to go out and dream up big, unfounded stories about recruits and group sex.
He can't do that and take care of the blog in a timely fashion.
Anon 7:57
Your ideas are right on the money! The problem is that the Enquirer and/or Bill K. do not want a real blog. They want more to pacify us with this psuedo blog and keep dissension to a whisper. It's 10:30 now and the last post that I can read is yours at 7:57. Isn't this just great, comrades??
Someone ask Josh how many minutes time it actually takes to check this. Just curious.
11:08 and the last post viewable is 10:30...
keep it up Enquirer and this blog will be about as active as your other blogs.
"keep it up Enquirer and this blog will be about as active as your other blogs."
There are already 17 comments about this post about how often this blog is checked, censorship, etc - hardly any comments about UC basketball at all for this thread.
That's not active?
I like the change - it keeps the riff-raff away.
Anon 11:09
Why are you complaining? Thirty-nine minutes is WAY faster than most of the comments show up!!!...LOL
Bill, P-L-E-A-S-E give the people what they want!
i made a post several days ago that some if not all of the hate mail should be deleted. that post was deleted. however i am glad to see that some of it is being deleted.
Hi Bill
Just a few comments. I know you said you're new to the whole blog thing so here are a couple suggestions:
1) You have to get a thicker skin. This is the second time since you started this blog that you're complaining about the comments. If you can't take it, it may be time to hand the blog over to someone else.
2) Moderate the comments as far as language and/or offensive content, but otherwise leave them alone.
Otherwise, you're doing a good job getting the info out there.
Bill,
For being new to blogging, you're doing just fine. I, for one, am glad that the blog is being monitored.
I would guess that many of those screaming about "censorship" are the same ones who turn blogs into their own "spitting contests" and just want to insult others.
As ANON 11:13 put it "I like the change -- it keeps the riff-raff away.
Those who want instant posting can either show some patience or leave.
Bill - moderation or requiring all to use ID makes sense.
Dow in his NCAA blog now requires an ID, this after so many crude and downright malicious comments not even pertinent to the topic being discussed.
A small minority of folks can't see the difference between good natured give and take and viciously attacking someone.
So it's not censureship just common sense. Posters can make their point without getting in the mud.
The good part about a blog is the instantanious reaction to a situation.
You lose that this way, especialy for an in game blog.
If there is something wrong or obnoxious just take the post down.
Just don't write Eggsavier or Suckeyes. Those posts don't make it. But then again, this post won't see the light of day either.
Shame on you Enquirer for your censorship. So much for the free press, you have become your own worse nightmare. Limiting people's thoughts, expressions, and their words. Great journalists of long ago are turning in their graves watching you censor our thoughts in a free country.
Although I obviously still visit this blog, I don't do so with the same frequency that I did with Josh's blog. There are two reasons for that. First, the censorship. There is no reason for the censorship. On the whole, Josh's blog worked very well without any censorship. Second, the quality of "reporting" is without question much lower. But, given the poor Enquirer reporting on UC athletics over the years, that should come as no suprise.
The lack of censorship on Josh's blog made for a lot of nasty posts, imho. Now maybe you were one of the nasty posters, so you'd like it the other way. But at times the comments were way out of hand.
I am curious why the paper's policy for monitoring posts is inconsistent from one blog to another. It seems to be up to each writer's discretion what he/she wants to do in regard to comment censorship. Or is UC sports so much more of a sensitive topic as compared to the Reds/Bengals/Xavier etc. that it requires special treatment?
If so, perhaps another solution for you is to completely disable posting comments.
Here's a thought. There seems to be 2 lines of thinking here. A few for censorship and many for free speach thought, etc. Bill and the few can have a pretend blog and the 99% of us who realize that this is still a free country can have a REAL blog, with actual expression of thought. Oh, forget it. That would be so un-Enquirer like!
I like the board being monitored, just hope it happens frequently so the blog doesn't lose momentum.
But, Mr. Free Speech, are you saying it should be okay for anyone to say anything about anybody? There's laws about that - they're called libel and slander. Even public figures have rights in this area - just ask the National Enquirer what happens when they fbricate lies about celebrities - citing anonymous sources.
Do you think people should be able to write swear words here without Bill deleting them? How about making up a lie about somebody and going with it? I thought Bill took an awfully big chance against the university on sex, lies, and videotape, but the folks at the Enquirer surely know the law.
So while Bill cannot possibly know the truth about every single post, he can monitor for outrageous, and what technically are often illegal, posts. If you post your opinion (the purpose of the blog), your opinion will be made public.
I don't understand why anyone feels the need to criticize anything having to do with this blog or the commenting rules. Its free. The sense of entitlement is ridiculous sometimes.
anon 3:06 I agree, your sense (and use) of a right or free Entitlement to criticize is ridiculous.
anon 4:07 PM... I guess that you subscribe to the "let them eat cake" attitude.
It seems like newspapers want to subscribe to the "Freedom of Speech" mantra only when it appears to them.
There's two very distinct parts of the First Amendment issue and most people conveniently rant about only one of them.
Yes, you are entitled to say what you please.
But that doesn't exempt you from the consequences of what you might say.
So while some of you think you are entitled to free speech on a corporation's news site and blog, that corporation has the right to set the rules and boundaries of commentary conduct and protect itself from any consequences.
On a simpler scale, this is no different than someone coming into your home and cursing every sentence. You say you don't allow that kind of language. Then, that person says they'll talk as they please. Fine, you must leave. This is my house, my rules.
And this issue about the posting rules of this blog isn't about free speech. It's about loosening the rules so that posts are allowed in real time so we can react to the games or other commentary.
Let's just say there's been a TON of comments that needed to be deleted on Katzowitz's space--venomous stuff we never saw on Rosecrans's blog--and most all of it was from anonymous posters, which C. Trent didn't allow.
Coincidence?
No.
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.
<< Home