$12256 / $11500
Hi,
I want to know what the benefits of anonymous comments are, as I don't see anything obvious atm. I rather irritates me when not knowing who wrote comments (especially if it is more than looking good). Also it is not clear if it was the same anonymous person or many different ones.
Does anyone of you use it or see some cases they might be very good for?
-remaxim
This website's content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Being forced to register (or login) usually makes me not bother with it, so yes, I for one consider them a good idea. Maybe allow a "poster" field where you can fill in a nick other than "Anonymous"? I agree that the current way is confusing.
Sure,
if the user has to write a name for commenting it is fine with me as well... I just get confused by multiple anonymous all over the site
Some people might be more willing to honestly critique art if they can do so anonymously. That's a valuable feature.
I don't actually think that art should be reviewed by people who don't like it. I think that uploaders who dared to make or upload stuff to OGA shouldn't be punished for it. We have moderation system and also a favorites system that can push good work on the front. Also art that for one user might look worthless, could be very handy for the other one. I know that I have a bit different view on the topic, but it helps to keep a good community, keep tensions out and also motivates people to upload their stuff without worrying what other might have to say bad about their work.
For some people - I'm fine either way really, but I know they are out there - the criticism is the reward for putting it up. "Looks great", "Well done" and so on can be encouraging, but you can get too much ego-boosting at times ;).
One possibility might be to do what dA does* - separating comments and critique: the uploader can then chose wether to allow critque or not. Not sure if that's a good idea though, or worth the effort...
* without the need to subscribe, obviously - if anything looks even slightly interesting on dA, it's going to require a subscription. No exceptions.
well, you only will get this egoboosting if you re good. Bad pieces just would not get any comments (which also should let you think about your art and how to make it better).
Also I actually think that DA is a pretty good example of how to create a bad community.
Sure, dA is horrible - the community, anyway. I don't see what that has to do with this though. Critique is an underused feature (because it requires subsription of both parties). If anything, page after page of "awesome!" even when the work is mediocre at best is something that feels very much like dA to me...
(by registered users btw, dA doesn't allow anonymous posting AFAIK)
Yeah, I think I know what you mean...
Constructive criticism definitely should be encouraged... but I don't think allowing to post anonymously can help there, as people should stand behind their criticism (if that is really a constructive one) and also help the artists to make it better in some cases by being responsive. I also don't think rating stuff bad is a good idea, but that s another topic
My personal preference remains anonymous comments allowed, with a mandatory"Nick" field. With this, the confusion should be mostly gone, and I honestly see little reason to not allow it. So I'd like to turn the question around: assuming the nick field is implemented, can you see any cases where it would be harmful*?
* and likely to be a problem
EDIT: Damn, you're quick :). I actually don't consider anonymous comments particularily useful for this either - for me, it's for people who don't want to register (or login, if they're in a hurry). No more, no less. Anyway, I think the "shouldn't comment 'bad' art" will solve itself - abuse won't be tolerated, and most people will probably skip art that doesn't interest them.
well spam or bashing ... but as I don't see any of those both problem at the moment (and don't think there will any soon), I think a mandatory Nick field is completely enough at the moment.
...but mostly it was used by spammers, so I made it completely anonymous.
My reason for allowing anonymous comments is that I'd like to include casual people as well. Not everyone is going to want to sign up to participate in OGA, but some people who don't sign up may have something interesting to say. Also, any time there's an anonymous comment that's not legit, we delete it. There was a site called spamcity.spam (name changed so as not to promote the guilty), that was actually hiring people to leave comments with links back to their site. Now that we've disallowed links in anonymous comments, they've pretty much given up.
Anyway, if, as an admin, you see a comment that's not legit, just delete it. And if you think someone is deliberatly trolling, let me know. Apart from that, I'd prefer to continue allowing people to comment anonymously.
Bart
The main problem to me is the confusement with absolut anonymity, and having a mandatory nick field would help there a lot IMO.
In how far was that madatory indentity field used by spammers?
spamcity.spam showd up a lot ion the identity field, which is why I removed it. Unfortunaetly, the choice I have is either to allow "contact information", which includes a link, or nothing. I can see if there are any Drupal plugins out there that will tell it to ask for a name only (and no link), but honestly it's pretty low on my priority list, unless you can point out any actual problems (other than link spam) that have occurred due to anoymous comments.
Bart
I do really want some kind of anonymous posting/comment.
I am one of the users who want to say something (constructive) now and then but doesn't want to register. At least for now.
Shall it be with or without nick field, I think it doesn't matter, as ppl who want to let the others know who they are can just sign their post. Like I'll do it now :)
--
Pompei2