Some research I'd like someone else to do

[andrewducker]

I'd like someone to look at all the different commenting systems out there, and work out why some of them have a decent proportion of interesting discussion, while some of them are full of pond scum.

And then write up the findings, along with a nice simple checklist for "How to manage the comments on your site if you want good discussion".

Because, frankly, on 95% of the sites out there I avoid reading the comments, because I know it's just not good for my blood pressure.

Comments

[andrewducker]

Frustratingly, The Guardian's website can be just as bad.

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

I've visited briefly another couple of newspapers forums, and they were pretty awful too.

Though the Sun's was quite funny in terms of sheer number of times Hitler and the Nazis were invoked.

[ninebelow.livejournal.com]

It is any site with a lot of readers. The problem is you can't moderate people just for being idiots (although that Gawker system mentioned below is interesting).

[andrewducker]

Hacker News also has a Karma system, where you can only upvote when you've been upvoted yourself for X points, and you an only downvote when you've reached Y points. It's quite simple, and seems to work reasonably well.

It's all self-running as well - the users moderate themselves.

[cairmen.livejournal.com]

"you can't moderate people just for being idiots"

Says who?

Actually, I can think of at least one site which explicitly removes posts and bans people for being, in their opinion, stupid. And they're the source of record for hardcore World of Warcraft players, so they're doing something right.

(They're also remarkably polite for a gamer site)

[andrewducker]

I believe that Something Awful also punish _the wrong kind of_ stupidity very heavily.

[cairmen.livejournal.com]

You're gently caressing right they do.

[andrewducker]

I don't read SA myself, but I get enough stuff forwarded on by a friend that does to make that terribly funny :->

[andrewducker]

Just had a friend point out the £10 joining fee. Which will also stop people doing stuff stupid enough to get banned.

[despotliz.livejournal.com]

I think the $5 fee for Metafilter also filters out a lot of the crap. Along with having visible moderators who are part of the community and not just some figure on high banning and deleting things, and who will explain their decisions.