This has been a long time coming, but we're happy to finally present a new and updated comment policy. Our comment sections have been an integral part of this site for many years now, but moderating the discussions have been a challenge for all of us, to say the least. To that end, we've developed a few new strategies (tech and otherwise) to help deal with comments. They're reflected below.
We appreciate everyone in the Feministing community who has contributed to our comment sections, has helped us keep comment threads in check and report abuse by commenters. We also appreciate the feedback we've gotten on how to make our comment sections better.
In the coming months you'll be seeing more changes at Feministing, all in response to community feedback. We're starting to introduce some new voices this summer (like Lori!) and there will be more in the near future. We're also preparing to do a site redesign with the money we raised at our 5th anniversary bash, so more details to come with that.
The full revised policy is after the jump!
Comment Policy (Revised June 2009)We view Feministing as a platform for not only discussion among feminists and allies, but for reaching (open, not hateful) people who may not agree with every word we write. Comment threads are a big part of what facilitates this dialogue.
Comment moderation has been one of the most difficult parts of running this site. We moderate comments because we want to leave space for dialogue and questions, but also want to prevent the comment threads from getting derailed or offending anyone is a difficult line to walk. We're not sure there can be such a thing as a safe space on a blog with thousands of readers, but we do want our common conversations to be as productive and useful as possible.
We appreciate all the feedback we've gotten from our community about how we can better moderate comments. To that end, here are some strategies/guidelines we've developed:
-What isn't allowed. Comments that contain personal attacks, hate speech or offensive language will be deleted. Victim blaming is never allowed. Commenters who derail threads (i.e. choose not to discuss the subject of the original post) will be warned and possibly deleted if the derailing continues. As editors, we use our discretion in determining which comments meet the criteria for deletion.
-"Report abuse" button. You all can help us to moderate comments and keep threads in check. You can "like" comments that you support, and you can also flag comments you think violate our policy. Just click the report abuse button on the bottom right hand side of the comment and we'll take a look at it. You can also help us to de-escalate a tense situation in comments by choosing not to respond to a commenter who is derailing a thread or trolling.
-Three options for comments on each post. Because some topics we write about are more contentious than others, and because we are not always able to moderate as attentively as we would like, we realized we needed different tech solutions for different threads. We've come up with three ways a post author can set comments on their post, and it's up to the author's discretion which method works for them and that conversation.
1) Open comments: Just like now, the comments go up as written and are moderated in the thread. We expect the majority of our posts will continue to be moderated this way.
2) Moderated comments: On these posts, the comments will only go up as they are approved by the author. This slows down conversation and allows us to make sure all comments are within our policy.
3) Closed comments: These are posts with no comments allowed. This option will be used in rare circumstances.
-Comments on the Community Blog. The editors don't have the capacity to moderate community blog comments as heavily as comments on the front page. We will do our best to keep an eye on them, but please use the report abuse button when possible to alert us to comment policy violations. We also recommend that community bloggers actively monitor and participate in comments on the posts they write.
-Comment thread duration. Threads will be heavily moderated the first day they are posted. After 24 hours, they will still be watched, but not as closely and community members should keep that in mind when participating. (This is where that report abuse button comes in really handy!) Comments on every post will be closed after seven days. We have thousands of posts on Feministing and the Community blog, and we simply don't have the capacity to moderate threads forever.
We'll also be adding a short reminder of our comment policy to appear in the space above the comment thread on each post--keep an eye out for that in the next few weeks.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Brand spanking new comment policy!.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/14719
I think this is great my only concern is with the 'moderated comments' in the community section. I fear an author of a post might purposely not approve any/all comments with a dissenting view in order to ensure their view wins. Not a big worry though, just a minor concern.
I register a big worry and concern.
When this feature is used, we would follow the same general comment policy guidelines, only deleting comments that violated it. The point would not be to filter out dissenting viewpoints, but to slow conversation down and prevent trolling from taking over. Often times a thread gets derailed by multiple people responding to the same troll over and over again.
This is only an option for Editors writing on the frontpage, not for community bloggers or community posts.
Like we said, it will probably be used rarely, but we wanted the option if needed.
"I fear an author of a post might purposely not approve any/all comments with a dissenting view in order to ensure their view wins."
Hopefully it'll never be as bad as the Operation Rescue website. I keep on trying to post comments giving them MY view, but they never pass through moderation.
Ah, oh well, what can you expect from extremists? Sorry for going a little off topic. :)
But yeah, I hope that feministing never gets that bad. One of my favorite aspects of this website is the fact that, even though we're unified on a lot of issues, we still manage to get into debates in every post.
I don't think the author of a community post has the ability to moderate comments - I think the editors will just "keep an eye on" the posts, as they said, but they won't be the middle option. I got the impression that the three levels of moderation were for non-community posts.
I have tech issues with the "report abuse" option. It would be nice to flag a comment I have issues with, but when I click "report," I'm told that my computer does not have the appropriate software and it would take digging and research to get it. It would be nice if it was a little more like the "like" icon.
I have the exact same problem. The "report abuse" button only works if you have Microsoft Outlook...which I don't...
I had this problem for the longest time!
I followed these steps to fix it (for Windows):
Click Tools
Click Internet Options
Click Programs
And then look to the right of the email option/heading and choose which email you wish to use
I was able to choose my hotmail account so that when I click the Report Abuse button it takes me immediately to a new message in my hotmail.
Hope this helps!
It's a little different with Firefox, but I figured it out with the help of your instructions, so thanks. :)
With Firefox you-
1. Go to Tools
2. Select "Options"
3. Select "Applications"
4. Using the Search function, type in "mailto"
5. Under "action", select which email you'd like to use.
Ahh!
This worked for me!
Thanks!
Strangely, I don't see the "applications" option. I'm on firefox.
Hm, it should be up at the top of the screen that pops up after you hit options.. Have you updated your firefox? That could be why, maybe.
I'm using a Mac and it wasn't under Tools for me either. I had to go to Preferences (under Firefox) and then go to Applications and change the mailto settings. I don't know if that's your specific issue, but ... look around for "preferences" and you might find it.
Thanks for this.
Unfortunately, I don't see an "Internet Options" under my "Tools." Furthermore, when I go to "Options" under "Tools" there is no "Programs" or anything that asks about email.
This is easy to fix.
1. Click on 'Tools' in the pull down menu at the top of the page
2. Click on 'Options', this is right at the bottom of the menu
3. Click on 'Mailto' along side this you will see a pull down menu. Click on 'Use Yahoo mail' (or whatever email program you use.
Even though I do have Outlook, I know what you're getting at.
You can get all the info you need from the URL by either mousing over "report abuse" or right click/property.
The email address is up front, the subject is there(after you extract the placeholders) and "on comment [url here]" is meant for the body of the email.
All in all, a web based form would be better I think.
I've reported comments using that before, but I've also not reported comments due to the need to open up a new window, open my email, cut and paste, etc. Ugh. Perhaps silly on my part, but I doubt I'm the only one with little patience. I wish that would change.
I see your point, but I think the extra effort required makes sure that people report comments only when it's really worth it to do so. If it took no effort and was essentially anonymous (rather than an email coming from your own address), the "report abuse" button could turn into a sort of "dislike/disagree" or "thumbs down" button.
Well, I personally think if it was a web-based form that reported based on our sign-in names, that would still be better than the system that's in place now. I don't think there is currently an issue of too many comments getting reported; rather it's the reverse IMO.
Thanks for the feedback on this feature. We will definitely take this into consideration and see if we can't reevaluate how that tool works.
I know it can take some time, but we really appreciate when people flag those comments!
All in all, a web based form would be better I think.
Much agreed. So many of us use web-based email these days.
That's not an Outlook-specific link. You don't need Outlook, you just need a mail client (e.g. Outlook, Mail, Thunderbird, etc.). But I second anteup - web based form would be simpler, especially for those who do not use a mail client.
Can you define victim blaming for the purpose of the policy? No one ever has the right to commit any form of sexual assault, no one ever deserves any form of sexual assault. But on my first time commenting on Feministing I was accused of blaming the victims and endorsing rape because I said I didn't see a problem with telling parents not to provide alcohol to children because it increases their vulnerability to violent crime.
Some people have the perspective that such a caution is trying to tie the actions of the victim to the actions of the attacker. They see it as akin to saying "don't dress like that" or "don't go out at night."
There is an understandable sentiment behind that feeling, as the crime should never happen in the first place. Which is obvious to you and me; but you seem to take the pragmatic approach that while it should never happen, the reality is that it can happen and so avoiding it is a step if preventing it.
I've been accused of the same thing for also being pragmatic, btw.
It's not a cut and dry concept, so we use our discretion when moderating. Often times on threads about abuse or violence people try to pursue logic that places blame on the victim. When this crosses the line, we step in and moderate as best we can.
There's a seemingly relevant FAQ at Feminism 101: http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/03/15/faq-what%E2%80%99s-wrong-with-suggesting-that-women-take-precautions-to-prevent-being-raped/
I'm not sure what you get from that 101 article but to me it ignores some very basic, and universal, beyond gender roles, rules about being prepared to defend yourself. I have seen and experienced that 101 link in the form of admonishment for suggesting self-defense training and a couple of books about environmental awareness.
I do not want anyone to be made to be scared, nor to be made to stay at home. This is why I advocate training and awareness. As a teen I used to do a lot of hallucinogens and I would go walking after the club. This resulted in a dozen or so violent encounters with individuals or groups of individuals. Telling me "It's not a good idea to eat 5 hits of lsd and go hiking around downtown at 4am by yourself" isn't "victim blaming" it's just a good idea.
While all sane people agree that responsibility lies with the attacker, the 101 argument does not mitigate stranger attacks which while the least frequent form of sexual assault are still out there and and still a threat. Apartment fires are uncommon for most folks, but renter's insurance is only 10$ a month.
The very notion that "precautions don't work because rape keeps happening" is outright dangerous to the individual. Yes a rapist will probably still rape: But if you take precaution he will be less likely to rape you.
Now I'm not here defending the "she was asking for it crowd" even though this very argument has seen me lumped in with those schmucks.
But offhandedly rejecting any suggestion of caution in the form of environmental awareness and alertness as victim blaming is dangerous.
Tell me this, when you tell a woman to take precautions against getting raped, do you also tell men not to rape women? If not, then why? Telling men not to rape women makes A LOT more sense than telling women not to get raped.
I remember, when I was in high school, my English teacher was going off on a tangent about college, and he mentioned to the girls in the classroom to "never walk on campus alone when its dark" (or something along those lines), because rape is all too common. Wouldn't it make more sense for him to tell the guys in the room not to rape us? I mean, he was telling us this because there's a good chance that one of us would end up getting raped, right? But doesn't that mean that there's also a good chance that one of the boys in the room would be come a rapist? I understand that there are female rapists and male victims, but if women are generally the victims and men are generally the rapists, then it only makes sense to tell guys not to rape.
That's why it offends me when people tell me not to get raped, but don't mention a thing to the guys. Women have been trying to end rape for years, and guess what? It's not working. The only people who can end rape are the people who are raping.
Yes, I any male that knows me well enough to know my feelings on self-defense probably knows me well enough to know my feelings toward rapists.
However the argument that "telling someone not to rape" is more effective is really problematic. Look at the number of rapists who are serial rapists who get out of jail and go back to raping. You think they know that people don't have a favorable opinion of rape? I'm pretty sure they know it's an unpopular choice they are making.
That's the whole benefit of self-defense and preparedness/awareness. It's like checking the tire pressure and water level in your car before a road trip. Knowing that you've taken some basic precautions beforehand gives you a greater feeling of liberty and ease.
Also the issue of context shouldn't be ignored. It's not like I'm walking down the street taping strange women and saying "Hey, you know you're gonna' get raped. Here is the card of a dojo, tell them I sent you." It's important when the topic of assault comes up then it's not inappropriate to suggest that some forms of precaution can mitigate the danger and give you greater freedom to go out and have a good time.
Ever tell someone not to drink a drink some stranger hands to you at a party? Precaution isn't a bad thing.
And I don't just advocate this for women, btw. As I noted I have been the victim of assault.
no one is saying that telling men not to rape is MORE effective than teaching self defense. But it is foolish to only address one side of an equation, especially when our culture perpetuates misogyny and minimizes violence against women. And it puts the onus on women to once again be responsible for men- "boys will be boys" type mentality- which is harmful to men.
Since you've said that you don't only advocate this for women, but for men as well, it doesn't bother me as much. At least there isn't a double standard in this case.
"Look at the number of rapists who are serial rapists who get out of jail and go back to raping."
From what I've heard, MOST rapists go unpunished. I just did a quick search and the first statistic I got was that only 6% of rapists ever spend a day in jail. This goes to show that we aren't really punishing rapists, and we're still concentrating on what women can do to "stop being raped", not on actually stopping rape by concentrating on the rapists.
"You think they know that people don't have a favorable opinion of rape? I'm pretty sure they know it's an unpopular choice they are making."
Do they really? I've given up on quite a few of my male friends because I've found out that they don't believe that having sex with a woman when she's unconscious is rape. When people think of rape, they tend to think of "stranger rape". A woman being dragged into an alley and raped by some stranger.. But in reality, most rapes are acquaintance rapes. Most people don't know that. I hear people making rape jokes ALL the time. Our culture still approves of rape.
I used to follow all of the little rules that society gives to women on how to not get raped. Has it helped me in avoiding assault? Not one bit. It still happened to me, and it's still going to happen to women if we don't start teaching people not to rape.
Enough with the derailing of this thread.
I'm the one who "derailed" the thread. She was trying to answer my query.
Sorries.
I think its only common sense that all people take steps to protect themselves, their families & their property whenever & wherever. When my partner moved to a rough part of Chicago I urged her to get a mace, or a gun. Self protection is only common sense.
As far as your professor is concerned, I hope you aren't mad at the guy for trying to help. I imagine the reason he told the women steps they could take to protect themselves but didn't tell the men not to rape is for the same reasons we tell kids not to use drugs but don't tell dealers not to deal them: It goes without saying. Of course you shouldn't rape anyone. With the numbers of incarcerated rapists I don't know that there's any question about that.
you could also say that with the "numbers of incarcerated rapists" that it DOESNT go without saying that raping is wrong! Or else... people wouldn't do it. I think the discussion is more than "don't rape", just like the discussion is more than "don't do drugs". Why do men rape? Why do men participate in a culture where violence against women is not serious? it's not just rape. I guarantee that 90% of the women on here have been sexually assaulted or harassed in some way. I have been, at least a dozen times. Does that sound like a society where sexual violence is a cut and dry issue for men?
"...you could also say that with the "numbers of incarcerated rapists" that it DOESNT go without saying that raping is wrong! Or else... people wouldn't do it..."
...well, there has always been & will always be criminals Evann...there are a lot of murderers out there but I don't think you'd use that as proof that murder is socially acceptable...
And how many people do you know who have been murdered? How many people do you know who think that murder is okay in certain circumstances? I know A LOT of people who have been sexually assaulted, and I know A LOT of people who think that rape and sexual assault are okay in some situations.
yet, it continues to happen. a lot. don't you think that is worth discussion and exploration? I am not prepared to sit back and say "well, it's not 'socially acceptable' (though I just told you that nearly every woman here has been sexually assaulted or harassed) so, we'll just sit back and stop trying."
"Of course you shouldn't rape anyone. With the numbers of incarcerated rapists I don't know that there's any question about that."
Like I said in my other post, most rapists go unpunished. Most of the guys that I've talked to about this issue tolerate rape in certain circumstances. We live in a culture that still tolerates rape. So yes, there is apparently question about that. And yeah, I was pissed at my teacher (not professor, this was in high school) for that. We used up the rest of the class period debating about it. The message we're giving people is that if women don't want to be raped, they must take precautions. If they don't take these precautions, then it's okay for men to go on and rape them. We live in a rape culture.
Yes. I spent the last 6 months in rural Namibia lecturing male students that they had no right to touch girls without permission, lecturing female students that they had the right not to be touched without permission, and physically escorting female volunteers to warn off men who were always annoying and potentially dangerous. The thing about rapists, however, is that they're criminals. They do things that they're not supposed to do. The best way to end crime would be for all criminals to reform themselves, but that isn't happening, so potential victims need to take precautions even though it's unfair. Violent criminals by definition do the wrong thing, so surrendering all the initiative to them and hoping they'll be good because they should is incredibly dangerous.
I got mugged and beat up once wandering around a bad part of Minneapolis alone. My vulnerability didn't *justify* the attack, but there were bad people ready and willing to exploit it, and I'm the one who paid the price. That's the world we live in. The fact that they not I were at fault didn't help me. Obviously rape is much worse than what happened to me, but I think that makes the point more applicable.
Nothing can justify and no one can deserve rape. But it's not the guilty who suffer from crime, it's the innocent. You shouldn't have to protect yourself from other people's evil deeds, it's unfair, it's burdensome, it won't always work. But that's the world.
That are several other things that are troubling about that response- a) it is viewed as patronizing, telling women what we have been told since childhood- don't go out, don't talk to strangers, don't do this, don't do that. We've heard the suggestions a million times before.
b) it implies that rape is preventable. The majority of rape is committed by someone the survivor knows, and often is committed by people we trust. Talking about self defense training only addresses a limited group of attacks, and many feel it comes across that only "stranger" rapes are real.
c) All too often, we ONLY hear "suggestions" about how to prevent rape. When this is the dominant message, it implies that the victim is the one to blame for her attack. It just gets OLD that every single time rape comes up, a chorus of people provide advice for all the women, but never talk about what MEN can do to stop raping, and discourage rape culture. Rapes happen in ALL sorts of situations (dress slutty, dress in sweats, old or young, "ugly" or conventionally beautiful, stranger or husband, etc etc... but they all would not have happened without a rapist.
Hey, enough derailing this thread with this debate about victim blaming.
good for y'all, Miriam, hope it works well.
I misread this to say, "Brand New Spanking Policy!"
What counts as "offensive language?"
This comment has been deleted because it violates our comment policy.
Thanks for proving our point logrus. ikkin, offensive language includes using racial slurs, sexist language, vulgar language, unnecessary swearing.
We use our discretion on a case by case basis as to what is offensive, but those are some examples.
When you say "unnecessary swearing", does that mean I wouldn't be allowed to say something like "this video/article/whatever is so f***ing annoying" or similar? It's just that I happen to swear a lot, for emphasis and the like, in my regular speech, and I usually type the same way I speak. I don't consider that kind of swearing to be particularly offensive because in that context it's really just words... But if this new policy means holding back, I can.
Sorry if this comes across as confrontational or anything - I really do just want to clarify things.
You might want to clarify what you mean by unnecessary swearing. I come here for the quality of discussion & while I think the level of discourse here is higher than the vast majority of sites, the vulgarity is also much, much higher. And, honestly, I think that tone is set by the Feministing staff (F*** You Fridays being just one example). So how do you define "unnecessary". I personally don't think the discourse is hurt by banning swearing (I wouldn't be able to swear in any college seminar) but I don't think that's what you intend either.
I understand the need to set a standard for productive discussion, but I dearly hope that individual traits will not be censored out for the sake of forced-friendliness. The problem with deeming language offensive is that people are offended by different things and the word "offensive" is very general. This blog, simply by existing, offends a great number of people. I think we should never overlook the fact that there are positive ways to offend others as well as negative ways.
By the way, I'm not trying to trump the opinion of the editors or say that these new rules will, indeed, force mannerisms on the community. I just want to be clear that I don't think comments should be deleted or users banned arbitrarily because something was said that would not have pleased the FCC.
We don't do that now, and we don't plan to in the future. Really this policy is a reiteration of our current moderation style, with some new tech elements and a few changes (like comments turning off after a week).
We're not going to turn into the FCC here, and obviously we use swearing in our own blogging.
When something crosses the line though, we reserve the right to moderate that comment.
There is no way to make it a black and white policy without being like the FCC, so you all have to trust us to use our discretion.
Just to clarify, if your comment is moderated you can still continue to comment. Only if you are moderated more than three times (or your comments are spam) will you be banned from commenting all together.
Lol.
Are you guys going to do anything about technical problems with posting comments and posting to the community portion of the site, like moving to a system besides MovableType? The last discussion about it got a "we're thinking about it"-type response and that was weeks (or months) ago.
It's very discouraging to write a long post, get the confirmation message, then never see the post appear on the community page. I've sent 3 emails about it through the contact page, but I think that's on the same system and either they never got through, or gmail is flagging your responses as spam, so I never get them.
Congrats on the new policy. I know it must have taken waaayyy too much time but I think it will be worth it for the community in the long run.
I have some reservations about the new policy and how it is going to be enforced. Since we have a crew of mods who rotate days, it's possible that they could moderate in different ways. I could see this being a problem since we, as the community, may not be able to figure out what's ok and what's not because of internal moderation inconsistency.
Have you all discussed as a group what the community standards for things like "offensive language" and other, sometimes circumstantial, rule enforcement will be?
If one of the editors is unsure if a comment is worth deleting, we check in with one another via email.
We developed this policy together and feel confident we are on the same page.
Cool. I can get on board with that.
Cool. I can get on board with that.
This comment has been deleted because it violates our comment policy.
What sunzheng said.