Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Leaving a Comment? That'll Be 99 Cents, and Your Name

Posted by timothy on from the slashdot-ai-ponders-this-idea dept.

netbuzz writes "Anxious to lift a ban on comments brought about by incessant trolling and anonymous slander, a Massachusetts newspaper has begun requiring two things of online readers who want to leave their thoughts on stories: a one-time fee of 99 cents and a willingness to use their real names. Says the publisher: 'This is a necessary step, in my opinion, if The Attleboro (MA) Sun Chronicle is going to continue to provide a forum for comments on our websites.'"

3 of 377 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Dept of Troll Prevention.... by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Slashdot's method isn't working: the site is infested with trolls and spammers and always has been. That's a perfect example of why the system doesn't work.

    --
    "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
  2. How long will the UK Guardian last without payment by Kupfernigk · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    The Guardian newspaper in the UK has a kind of, to be polite, half-baked moderation system. Paid moderators delete posts that fall foul of the UK's remarkable libel laws, and the general public can vote comments up (but not down). I understand that this is being reviewed and they recognise that it is inadequate, but the main problem is that it has attracted steadily more right-wing trolls (and, to be fair, some equally stupid left-wing ones) who both post and mark one another up. This is intended by them to give the impression that extreme right-wing views enjoy a great deal of support. It has got very significantly worse since the Daily Murdoch introduced its paywall, so the trolls can't post on it any more for free.

    I'm waiting to see how long it will be before a combination of British libel lawyers (a fine body of men against whom nobody would ever say a word in public), and the actual cost of moderating all those posts, forces the Guardian to introduce a paywall. I wouldn't even be surprised if Murdoch's very expensive advisors saw precisely this scenario developing. I suspect that this small newspaper is just a bit ahead of the trend.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  3. Re:Irony by guspasho · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Why does every discussion about someone being an asshole always turn into a discussion about their constitutional right to be an asshole?

    They are still assholes for charging for something that has always been free. If their goal is to keep the quality of the comments from degrading, they should moderate their comments or not allow them at all. That's how it worked when people mailed letters to the editor. If they are looking for a new revenue stream the market will soon help them realize how stupid of an idea that this is.