Slashdot Mirror
A Norwegian Website Is Making Readers Pass a Quiz Before Commenting (niemanlab.org)
Joseph Lichterman, writing for Nieman Lab: Two weeks ago, NRKbeta, the tech vertical of the Norwegian public broadcaster NRK, published an explainer about a proposed new digital surveillance law in the country. Digital security is a controversial topic, and the conversation around security issues can become heated. But the conversation in the comments of the article was respectful and productive: Commenters shared links to books and other research, asked clarifying questions, and offered constructive feedback. The team at NRKbeta attributes the civil tenor of its comments to a feature it introduced last month. On some stories, potential commenters are now required to answer three basic multiple-choice questions about the article before they're allowed to post a comment. The goal is to ensure that the commenters have actually read the story before they discuss it.
"The goal is to ensure that the commenters have actually read the story before they discuss it"
A+ idea.
+1 insightful
Too many RTFA's...
And here's the list of questions:
1) Where do hot grits go?
2) Give us a good "In Soviet Russia" joke.
3) Who is Old Ike?
4) What does the acronym GNAA stand for?
5) What movie is it a requirement to watch to join GNAA?
"But the conversation in the comments of the article was respectful and productive"
[CITATION NEEDED] ;-)
If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
I don't know why I must pass a test before being able to read a website. Also, do I have to pay for the test? How long is it? I think this is a stupid solution for a non-existent problem.
This sounds like a surefire way to get only the best trolls! ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Absolutely not. There are 1000s of reason to vote for a candidate or another. Answering questions about something you've read is just like a form of captcha that requires a minimal intellectual effort that can discourage the most lazy trolls.
OTOH, political literacy can be VERY subjective and emotional. Literacy for one can look like propaganda for the other.
..requiring a literacy test to vote?
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you are not trolling with that one, and share just a couple ways how these are not similar.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Did you read the article before posting that?
If this was about voting, and if the quiz was a literacy test, then yes.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
Starting April 1, Slashdot will require users to pass a drug test before commenting. Here in the /. offices, we refer to it as the "If You're Not High, GTFO Rule".
Submission of a >0.080 breathalyzer score will also be accepted for full credit.
You are welcome on my lawn.
now if we could make the "journalists" pass a quiz before writing an article on something they know nothing about.... even better.
It's nice that people have to qualify for some things. Doctors, for instance, and police. Drivers tests help, but maybe should be more strict. More controversial is that parents should be tested before having children (are some parents unprepared physically, emotionally, financially?).
Qualifying before comments sounds interesting. Unfortunately many sites require commenters to register with an outside data gatherers before you can comment.
...omphaloskepsis often...
Why would you want to post on such a site to begin with though? Conceivably some antisemitic website would require you to indicate that you believe Jews are the source of all evil or something like that. You can't have a reasonable debate in such a place to begin with and I expect that only people who would want to post there are already true believers.
As with any tool, it can be used responsibly and have good outcomes or be used for terrible purposes by immoral people. You also forget that for the website to ask a question and assign it a correct answer is a tactic endorsement that they believe it is the truth. A news site could run a story about political candidate X talking about the wage gap, but that's just reporting on something that happened, having a question where the correct answer is "the wage gap is real" on the other hand goes beyond just reporting. Any news site that used questions so irresponsibly would just hang itself.
... would start with, "What day was the original version of this duplicate post posted?"
This summary was too long, but whatever the concept it proposes is just ludicrous.
I want to make a bot that can answer the quiz. My theory is that, once I have done so successfully, it can make more intelligent comments on the article than the average commenter. At that point, I think I have won my own personal turing test.
Next up: A bot that tells you if the news is fake. Has someone already done that? I imagine something like Microsoft's "clippy" popping up in the corner saying "I see that you are reading complete bu11sh*t. Would you like some help posting vitriolic comments?"
The only way this can work with US readers is if the questions are shorter than 140 characters, and the answers were in the readers' twitter feeds within ten minutes of the question being asked.
Also, SQUIRREL!
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Oh, there is. It goes like this:
[ ] Check if you think "interstate" is a synonym for "intrastate"
[ ] Check if you think "unreasonable" means "ignore the rest of this amendment"
[ ] Check if you think "ex post facto" means "pile on punishment at will post-sentencing"
[ ] Check if you think article five says "SCOTUS shall make any amendments it likes"
[ ] Check if you think article three says "article five was just there for humor's sake"
[ ] Check if you think "shall not infringe" means "infringe"
[ ] Check if you think "rights reserved to the people" means "things congress can tell them they can't do"
[ ] Check if you think "speedy and public trial" means "rot in Guantanamo indefinitely"
[ ] Check if you think "inflicting cruel and unusual punishment" means "withholding waterboarding"
[ ] Check if you can keep a straight face while intoning "support and defend the Constitution"
Bonus questions:
[ ] Check if you will take bribes from lobbyists
[ ] Check if you will do what the party "leadership" tells you to
Did you check all the boxes? Congratulations! You have qualified to pass the initial screening process of our two political parties!
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.