There's a new comment on an old post - the one about branding. The comment is cut and pasted in about a website on Jehovah's Witness lawsuits. The person got there through a google search for Jehovah's Witness. And the commentor got through the screening. So I'm guessing it was a person, not a machine. . It's sort of relevant since JW is mentioned (though there was a much more relevant one that same day..) Should I leave it or dump it? Based on what criteria?
Possible criteria:
1. A real person left the comment
2. There's a relationship to the post content
3. It isn't abusive of someone or a group
4. The information posted might be of interest to a reader
Should "It isn't a cut and paste comment without direct reference to the post" be a criterion?
What should I do?
Friday, May 04, 2007
1 comment:
Comments will be reviewed, not for content (except ads), but for style. Comments with personal insults, rambling tirades, and significant repetition will be deleted. Ads disguised as comments, unless closely related to the post and of value to readers (my call) will be deleted. Click here to learn to put links in your comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I normally approve all comments, as long as they don't violate my own personal standards. My teenaged nieces and nephew read my blog, so I keep that in mind.
ReplyDeleteThere have only been two comments [by real people, vice spambots] that I have refused to approve. One was from a supporter of a (alleged) cop killer. The second was from a woman that I had been on a few dates with that chose my blog to convey some personal information she should have told me in person, or at least on the phone.
Other than that, I approve them.
Then again, most of my posts are photos, and I rarely get anything controversial.