Engage / ArtifactView / Comments

[Hugues Boily]

Hi guys,

The user comment section of the CBC News site uses a similar approach. 
For example, see :
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2009/12/07/building-permits-october.html

Hugues



Armin Krauss wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> I have some thoughts on this. To avoid accidental input of a "report abuse" button it would be good
> to ask the user for confirmation via a dialog/pop-up.
> Regarding the reset of the function I think that there should be no reset for a user-comment combination.
> This means if a user flags a comment as abuse this should only be possible once. If no user management
> is done (sign in without authentication or with pseudonym) any user can abuse the system and flag
> a comment multiple times by login out and in again.
>
> Armin
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:01, James William Yoon <james.yoon at utoronto.ca<mailto:james.yoon at utoronto.ca>> wrote:
> Thanks for bringing this question to list!
>
> Let's actually keep a count of the abuses (i.e., use integer instead of boolean).
>
> Doing so would afford us the following benefits:
> a) Accidental, unintentional tapping of the "report abuse" button would have a less significant effect (lower count)
> b) Individuals abusing the "report abuse" button (e.g., users who maliciously attempt to have other people's legitimate comments removed) would have a less significant effect (lower count)
> c) Crowd sourcing: if many people find something offensive, there's a good chance it's offensive (although the flip side of this democratic morality is that marginal users who genuinely find something offensive would have a less significant effect on the abuse count)
>
> The upshot of all of this is that the moderator can prioritize which comments to look at first and delete, instead of wading through a potentially long list of not-necessarily-offensive comments.
>
> Also, I imagine you've already taken this into consideration, but the report abuse functionality should probably be reset for each session or login, and not by IP since it's quite possible that multiple users will have the same IP when in the museum, especially if they're using a museum device.
>
> Cheers,
> James
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Michelle <michelle.dsouza at utoronto.ca<mailto:michelle.dsouza at utoronto.ca>> wrote:
> Forwarding to the list because I accidentally took this off list.
>
> Michelle
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Joan Garcia Vila <jgarciavila at uoc.edu<mailto:jgarciavila at uoc.edu>>
> Date: November 30, 2009 11:11:30 AM EST
> To: "michelle.dsouza at utoronto.ca<mailto:michelle.dsouza at utoronto.ca>" <michelle.dsouza at utoronto.ca<mailto:michelle.dsouza at utoronto.ca>>
> Subject: RE: Re: Engage / ArtifactView / Comments
>
> Hi michelle,
>
> A boolean is good for me.
>
> Cheers,
> Joan.
>
> --> Missatge original de Michelle (michelle.dsouza at utoronto.ca<mailto:michelle.dsouza at utoronto.ca>) per a Joan García Vila enviat el 30/11/2009 17:04:49
>
> Hi Joan,
>
> One question about the abuse attribute. Are you using it as a boolean or are you planning to keep a count of the number of times abuse has been reported? If it's a boolean I would suggest that you use a boolean instead of an integer.
>
> Michelle
>
>
> On 2009-11-30, at 6:22 AM, Joan Garcia Vila wrote:
>
> Hi James.
>
> Many thanks for your quick response.
>
>
>
> Only one more question/suggestion:
>
>
>
> - ... when user clicks "report abuse" , the comment is marked (attribute abuse=1) and becomes out off the view. In this way, user who reports sees the comment disappear which is good ("Something happened in the UI after a click it done").  That is, the comments lists is filtered (comment.abuse != 1).
>
> When the moderator decides that the comment is "abuse" hi can delete it. But, if he decides the opposite, the abuse attribute is set to 0 so it will become visible again.
>
> Makes sense?
>
>
>
> many thanks in advance,
>
>
>
> cheers,
>
> joan.
>
>
>
> --> Missatge original de James William Yoon (james.yoon at utoronto.ca<mailto:james.yoon at utoronto.ca>) per a Joan García Vila enviat el 26/11/2009 20:16:22
>
>
>
> Woah, that was weird. Copying and pasting from the Jira comment somehow copied both raw text and the marked up text. Apologies for the redundancy.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:09 PM, James William Yoon <james.yoon at utoronto.ca<mailto:james.yoon at utoronto.ca>> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hey Joan,
>
>
>
> Great question. I've posted a comment to the Jira. Here's a copy:
>
>
>
>
>
> "Report abuse" functionality hasn't been fully fleshed out, but the idea scaffold is as follows:
>
>
>
>
>
> - User taps "Report abuse" for a comment
>
>
>
>
>
> - List of reported comments abuse on museum moderator/administrator's side would update to include said comment
>
>
>
>
>
> - At this list, moderator should be able to see all the abuse-flagged comments, and delete/hide comments as necessary
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
> fluid-work mailing list - fluid-work at fluidproject.org<mailto:fluid-work at fluidproject.org>
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
> see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Michelle D'Souza
> Software Developer, Fluid Project
> Adaptive Technology Resource Centre
> University of Toronto
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
> fluid-work mailing list - fluid-work at fluidproject.org<mailto:fluid-work at fluidproject.org>
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
> see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
> fluid-work mailing list - fluid-work at fluidproject.org<mailto:fluid-work at fluidproject.org>
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
> see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
>
>
>
>