Sunday, February 24, 2008

Games people play

Just for fun, I popped a comment, somewhat tongue in cheek, into the Andrew Marr show comments section, after a rather, how to say, 'less than challenging' interview with Ken Livingstone. Just to see if they could tell when someone is being utterly ironic, and highlight the value (at least here), of such moderated comments when all you need to attribute is a name and location.

Don't know why they bother with any pretence, when they could pretty much write 'em themselves.

Anyway, it's good to know the London Mayoral leadership will be guided by the likes of the BBC, based not on celebrity or gesture politics or personality attacks, but with the actual records, words and deeds of the candidates and those they have surrounding them investigated thoroughly.

Or, as I neglected to add in my initial post, should I perhaps influence the moderators on its inclusion... not.


'Awesome show today. Andrew really took to task and nailed Mr. Livingstone on all his claims, whilst teasing out the substantive issues that truly matter in helping voters make informed political decisions.
Peter, UK'

Mind you, you can never have enough 'support': What's at stake An interesting insight into the value of agenda-driven media (both right and left)

PROF'S POSER - Pixel reviver

I have been told of this rather clever notion which, if it works, seems a worthy mention in's more fromal REPAIR advisories: killdeadpixel

Bascially a means to restimulate dead pixels on a screen.

Before I give it a full blown big-up (which it may deserve), I was wondering if any IT whizzes had a view on possible pros and cons and value.

It's not like this life is working out so well

As my wife is an addict of online community 'Second Life' so this caught my interest: Searching for a new virtual life

I watched the programme, and what really piqued my interest was the notion that some are using such communities for virtual conferences. We're talking teh capacity for hundreds to 'attend', and then break out into groups.

This I find very exciting, especially bearing in mind my oft-cited lack of faith in the plethora of big-ticket mega-conferences, especially enviro-related, that seem to actively promote exclusivity and positively encouarges carbon excess.

I am now pondering this big-time with my notion of a genuine 'People's Gathering' where those that may really have worthy contributions can attend, be heard and contribute.

Cure or kill?

We are very lucky on this blog that, so far, there have been no extremes of posting requiring even a reaction, much less intervention.

As moderator, I am well aware of the responsibility. But also the various threast that exist.

Hence I was interested in this:

Why online communities attract trolls

I have allowed 'Anons' to comment before, mainly because they almost all have had a reasonable contribution. So I am erring on reserving the right to delete (whilst posting I have) without much compunction if someone uses 'anon' to hide behind a more extreme response.

But it seems idealistic to ignore that an adequate definition of what is trolling is hard to arrive at, and 'ignoring' them may be easier to advocate than do.

As I have written:

I must say I am intrigued that there seems to be general consensus that there is a mechanism by which a 'troll' can be identified... and dealt with on either an individual poster and/or moderator basis.

I fear I seem unable to do so, and hence often have to trawl though a load of dross, and counter-dross, to try and arrive at an objective view on what is being discussed.

I envy those who can short-cut the process.