Editorial: From now on, chatting on Thailandblog is limited
The editors of Thailandblog have decided that chatting, under certain conditions, is now allowed on Thailandblog. Our moderators will therefore be more lenient with commenters who chat. Nevertheless, not everything is allowed.
There are currently more than 140.000 comments on Thailandblog and we are proud of that. Thailandblog is therefore the only Dutch-language forum about Thailand where large numbers of visitors actively respond and discuss.
Research on social media shows that readers' reactions are often read better than the posting itself. In addition, it is also nice for the blogger to get reactions, the writer often receives valuable feedback from the readers and possibly inspiration for new blog topics.
The editors of Thailandblog therefore find the interaction with readers very important. This way we get to know our target audience even better and can therefore improve the blog.
We have had a fairly strict moderation policy in recent years and we think it's time to relax the reins. Why this change of course? Well, it turns out that our readers need chatting (chatting is mostly reigning over each other and not so much over the article). Despite the fact that we have been removing the majority of chat responses for years, this phenomenon does not stop. Apparently the readers of Thailand blog feel the need to respond to each other. And with us, the reader is king (provided he/she also behaves like a king).
We would therefore like to emphasize that chatting is only allowed under certain conditions. To explain this, here are our most important house rules for comments:
1. Normal sentences in somewhat correct Dutch (use spell check if necessary).
This can be disapproved by the moderator:
- Sentences without initial capital letter and punctuation marks (periods and commas).
- Excessive use of punctuation marks (i.e. a whole series of exclamation marks or question marks).
- Sentences in capitals only (capital letters).
- Sloppy or incomprehensible texts.
2. Normal decency and manners.
We reject this:
- Swearing, swearing, discriminating, threatening, insults, foul language, making fun of someone, calling someone stupid.
- Involving someone's beliefs, ethnicity or orientation in a discussion in a hurtful way.
- Sexist comments.
- Libel and slander (Thailand blog is not a pillory).
- Hurtful reactions.
- Calling for violence or justifying violence.
3. Quality. Your response must have substance. Be interesting to other readers. Use rational statements and cite facts or sources. Do you disagree? Do you have a different opinion? Fine, but substantiate your criticism or opinion in a normal way without overly emotional statements. Please explain why you disagree with something.
We reject this:
- Just emotional reactions and gut feelings.
- Disrespect and generalizations towards Thai or Thailand, but also towards expats or other Thailand visitors.
- Extreme criticism and/or lamentation about Thailand or the Thai people.
- Nag comments – readers who only respond when they can nag about something.
The following things are did not allowed in a comment
- Exaggerated criticism of the writer of an article (we protect our authors against unfounded criticism and playing the man).
- Commercial messages.
- Links or references to dubious sites or videos.
- Criticism of the Thai royal family.
- Reactions only intended to evoke other reactions.
- Constantly changing identity, the so-called 'Trolling'.
It is possible that the moderator misjudges a comment, in which case the readers can respond to such a comment by asking the moderator to review it again. The moderator can then secondly reject and remove the comment.
The moderator also has the right to remove part of the comment, for example a hurtful sentence. If the rest of the comment is interesting, the moderator will choose it.
Why was my comment not posted?
Moderating comments is a tedious and time-consuming job. Daily, Thailandblog's moderator has to review more than 100 comments. That is also the main reason why we do not provide an explanation why a response has been rejected. That is too time-intensive and that is why we do not do it. This does not alter the fact that it can sometimes happen that a response is wrongly rejected. We regret that of course and there is no intention in the game. If necessary, try again and look at the house rules above. If your comment meets these criteria, it will always be posted.
In addition to prohibiting criticism of the 'House', I think that you cannot, or under certain conditions, allow reactions to every religion and to national politics. Religions are sensitive here, elsewhere too, and politics has long toes not only in Thailand.
This falls under the rule: Disrespect and/or generalizations towards Thai or Thailand.
A great initiative from the editors of Thailandblog. This forum is indeed an immense source of information and inspiration for many people regarding Thai knowledge and experiences. What I want to advocate is that responders make the effort and continue to make the effort to make their contributions in well-formulated Dutch. Not only does it read more pleasantly, it also adds great value to the response. Because what good is a response that is illegible or structured illogically.
Thailand has strict 'lese-majeste' legislation. I'm glad the editors pointed this out. However, it remains the responsibility of the responder to take into account the consequences of this legislation. In my opinion, this also applies to comments and criticism of both the Thai clergy and Thai politics. Both institutions have great influence on Thai society, and not always in a beneficial way. To find something about this and to be able to say something about it within the bounds of what is proper and within all standards of decency. But everyone remains responsible for his/her own contribution.
In addition to criticizing the 'House', in many cases telling the truth about the 'House' is also not allowed.
As far as religion and politics are concerned, I believe that reasonable, reasoned and constructive comments and even criticism are quite possible. The Thai newspapers, and some TV stations do as well. Maybe I can post some mocking cartoons.
I went back to 2009 and 2010 when this blog started. Lots of strong political statements.
Generalizations and disrespect are not good, of course, and I often come across them on the blog. But yes, then it is about 'ordinary people' and that is allowed again 🙂
Your first sentence is a very good one (besides criticism, the truth) but also a very dangerous statement (balances on the edge) which I would keep to myself in Thailand to be sure.
I was also thinking about your second sentence, that there is criticism of the government/government without punishment, I think it's correct. However, I do think that this is a drop in the ocean.
LuckyTV (after DWDD) will therefore be delayed in Thailand for a while 😉
Kind regards, Hendrik S.
Fully support the rules, but since the majority of the commenters consists of Dutch and Belgians and the articles are often also (in)directly related to the Netherlands and Belgium, extreme criticism and/or lamentation would also include disrespect / generalizations about the Netherlands. /Belgium or Dutch/Belgian population may be included in the house rules as disapproval.
Excellent elaborations expansion of the possibilities offered, it can directly bring about an improvement where a commenter can respond to a previous commenter and their possible questions.
Time will tell if this is an enrichment, but expect it.
Nico B
Why don't you open a chat on Facebook?
Moderator: We are not going to support or promote a separate chat group on Facebook.
I generally liked the fairly strict moderation for the readability of the articles. This kept the responses relevant and related to the main item.
I find many blogs less attractive to read because a solid core of commenters has often formed who disagree endlessly and lose sight of the content of the main item.
I wish the moderators every success, their job will not get any easier in my opinion.
I wonder if it's such a wise decision. Often a chat gets bogged down in a yes / no battle between supporters and opponents of a certain issue. Have seen this all too often on other blogs with the result that it became very confusing and eventually part of the so-called solid core, as well as newcomers who think it's a mess….
1. I assume and hope it is not allowed to write that someone gave a great comment. After all, you can already express that opinion by clicking on "Appreciation" that is under that "great reaction". I'm reporting it because I know a blog where there's something like "I couldn't have said it better" or "what a great idea of yours". Highly annoying!
2. Recently part of my text was deleted. I have trouble with that. Accept it as a whole or don't accept it at all. I think it's rather link to post 'only' a part. I had a goal in mind and by not posting the first part, the context of my response has in fact been tinkered with. Doesn't seem like the right way to me.
In my opinion, in addition to the 'Appreciation' for the story, it can give input for a writer to write a next blog/story by precisely the comments such as “I couldn't have said it better” and “What a good idea of you”.
After all, the “I couldn't have said it better” responses confirm to the writer that his/her writing style is a good read.
The 'What a great idea of yours' comments give confirmation to the writer that maybe he can make a sequel to what has been written, as there is a high level of interest among the readers.
Many writers see this as the crowning glory of their work, as they do not earn any income from their writing.
Kind regards, Hendrik S.
I think there is a misunderstanding here. I am not talking about the original reactions to the stories on the Thailand blog, but about the reactions to those original reactions. Appreciation may of course be expressed in reactions to stories. Those writers indeed deserve recognition for the effort they have taken, the importance of the topic can be underlined, the writing style can be reported as being appreciated ... and much more. In my opinion, there is no other way than to use words to express that appreciation. After all, there is no button under the stories to indicate this. But … when responding to a response, I believe there must be a good substantive reason to ignore the “Appreciation” button and switch to providing a written response. I don't think it helps anyone if the "Appreciation" button no longer has a function and the readers in return have to struggle through an endless series of clichés such as "I couldn't have said it better" or "You've got a great idea" .
A good decision and especially good that there will be rules not to exaggerate chatting…
I sometimes thought it was one of the big downsides of this blog that you weren't allowed to give someone a verbal slap (with good argumentation), but over time I also saw the advantages of it.
The endless discussion, which I sometimes dare to be guilty of to prove my point, didn't get a chance on this blog.
The strict moderation therefore had advantages and disadvantages, but I am still glad that we can now continue on messages a little more!
I agree with Pat, I also sometimes thought that if you gave an opinion that someone with an oblique opinion would then be taken down, you could not respond with a solid opinion.
I don't think that's an endless discussion because then it ends for me.
I shouldn't think about it becoming a kind of Facebook because then the fun for which I think the blog is nullified.
I've often seen the request from the moderator not to chat in the past. I could live with that. Everyone has the right to express their opinion, as long as it complies with the rules imposed by Thailandblog. I have no problem with that at all.
That limited chatting is now allowed, I can also live with that, when it comes to a reaction to a reaction. Hopefully this will not lead to long 'chains of reactions', because then it will no longer be fun to read.
I also hope that there will be no repetitive reactions, whereby e.g. someone tries to impose their opinion on the other readers.
I also hope that chatting will hardly deviate from the core of the subject. Due to long discussions, it is quite easy to deviate from the subject, so that 'eventually' one no longer knows what it is actually about.
In itself this seems like a good idea, but I think it remains to be seen how this will work out in practice and where the limits will be set.
Good luck and I hope that the editors of Thailandblog will not drown themselves in the - in my opinion - expected increase in the submitted texts.
Moderation is always compromise. For a long time I was a (senior) moderator on an international forum on a completely different subject with thousands of responses per day. If you are overly strict, the word 'jee what a Nazis' will quickly fall and the number of reactions will drop sharply. A discussion must be able to develop, there must be some space for a small sub-discussion to exist within a discussion. But if you are too easy, an item will fall into an endless jungle of back and forth talk, and that too scares people away when they drown between pointless bleating and whining back and forth between a hard core of commenters. Respond, but with sizes. or moderation.
I've been reading this blog since 2010, and commenting since mid-2011, since then only 1 comment of mine has been addressed by the moderators. So I have nothing to complain about, but a little more slack is fine.
Are all new comments always reported? Or just not to the author of a new comment?
I have my doubts about it.
I completely agree with the reaction of 'thailandganger' and 'Rob'.
I fully agree with the opinion of 'Thailandganger' 'Rob' and 'The Inquisitor'
The value of a blog largely depends on the thoroughness of moderation and the skill of the moderator(s)
So far it has been exemplary on this blog.
Hopefully also in the future.
We will all see it happen where and how picket pictures will be beaten by the moderators. I assume that certain topics remain blocked for comments because they evoked quite a few emotions in the past.
A super good idea from the editors, I still think Thailandblog is a news forum where you can draw a lot of information from. Most of us are already a day older to put it nicely and what have these older ones still learned :: You are never too old to learn :: So with each other in a neat way I think a plus and fair is fair: The editors of Thailandblog do not always know everything (sorry) and is therefore a pleasant way to hear from each other and to discuss this in a neat way.
You do the first moderation yourself, by the way you write a response, you can also moderate yourself by not commenting on reactions of no value from like-seekers, you do get to know your pappenheimers a bit if you blog a bit longer.
Should Thailandblog get bogged down in a welles nothing story, then I expect that bloggers will also express that, every change is a risk, but not tried is always wrong.
With confidence in the capabilities of the editors and moderators, I expect that it will work out and if not ... we will express that and it will work out anyway.
Nico B
My compliments for the preparation. Don't be jealous of the moderators at all. Too many people see social media as a means of being extremely rude and causing any discussion to bleed to death. Until now I found the Thailand blog a relief. I hope it stays this way.
Dear editors,
Nice to read that there is some stretch in it.
I think that the bloggers will understand each other a little more
and warden.
There are people who suffice with 1 word, but there are also
People who like to understand a little story better.
Good luck with the new rule.
Yours faithfully,
Erwin
As long as the chat is about the subject itself, there is no problem. But even now, as it was, despite fairly strict moderation, I sometimes wondered: what has this got to do with the subject? Moderation is not always easy, but it is really necessary otherwise you will quickly get into trouble.
We'll see what it will be.
Maybe also nice emoticons as disapproval or appreciation like with FB.
Great idea, especially the announcement that we are not going for the Face - Book method.