Episode 121 of The SitePoint Podcast is now available! This week the panel is made up of regular host Patrick O’Keefe (@iFroggy) with guests Sarah Hawk (@ilovethehawk) and Matt Haughey (@mathowie). The panel discuss some more in depth areas and challenges facing those managing online communities.
SitePoint Podcast的第121集现已发布！ 该小组由常规主持人Patrick O'Keefe( @iFroggy )和来宾Sarah Hawk( @ilovethehawk )和Matt Haughey( @mathowie )组成。 小组讨论了一些更深入的领域以及管理在线社区的人所面临的挑战。
下载此剧集 (Download this Episode)
You can download this episode as a standalone MP3 file. Here’s the link:
您可以将本集下载为独立的MP3文件。 这是链接：
SitePoint Podcast #121: Online Community Roundtable Part 2 with Matthew Haughey and Sarah Hawk(MP3, 53:52, 51.7MB)SitePoint播客＃121：Matthew Haughey和Sarah Hawk的在线社区圆桌会议第2部分(MP3，53:52，51.7MB)
Browse the full list of links referenced in the show at http://delicious.com/sitepointpodcast/121.
浏览http://delicious.com/sitepointpodcast/121中显示的参考链接的完整列表。
面试成绩单 (Interview Transcript)
Patrick: Hello and welcome to another edition of the SitePoint Podcast. This is Patrick O’Keefe and I am joined once again by a panel of online community management veterans just as I was two weeks ago for episode 119 of the SitePoint Podcast. Once again I’m joined by Matt Haughey and Sarah Hawk. Matt, I’m going to ask you just to say hello again and tell us what you do.
帕特里克：您好，欢迎来到SitePoint播客的另一版本。 这是帕特里克·奥基夫(Patrick O'Keefe)，在线社区管理经验丰富的专家小组再次与我一起，就像我在两周前观看SitePoint Podcast的第119集一样。 Matt Haughey和Sarah Hawk再次加入了我。 马特，我要问你再打个招呼，告诉我们你做什么。
Matt: Hello, I run MetaFilter.
Matt：您好，我运行MetaFilter 。
Patrick: Nice. Is that the 140 character version? More like the 40 character version.
帕特里克：很好。 那是140个字符的版本吗？ 更像是40个字符的版本。
Matt: Yeah.
马特：是的。
Patrick: So, Sarah, why don’t you do the same.
帕特里克：莎拉，你为什么不这样做。
Sarah: Sure, my name is Sarah Hawk, as you mentioned, and I am the community manager for SitePoint.
萨拉(Sarah)：当然，正如您提到的，我叫萨拉·霍克(Sarah Hawk)，我是SitePoint的社区经理。
Patrick: Right. So if you’re in the SitePoint Forums, Facebook page, Twitter profile, you know who Sarah is. Unfortunately we’re not joined by Venessa Paech this week as she had some meetings she had to attend to, so we’re going to miss her voice, but we’re going to soldier on and talk about some online community management topics and points of discussion and go around the table and just have a loose, comfortable talk about each of the issues. The first issue I wanted to bring up is the one of community metrics. Last show we talked about this briefly and said that we’d discuss it later, well, we didn’t; oops, but this week we are making up for that. And just adding any sort of metrics to a community, there was a quote of you, Matt, that was posted on Twitter by @stitchmedia that I read that I thought fit in well with this. Stitch Media said that you said, “Be concerned with anything that adds a metric to your site because people will want to game it.” Can you elaborate on that?
帕特里克：对。 因此，如果您在SitePoint论坛，Facebook页面，Twitter个人资料中，则知道Sarah是谁。 不幸的是，本周我们没有参加Venessa Paech，因为她必须参加一些会议，所以我们会想念她的声音，但是我们将继续讨论一些在线社区管理主题和观点。讨论并四处讨论，就每个问题进行轻松，舒适的讨论。 我要提出的第一个问题是社区指标之一。 在上一个节目中，我们简短地谈到了这个问题，并说我们稍后再讨论，好吧，我们没有。 糟糕，但是本周我们将对此进行弥补。 只是在社区中添加任何指标，Matt都会引用您的名言， @ stitchmedia在Twitter上发布，我读到我认为很适合。 Stitch Media说过，您说：“请关注任何会为您的网站添加指标的内容，因为人们会想玩它。” 您能详细说明一下吗？
Matt: Sure, sure. I’ve seen this pop up in all sorts of ways on communities. If you have any sort of leader board, give people points for anything, if you have karma, I mean we’ve all seen this one.
马特：当然可以。 我已经在社区中以各种方式看到了这一点。 如果您有任何类型的排行榜，就给别人任何积分，如果您有业障，我的意思是我们都已经看到了这一点。
Patrick: On the SitePoint Forums even (laughter), way back when.
帕特里克：在SitePoint论坛上(笑)，什么时候回来。
Matt: As soon as you give people a number they go, oh, that’s interesting, my number is lower or higher than this other person I know of, I am going to try and adjust mine. Then you run down this path of chasing points, what’d they used to call it in Slashdot, karma whoring; you just post what the audience loves knowing that you’d get all the votes in the world just to boost your ranking, so gaming anything is really tied often to money, right, like if there’s any financial incentive people go nuts to try and get to that; if it’s 10,000 points equal a dollar people will kill themselves trying to get points. But even without any financial incentives whatsoever people still do it, and I’ve seen it happen just with everything, everything with a leader board, anything with a number; even things you don’t even think about like if your user page, like your user profile page is on your forum or community, have a number in them that’s maybe like the user ID signup and maybe it’s in sequential order, people will lord that over others that I was here before you therefore like I’m more correct.
马特：给您提供电话号码后，噢，这很有趣，我的电话号码比我认识的这个人低或高，我将尝试调整我的电话。 然后，您沿着追逐点的路走下去，他们曾经在Slashdot中称呼它为因果报应。 您只要发布自己喜欢的内容，就可以吸引观众的眼球，从而提高排名，因此游戏中的任何事情通常都与金钱息息相关，对，就像有人有金钱上的动力去尝试并获得那个 如果等于10,000点等于1美元，那么人们会为了获得点分而自杀。 但是，即使没有任何经济诱因，人们仍然会这样做，而且我已经看到，一切都会发生，一切都有排行榜，一切都有数字。 即使您根本没有想过的事情，例如您的用户页面(例如您的用户个人资料页面位于论坛或社区中)中包含的数字可能类似于用户ID注册，也可能是顺序排列，人们会主宰这一点比我在你面前的其他人要多，因此我更正确。
Patrick: I have a three-digit user number!
帕特里克：我有一个三位数的用户号码！
Matt: Exactly, this happens on MetaFilter, I’m a four-digit user, shut up five-digit user.
Matt：确实是在MetaFilter上发生的，我是四位数用户，关闭了五位数用户。
Patrick: I remember the same thing with ICQ, oh, my gosh; I have four-digit ICQ number, a six-digit!
帕特里克(Patrick)：我还记得ICQ的那件事，哦，天哪； 我有四位数的ICQ号，六位数！
Matt: Yeah, people sell those things. But, so when it comes to community designs something five years later happens you’d never thought in a million years people would pick up on, so a community I’ve built off of MetaFilter I made sure that usernames no longer had numbers and stats to them anywhere, and it was like your username was in the URL so that people couldn’t get in those kinds of games. But I’ve just seen like ridiculous gaming before, let me see, the 5K contest, this was like 10 years ago, programming contest for like you can only make a 5 kilobyte webpage, and like people would submit four or five hundred submissions of people doing amazing like JavaScript Tetris games in 5K of code doing all this crazy math inside their code to keep it tight. And some guy with a lackluster project signed up, God, 700 to a 1,000 accounts to vote his up, like I was on the judging panel and it came around we were like, okay, the dolphin in Flash is amazing and I don’t know how that was less than 5K, the Wolfenstein in 3D in 5K, that was incredible, what was this guy’s thing, you know, it was like a lamp that turns on; why is it the highest rated thing? And then we did some digging and it was some kid in Italy who just ran a bot; and the grand prize for the entire thing was $50.00 (laughter), and somebody spent days programming a bot to signup, login, vote in his five stars and vote everybody else like one star, it was ridiculous. So, people game anything and even things you never in a million years thought they would, so be careful with those leader boards and giving out any points at all.
马特：是的，人们卖那些东西。 但是，因此，在社区设计方面，五年后发生的事情，您在一百万年来从未想过人们会加入，所以我建立在MetaFilter的基础上，我确保用户名不再具有数字和统计信息给他们任何地方，就像您的用户名在URL中一样，这样人们就无法参与这类游戏。 但是我之前看过像5K竞赛那样荒谬的游戏，就像10年前，因为编程竞赛只能制作一个5 KB的网页，就像人们会提交4到500个人们在5K代码中执行JavaScript Tetris游戏之类的惊人工作，在代码内部进行所有疯狂的数学运算以保持紧密关系。 有人签署了一个项目，表现平平，天哪，有700到1000个帐户投票给了他，就像我在评审团上一样，结果就好像是，好吧，Flash中的海豚真是太棒了，我没有知道不到5K，3D的Wolfenstein以5K拍摄，那真是不可思议，这家伙到底是怎么回事，就像开着灯一样； 为什么它是评价最高的东西？ 然后我们进行了挖掘，这是在意大利的一个小孩刚跑了一个机器人。 整件事的大奖是50.00美元(笑声)，有人花了几天时间编程一个机器人来注册，登录，投票给他的5星，然后像其他人一样投票给其他人，这太可笑了。 因此，人们可以玩任何东西，甚至是一百万年来您从未想过的事情，因此请谨慎对待那些排行榜，并给出任何要点。
Patrick: And thinking about PHPBBhacks.com, which is a site I’ve run for over 10 years now, the largest unofficial resource for the PHPBB forum software, and when we launched the version of our front-end database, or the friend software we use now, we had a top or most downloaded hacks style template page and also a top-rated page, and it made sense as a way to show people what other people were downloading, but what happened was — and I could never prove this but I always suspected that people were gaming it, and not many people, I think it was a few authors or maybe even just one who wrote a script and just hit the download over and over and over again to get that download count up. And I took the page down, I don’t even want to deal with this, I shouldn’t have to put a CAPTCHA on this, I don’t want to ask people to put a CAPTCHA to download something, I don’t have the programming knowledge right now to put together something that’s based on number of times per IP address, whatever, I just don’t care, it doesn’t matter at the end of the day, it’s just not that important a feature; I just took the page down and said forget about it, like if you’re going to game it I don’t even want to bother with it. And no one cared; I haven’t received one email over the six, seven, eight years since I took it down that anybody said, oh, I want that back, so apparently it wasn’t that badly missed, and the only person who really cared that much about it was that maybe one author. So I mentioned the SitePoint Forums because before Sarah was administrator, long before, there was a reputation system for a period on the SitePoint Forums, and you made me think of that, Matt, because the same kind of things happen and expose themselves I would say within the community, those sorts of activities and behaviors where it maybe isn’t a majority of people, but it’s just this minority of people that’s just annoying with it and just tries to game it in a way, but also like make it a constant point of focus of adding rep, rep, rep, rep, rep me! And eventually the forum’s, the administrator, whoever the brain trust in charge at that point took it down, so, I don’t know, that made me think of SitePoint.
帕特里克：考虑到PHPBBhacks.com ，这是我运行了十多年的网站，它是PHPBB论坛软件的最大的非官方资源，当我们启动前端数据库的版本时，或者说它的朋友软件。我们现在使用的网站上，我们有一个下载次数最多或下载次数最多的黑客样式模板页面，还有一个评分最高的页面，这是向人们展示别人正在下载的内容的一种方式，但是发生了什么事，但我永远无法证明这一点但是我一直怀疑人们在玩游戏，而不是很多人，我认为只有几个作者，或者甚至只有一个写脚本的人，一次又一次地点击下载以增加下载量。 我记下了页面，我什至不想处理这个，我不必在上面放一个验证码，我不想让人们放一个验证码来下载东西，我不现在拥有编程知识，可以根据每个IP地址的次数来组合一些东西，不管我什么都不在乎，一天结束都没关系，它并不是那么重要的功能； 我只是把页面记下来，说了算了，就像你要去玩游戏一样，我什至不想打扰它。 没有人关心。 自从我删除记录以来的六，七，八年来，我还没有收到一封电子邮件，有人说，哦，我想回来，所以显然没有那么多人错过，而且是唯一真正关心过这么多人的人大概是一位作者。 我之所以提到SitePoint论坛，是因为在Sarah担任管理员之前，很久以前，SitePoint论坛上就有一段时间的信誉系统，您让我想到了，Matt，因为同样的事情会发生并暴露自己，我会比如说在社区中，可能不是大多数人的那种活动和行为，只是少数人对此感到烦恼，并试图以某种方式进行游戏，但也喜欢使其成为一种添加rep，rep，rep，rep，rep我的恒定焦点！ 最终，论坛的管理员，无论当时负责人的大脑将其删除，所以，我不知道，这让我想到了SitePoint。
Matt: Yeah, I was going to say a good indicator like the CAPTCHA, have you seen a CAPTCHA anywhere? The only reason it’s there is because someone’s gamed whatever feature or thing you’re about to do.
Matt：是的，我想说的是一个类似于CAPTCHA的指标，您在任何地方都看到过CAPTCHA吗？ 它存在的唯一原因是因为有人在玩您要做的任何功能或事情。
Patrick: That’s a fair point.
帕特里克：这是一个公平的观点。
Matt: Like looking up a domain or signing up for Digg, or whatever, somebody’s automated that in an annoying way and the person running it is so pissed off, like the contact form on MetaFilter requires a CAPTCHA because we got so much weird Chinese spam from bots that we just had to do it and just — oh, that sucks.
Matt：就像查找域或注册Digg一样，有人以一种烦人的方式自动进行了操作，使运行该应用的人非常生气，例如MetaFilter上的联系表格需要CAPTCHA，因为我们收到了很多奇怪的中国垃圾邮件来自机器人，我们只需要这样做就可以了-哦，太糟糕了。
Patrick: Any thoughts, Sarah, I wanted to leave an opening there for you.
帕特里克：想念什么，莎拉，我想在那给你留个空位。
Sarah: Not really, to be honest, what I was going to say was that interestingly the rep system is something that we’re constantly asked to reinstate, and every time we have this same conversation and I come back to the same conclusion that it’s just not going to happen. I don’t know why people think that it is, yeah, it’s something that should be so important. It’s not really what forums are about in my opinion but, yeah, that’s about all I’ve got to say on that.
莎拉：说实话，不是真的，我要说的是有趣的是，代表制度是我们不断被要求恢复的东西，每次我们进行同样的对话时，我都会得出相同的结论，那就是只是不会发生。 我不知道为什么人们会认为它是重要的。 在我看来，论坛不是真正的话题，是的，这就是我要说的。
Patrick: Yeah, it’s funny because I remember I was on the forum staff for, I don’t know, about six, seven, eight years, and I would say coming on 10 years next week of being SitePoint Volunteer Staff in general, so all the time that’s gone by, but I remember it being a constant request and it being a point of discussion with staff, and I was always like well, you know, I don’t think we should do this again judging from what happened last time and how it was used. And then you have Stack Overflow’s hot right now, their network of communities are hot right now, and they have their reputation sort of baked in to what they do, and I don’t know, it’s not bad or good it’s just a way of doing something I guess, and people participate for different reasons.
帕特里克(Patrick)：是的，这很有趣，因为我记得我在论坛上工作了大约六年，七年，八年，我不知道，我会说下周成为SitePoint志愿人员的十年，所以所有的时间都过去了，但我记得这是一个持续不断的要求，也是与员工讨论的重点，我一直都很好，你知道，我不认为从最近发生的事情来看我们应该再次这样做时间以及如何使用它。 然后，您现在就开始关注Stack Overflow，他们的社区网络现在很热门，他们的声誉扎根于他们的工作，我不知道，这不是坏事还是好事，这只是一种方法做我猜想的事情，人们出于不同的原因参与其中。
Sarah: Yep, absolutely.
莎拉：是的 ，绝对。
Patrick: So I’m just going to throw this one out there, I don’t know where it’s going to go, I don’t know what kind of email I might receive, but at the end of the last episode we started to — I think it was after the recording, we started to talk about the idea of tech being a male dominated world, and yet on the podcast we had two female community managers and Matt and myself, two average white males, and there’s a lot of female community managers, it feels like to me there’s a lot of people in the space and it’s more gender balanced than other areas of tech, and I have my kind of theories on why that might be, but let’s just kick that off as the point of discussion. And, Sarah, I’ll ask you for your thoughts.
帕特里克：所以我只打算把它扔出去，不知道要去哪里，不知道我会收到什么样的电子邮件，但是在上一集结尾时，我们开始—我想是在录制之后，我们开始谈论技术是男性主导的世界的想法，但是在播客中，我们有两名女性社区经理和Matt和我本人，两名普通的白人男性，并且有很多女性社区经理，我觉得这个领域有很多人，而且性别比其他技术领域更均衡，我对为什么会这样有自己的理论，但让我们开始吧讨论。 而且，莎拉，我会问你的想法。
Sarah: Yeah, sure. I came from, as I mentioned in the last broadcast, a very technical area as a .net developer and found the opposite, so yeah, very male dominated. And I found that, um, I don’t know how you guys feel about this, but quite refreshing actually in a way to walk away from that and come into an environment that is a lot more sort of — I don’t know if you’d say female dominated but a lot more even. But what I find interesting, though, is that there is still the constant perception that I’m a male, and I don’t know how much of that has to do with my username and how much of that has to do with the fact that, as you say, tech is traditionally a male dominated area. But, yeah, I would say probably 60, 70% of the emails I get are addressed to Dear Sir (laughter).
莎拉：是的，当然。 正如我在上一个广播中提到的那样，我来自.net开发人员的一个非常技术领域，但发现相反，所以，是非常男性化的。 我发现，嗯，我不知道你们对此有何看法，但实际上确实令人耳目一新，从而可以摆脱这种情况，进入更像是这样的环境中-我不知道是否你会说女性占主导地位，但甚至更多。 但是，我发现有趣的是，仍然不断有人认为我是男性，我不知道这与我的用户名有多大关系，以及与用户名有多大关系正如您所说，高科技在传统上是男性主导的领域。 但是，是的，我想我收到的电子邮件中大概有60％，70％是发给亲爱的先生(笑声)。
Patrick: Not even “or Madam,” just Sir.
帕特里克：先生，甚至都不是“或女士”。
Sarah: Just Sir, yeah, I love replying to those people. And, yeah, to be honest I’m not somebody that is offended by that at all, I find it mildly entertaining, and a little bit interesting. I don’t know whether the community side is more enticing to females because it’s less technical, I think it’s probably more to do with the fact that it is more people based, and I think that traditionally women do very well in those areas where people management I suppose, mediation; we’re used to listening to our children fight and in some ways this is very similar (laughs), so it’s not surprising to me. Yeah, I think it’s great, I think it’s to be encouraged, but then again it shouldn’t really matter.
莎拉：主席先生，是的，我喜欢回覆这些人。 而且，是的，说实话，我根本不是一个受此冒犯的人，我觉得这很有趣，而且有点有趣。 我不知道社区方面是否对女性更具吸引力，因为它的技术含量较低，我认为这可能与基于更多人的事实有关，而且我认为传统上女性在人们所处的领域中做得很好我想管理，调解； 我们习惯于听孩子们打架，这在某些方面非常相似(笑)，所以对我来说并不奇怪。 是的，我认为这很不错，我认为这值得鼓励，但是再也没关系。
Patrick: Right. And you brought up a point that I was going to kind of bring up myself which is part of being a community manager it’s not the typical tech role, locked in a code basement pounding away in front of a monitor, you know, community is very people based, personality based and analytical in a way. And, I don’t know, it seems like it’s more to do with personality than a traditional tech role might be, I don’t know if that’s a fair or unfair statement, but I’ll just throw that bomb out there and kick it over to you, Matt.
帕特里克：对。 您提出的一点是，我要提出自己的观点，这是成为社区经理的一部分，这不是典型的技术角色，它被锁定在监视器前面的代码库中，您知道，社区非常重要。以人为本，以人格为基础，以某种方式进行分析。 而且，我不知道，这似乎与个性有关，而不是传统的技术角色，我不知道这是公平还是不公平的说法，但我只是将炸弹扔在那里踢它交给了你，马特。
Matt: Here would be the epitome of the culture of male dominated computer world, I once spoke on a panel of all women except me about, what were talking about, I think it was something general like freelancing, tips for freelancers, but the moderator just made a point to try and be more inclusive by not just having four white guys on the panel, so instead it was just me and three women. And then so when the organizers came over like an hour before our talk, we were in the green room or something when one of the handlers came over to say, hey everyone you should get your things and lets go, the show starts in 15 minutes; they only spoke to me because I was the only man there (laughter). And I remember just going I’m not even the moderator, why did they even single me out, they never talked to you guys, that was totally messed up, like that’s just sort of classic computer science world. So, yeah, I was noticing last week that that half the people on the call are female, half of my employees, two of my moderators out of three are female, and it’s just awesome and it’s great and we totally strive to be as female friendly as possible, and we have a lot of pissed off dudes that aren’t allowed to tell women that they would love to sleep with them and junk like that. But, yeah, I was just noticing that like it’s kind of weird and cool that community management in general is way better gender balanced than the world of computer science.
马特：这将是男性主导的计算机世界文化的缩影，我曾经在除我之外的所有女性小组成员中谈论过，谈论的是什么，我认为这像自由职业者，自由职业者的技巧，但主持人只是通过在面板上不仅仅让四个白人来尝试并更具包容性，而是我和三个女人。 然后，当组织者到我们的演讲开始前一个小时过来时，我们就在绿色的房间里，或者当其中一位管理人员过来说时，嘿，每个人都应该把你的东西放开，放映会在15分钟内开始; 他们只是跟我说话，因为我是那里唯一的人(笑声)。 而且我记得只是走了，我什至不是主持人，为什么他们甚至把我挑出来，他们从未与你们交谈过，那完全是一团糟，就像那是经典的计算机科学世界一样。 所以，是的，我上周注意到通话中有一半人是女性，一半是员工，三位主持人中有两位是女性，这真棒，很棒，我们全力以赴成为女性尽可能友好，我们有很多生气的家伙，不允许告诉女人他们愿意和他们一起睡，然后像垃圾一样。 但是，是的，我只是注意到，总体而言，社区管理比计算机科学领域更能实现性别均衡，这很奇怪，也很酷。
Patrick: So just to throw this data point out there, it’s not a new survey, it’s from October 2009 from Forum One Networks who used to do some online community and social media compensation surveys, and their 2009 online community profession compensation survey also asked people their gender, and they received approximately 370 responses, and they had people who worked for organizations like Answers.com, Autodesk, Best Buy, Cartoon Network, Consumer Reports, EA, Nokia and so on, so Sony and a lot of other big corporations. Of the 370 that replied 52% were female —
帕特里克(Patrick)：因此，仅是为了说明这一点，这不是一项新调查，它来自于Forum One Networks于2009年10月进行的一些在线社区和社交媒体薪酬调查，而他们2009年的在线社区职业薪酬调查也要求人们他们的性别，他们收到了大约370条回复，并且他们在Answers.com，Autodesk，Best Buy，Cartoon Network，Consumer Reports，EA，Nokia等组织工作，因此Sony和许多其他大公司。 在370个回答中，有52％是女性-
Matt: Whoa!
马特：哇！
Patrick: vs 48% that were male and this is from 2009.
帕特里克(Patrick)：男性是48％，而这是2009年的数据。
Matt: That’s awesome.
Matt：太好了。
Patrick: So you have that half-half split. And one theory that I have for some of this, and it’s just something that I’ve found in my own communities, and I know not everyone is like this, not everyone manages their community like this, but the way that I’ve always run my communities and promoted staff in the form of volunteer moderators, is from the community first of course so it’s not uncommon, but I don’t ask anybody what their gender is, I don’t ask anybody what their age is; I ask them their name when we bring them on board, but they’re invited before I even ask that. And so when it comes to us selecting staff members and picking from people in the community, and really my staff, current staff, has a major input into that, they make most of the suggestions, they comment on everybody, I always want their thoughts and their feedback, we judge people solely on the merit of their contribution to the community, how they act, what their attitude is, what they’ve contributed, whether or not they’re a good example to other members. So it doesn’t — it never enters into the discussion of we don’t even know what their gender is in many cases, in some cases, and not all of the staff knows, one or two might, but not all of us will know or be certain. And sometimes the username is a giveaway, sometimes it’s not, and it’s interesting to see that happen where we don’t know what gender they are, how old they are, what race they are; they’re just promoted based on the merit. Just a while back I realized I had two law enforcement officials on my community staff, and I didn’t know that because I didn’t ask or I don’t really care. So I’ve got a couple police officers that are on my moderation team, well, I guess that makes sense, I didn’t know that, but, and it’s funny because I think half of my staff is female and half is male and it just works out that way, and I think online community is a great, or online communities in general are a great example of, for better or for worse I would say, judging strictly on the merit of the contributions to the given community.
帕特里克：所以你有一半的分裂。 我对此有一个理论，这只是我在自己的社区中发现的一种理论，我知道不是每个人都是这样，不是每个人都这样管理自己的社区，而是我一直以来的方式以志愿者主持人的形式管理我的社区和晋升的工作人员，当然首先来自社区，因此这并不少见，但我不问任何人其性别是多少，我不问任何人其年龄是多少。 当我们邀请他们加入时，我问他们的名字，但是甚至在我问他们之前就已经邀请了他们。 因此，当我们选择员工并从社区中选拔人员时，实际上我的员工(现任员工)对此有很大的投入，他们提出了大部分建议，对每个人都发表了意见，我一直都希望他们有自己的想法以及他们的反馈，我们仅根据人们对社区的贡献，他们的行为方式，态度，所贡献的东西，是否为其他成员树立榜样来判断人们。 因此，它不是-它从未参与讨论，因为在许多情况下，甚至在某些情况下，我们甚至都不知道他们的性别，而且并非所有员工都知道，一两个可能，但不是所有人知道或确定。 有时用户名是一种赠品，有时却不是，并且有趣的是，这种情况发生在我们不知道性别，年龄，种族的情况下。 他们只是根据优点晋升。 不久前，我意识到我的社区工作人员中有两名执法人员，我不知道那是因为我没有问过或者我不在乎。 所以我的管理团队中有几个警官，嗯，我想这是有道理的，我不知道，但是，这很有趣，因为我认为我的职员中有一半是女性，一半是男性，我认为在线社区是一个很好的例子，或者总体上来说，在线社区是一个很好的例子，无论是好是坏，我都会严格地根据对特定社区的贡献来判断。
Matt: Yeah.
马特：是的。
Patrick: So we talked about how I guess the idea that users act like children, not all do, not all members do (laughter), but Matt said it not me, so that kind of plays into what I wanted to talk about next which is persistent problem members and toxic users, and I think it was Sarah who used that verbiage, as good as it is. Managing online community you have a lot of people who maybe push the guidelines, who violate your guidelines, your terms of service, whatever, that you talk to about it, and they never do it again. But then you have this very small minority of people who persistently seem to take pleasure in pushing those boundaries and maybe even demonstrating that they don’t really care about the boundaries. So, Sarah, how do you deal with those people?
帕特里克(Patrick)：因此，我们谈到了我如何猜测用户行为像孩子的想法，不是所有人都做，不是所有成员都做(笑)，但是马特(Matt)并不是我，所以我想在接下来要谈论的内容中扮演这种角色是长期存在的问题成员和有毒的用户，我认为是Sarah尽其所能使用了这种说法。 管理在线社区时，有很多人可能会推销该准则，违反您的准则，您的服务条款以及您谈论的任何内容，而他们再也不会这样做。 但是，然后只有极少数人似乎总是乐于突破边界，甚至表明他们并不真正在意边界。 那么，莎拉，您如何与这些人打交道？
Sarah: (Laughs) Yeah, I’m a volatile personality myself so I take great pleasure in dealing with those people. I have very little patience for them because I guess I view my primary role in this job is to protect the people in the community that are there for the right reasons from the people in the community that are there for the wrong reasons and whether the wrong reason be spam or soap-boxing or back-linking or just general abuse, it doesn’t matter, so yeah, I have a very short fuse when it comes to that. I give people one chance, I prefer to make that chance an offline conversation, a message, a personal message from me. I usually ask my staff to send those people through to me rather than going through our normal infraction system that tends to just rile those people that as you say they have absolutely no respect for guidelines or boundaries anyway. Yeah, and that either works very, very well, people pull ahead and appreciate the fact that you’ve taken the time to treat them like a person and everything goes well, or they turn it into a mudslinging match and they get abusive and then, yeah, at the end of the day unfortunately I’m the one that has the ability to pull pin on them and that’s usually what happens, yeah, it’s black and white as far as I’m concerned.
莎拉：(笑)是的，我本人的性格很不稳定，所以我很高兴与这些人打交道。 我对他们几乎没有耐心，因为我想我认为我在这项工作中的主要作用是保护社区中因正确原因而存在的人们免受社区中因错误原因以及是否存在错误的人们的影响原因是垃圾邮件，肥皂盒，反向链接或只是普遍滥用，没关系，所以是的，在这方面，我的保险丝很短。 我给人们一个机会，我更愿意使这个机会成为我的离线对话，信息或个人信息。 我通常会要求我的员工将这些人员派遣给我，而不是通过我们的正常违规系统，该系统往往会激怒那些人，正如您所说，他们绝对不尊重准则或界限。 是的，要么效果非常好，人们就会向前迈进，并欣赏以下事实：您花了时间将他们当作一个人对待，并且一切顺利，或者他们将其变成了混乱的比赛，然后变得辱骂，然后，是的，不幸的是，归根结底，我是有能力to住他们的人，通常就是这种情况，是的，就我而言，它是黑白的。
Patrick: Matt?
帕特里克：马特？
Matt: What do we do with problem users, well; we could talk for hours about this or years (laughs).
马特：我们该如何处理问题用户？ 我们可以聊几个小时或几年(笑)。
Patrick: We could just start with the names they call us after we ban them but we’ll skip that.
帕特里克(Patrick)：我们可以从禁止他们的名字开始，但是我们将跳过它们。
Matt: I mean there’s a whole like ramping up system, we have this whole flagging system so people get on our radar pretty quickly, and we remove sort of things that break the guidelines that escalate usually to like a direct email to them because we found like a direct email usually stops about 90% of people in their tracks, as going, “Whoa, hey, I just thought, wow, okay, there’s actual people behind this, okay, I’ll stop.” That’s usually the reaction. Sometimes it’s like how dare you tell me, don’t ever email me again, kind of.
马特：我的意思是说，有一个像提升系统一样的整体，我们拥有整个标记系统，因此人们可以很快进入我们的视野，并且我们删除了一些违反准则的事情，这些准则通常会升级为像直接发送给他们的电子邮件，因为我们发现就像直接发送的电子邮件通常会阻止大约90％的人前进一样，“哇，嘿，我只是想，哇，好吧，背后有真正的人，好吧，我会停下来。” 通常这就是React。 有时候，就像你敢告诉我，永远不要再给我发电子邮件了。
Patrick: Get a life!
帕特里克：生活！
Matt: Yeah.
马特：是的。
Patrick: Get out of your mother’s basement!
帕特里克：走出你母亲的地下室！
Matt: At that point we’re like, hey, we’ll only give you one last warning then if we can never email you again, so if you get banned at least you know what’s going on. Yeah, things just sort of escalate; it’s usually over an email by talking to them, that stops almost everybody. Persistently problematic people just have to be — everything has to be explained to them, so it might be 10 emails with someone that takes up one moderator’s entire day just dealing with one person, and at some point they’ll say like, you know what, you should talk to all the other moderators too, and the owner of the site, only to cc everybody because this is going nowhere or something; the only people we ban instantly are like spammers that are clearly there to just pop URL’s everywhere and try some SEO jack-assery. But for the most part for behavioral issues we rarely ban on the order of maybe once a month or something, and it’s only after like a gazillion emails have gone back and forth. But for the most part people get the picture if they’re being problematic and their stuff is being deleted, if not the email works; I would say 90% of the time the truly persistent are a pain in the ass, but that just keeps going. I mean I would say this is a lame generalization, but like in the last two, three years, and I’ve been doing this for 12 years now, and the last two or three years we find consistently people admit to us in the end after just like 20 emails telling them like why prison rape isn’t funny, and like all these obvious things that like they’ll admit that they have some — they’re on the autism spectrum, like if they’ve been described as Asperger’s and stuff, that social interactions are actually physically difficult for them and they don’t understand about other people’s feelings and stuff. Lately we’ve been running into a lot, and we’re like holy cow, when you’re just exhausted explaining to someone.
马特：到那时，我们想，嘿，我们只会给您最后一次警告，然后我们如果再也无法再给您发送电子邮件，那么，如果您被禁止，至少您知道发生了什么。 是的，事情在不断升级； 通常是通过与他们交谈来发送电子邮件，几乎阻止了所有人。 始终存在问题的人必须-必须向他们解释所有事情，因此可能是一封10封电子邮件，某人花了一个主持人的一整天才与一个人打交道，在某些时候他们会说，你知道，您也应该与所有其他主持人和网站所有者进行对话，只与所有人抄送，因为这无济于事。 我们唯一被禁止的人就像垃圾邮件发送者一样，显然他们在那里只是在各处弹出URL并尝试一些SEO杰作。 但是在大多数情况下，对于行为问题，我们很少禁止一个月一次或一次左右的命令，只有在像数不胜数的电子邮件来回传播之后才禁止这样做。 但是，大多数情况下，如果人们遇到问题并删除了他们的东西，那么他们会得到照片，如果电子邮件不起作用的话； 我会说90％的时间里，真正持久的感觉是种痛苦，但是这种情况一直持续下去。 我的意思是说这是一个la脚的概括，但是就像最近两年，三年一样，并且我已经这样做了十二年，而在过去的两年或三年中，我们发现人们始终认可我们就像20封电子邮件告诉他们为什么监狱强奸并不有趣，以及喜欢所有这些显而易见的事情一样，他们承认自己有一些-他们属于自闭症患者，就像被描述为阿斯伯格(Asperger)一样和事物，社交互动对于他们而言实际上是身体上的困难，并且他们不了解他人的感受和事物。 最近，我们遇到了很多麻烦，就像您只好向别人解释时，我们就像圣牛一样。
Patrick: And what percentage of people actually have that is the next good question, right?
帕特里克：下一个很好的问题是，实际上有百分之几的人对吗？
Matt: Well, I don’t think it’s like an ADD thing where everyone thinks they have it, but I think —
马特：恩，我不认为每个人都认为拥有它就像添加东西，但我认为-
Patrick: Right. Because it’s easy to see a history of violations by saying, oh, Asperger’s!
帕特里克：对。 因为很容易通过说“阿斯伯格(Asperger's)”来查看违规的历史！
Matt: No, I mean this is like after 30 emails where you’re like you seriously don’t get it why like shooting a grandma in the face is considered offensive to people, or something like that.
马特：不，我的意思是，这就像30封电子邮件之后，您好像真的不明白那样，为什么像开枪打脸一样被认为会冒犯他人，或者类似的事情。
Patrick: Right. Because some would say that might be a troll that’s kind of a claim to make after spending a whole day emailing with them then oh, yeah, okay good, they’ve trolled their maximum and now, okay it’s cool. So, but you have to take their word for it, I mean you can’t say, No! You don’t have Asperger’s; you have to take their word for it and then kind of deal with it as an aside. But I think one of the questions I would have then for you, and by the way, I think you’re totally — one ban a month for personality at MetaFilter, that doesn’t sound — that sounds way too low, that sounds way too low.
帕特里克：对。 因为有人会说这可能是一个巨魔，是在花了整整一天的时间向他们发送电子邮件之后做出的声明，然后，哦，是的，很好，他们已经达到了最大极限，现在，很酷。 所以，但是您必须遵守他们的承诺，我的意思是您不能说，不！ 您没有阿斯伯格(Asperger)的； 您必须信守诺言，然后将其放在一边。 但是我想我会遇到的一个问题是，顺便说一句，我认为您完全是-一个月禁止在MetaFilter上使用个性，这听起来并不合理-听起来太低了，听起来很简单太低。
Matt: Well, yeah, yeah.
马特：是的，是的。
Patrick: Unless you don’t get as much traffic as I think you do.
帕特里克：除非您获得的流量不如我想的那么多。
Matt: No, we get tons of traffic; I just think we have like a million other stepped measures that sort of shake out any problems before they get that bad.
马特：不，我们得到了无数的流量； 我只是认为我们还有其他一百万个阶梯式措施，可以在问题恶化之前消除任何问题。
Patrick: Well, I’ll give you that. But the thing I was going to ask you was the need to protect the community, what you have going on, and also to protect I guess your time and your resources. So you have a small team, we talked about that last episode, and large site, lots of contributions, lots of content coming in and out, lots of stuff you have to read, lots of reports you have to view, flagged content, whatever; at some point I always explain to people, I take the time to explain to people we give people tons of chances, so I totally understand that. But, at the same time it’s hard to justify 30 emails in a day as a member of staff’s time; you said the whole day, I know that’s an exaggeration, certainly it probably wasn’t their whole day, but a part of it and, I don’t know, I think in some cases that’s hard to justify where I think the staff of a community generally the responsibility is to protect the community and not to play doctor to one person.
帕特里克：嗯，我给你。 但是我要问的是，需要保护社区，您的活动状况以及保护我的时间和资源。 因此，您有一个小型团队，我们讨论了最后一集，以及大型网站，大量文稿，大量内容出入，您必须阅读的许多内容，您必须查看的许多报告，已标记的内容等; 在某些时候，我总是向人们解释，我花时间向人们解释我们给人们很多机会，所以我完全理解这一点。 但是，与此同时，很难证明每天有30封电子邮件作为工作人员的时间。 你说了一整天，我知道那是夸张的，当然那可能不是他们的一整天，而是其中的一部分，而且我不知道，我认为在某些情况下很难证明我认为工作人员在哪里一个社区通常的责任是保护社区，而不是一个人玩医生。
Matt: Yeah, yeah, definitely.
马特：是的，是的，当然。
Patrick: Or parent or mother, however you want to term it.
帕特里克(Patrick)：或父母或母亲，但是您想称呼它。
Matt: Yeah, we definitely keep the — we’re mindful of how much time we’re spending with problematic users. And I mean it doesn’t literally take your entire day, but it —
Matt：是的，我们绝对会保留—我们牢记有多少时间与有问题的用户在一起。 我的意思是，这实际上并不会花费您一整天的时间，但是-
Patrick: Feels like it.
帕特里克：感觉喜欢。
Matt: Well, I mean not only do you spend maybe like an hour or two writing emails over the course of an eight-hour day, you don’t stop thinking about it for 24 hours, it dominates your thoughts, like, God, I hope — like every time you look at Gmail you’re like, “God, I hope that guy doesn’t email back…
马特：嗯，我的意思是，您不仅在一天8小时的时间里花了大约一两个小时写一封电子邮件，而且还在24小时内不停地思考，它支配了您的所有想法，例如上帝，我希望–就像每次您查看Gmail一样，“上帝，我希望那个家伙不要回信…
Patrick: It can be stressful.
帕特里克：可能会感到压力。
Matt: Ah! He emailed back!” You know, I have another half hour to think about what he said, concoct a reply, so it ends up it really does take all your time. We have like some leader boards in the background of like people that are most problematic over the history of their participation on the site, and we kind of realized the top ten worst users are people that are just constantly, you know, you recognize all their names that you see them get in fights everyday and stuff. So, I’ve also heard, I mean the smartest thing I ever heard about it was from Philip Greenspun who started Photo.net and established ArsDigita, whole community management software company, he had fake accounting in his programs starting in like 1997 or something, he just created a fake accounting system so anytime anyone used the contact form while logged in that cost like a fake dime or something. Anytime he edited or deleted something that was like fifty cents or something in like this fake account, it’s another table in the database and anytime the user requests an action that requires moderators to do something it had a price, and he adjusted these prices; I think he ended up with like a contact form email to one of the people running the thing, it was like $1.00, because that really took someone’s time. So when some unknown person goes, hey, I have a problem, he just looks at their account and goes, dude, you’ve racked up $13.00 fake dollars, like oh my god, you are sucking the life out of this community (laughter), versus like, oh, ten cents, whatever, they’re new, that’s fine. He would use this like background, this wasn’t public to any user, it was just sort of a background reputation sort of thing going, and I’ve long wished I’d instituted something like that. Because I mean we get people who email us about typos in a comment out of 300 comments in a thread, like, “Hey, I misspelled billions, I put too many L’s,” like really, does anyone even care, like come on, and that takes time.
马特：啊！ 他发回了电子邮件！” 您知道，我还有半个小时想一想他说的话，编造一个答复，所以最终确实需要您花费所有时间。 我们就像背景中的某些排行榜一样，在他们参与该网站的历史上遇到最大问题的人中，并且我们意识到最差的前十名用户是不断地，您知道，您认识到他们所有的人您看到他们的名字每天都在打架。 所以，我也听说过，我的意思是说，我听说过的最聪明的事是来自Philip Greenspun，他创立了Photo.net并创立了ArsDigita，这是整个社区管理软件公司，他从1997年开始在自己的程序中使用虚假会计核算，他只是创建了一个伪造的会计系统，因此任何人在登录时使用联系表格，例如伪造的毛钱或其他费用。 每当他编辑或删除诸如五十美分之类的东西或该假账户之类的东西时，它就是数据库中的另一张表，并且每当用户要求操作者要求主持人做某件事时，他都会调整价格； 我认为他最终像一封联系表格的电子邮件发送给了一位管理该事情的人，当时的面值是1.00美元，因为那确实花了一些时间。 因此，当某个不知名的人走了，嘿，我有一个问题，他只是看着他们的帐户，走了，伙计，您积$了$ 13.00的假币，就像我的天哪，您从这个社区中吸了生命(笑声) )，而不是十美分，不管怎么说，它们都是新的，没关系。 他会使用这样的背景，对任何用户都不公开，这只是一种背景声望，我一直希望自己能建立这样的背景。 因为我的意思是说，有300个人在帖子中以评论的形式向我们发送有关错字的电子邮件，例如：“嘿，我拼错了数十亿，我放了太多L，”真的，有人在乎，比如说，这需要时间。
Patrick: I’m being judged on the Internet, help!
帕特里克(Patrick)：我正在互联网上受审，请帮助！
Matt: Yeah. I mean no one will even mention it, they just don’t feel good about having a typo out there with their name on it.
马特：是的。 我的意思是没有人会提到它，他们只是对上面印有自己名字的错字感到不舒服。
Patrick: They don’t respect me!
帕特里克：他们不尊重我！
Matt: Yeah. So I really wish I instituted accounting in the background on my site.
马特：是的。 因此，我真希望我可以在网站的后台建立会计。
Patrick: That’s funny. And, Sarah, one thing you mentioned that I wanted to highlight was in addition to protecting your community and directing people to you who need more than a basic level of attention, I guess you could say, because that’s something I do as well, and I think it’s especially important with volunteer staff, which is what SitePoint has in the forums and which you manage and what I manage where they’re not paid, and it’s a ‘as they want to do it’ type of thing; there’s a commitment there but it’s not like — you can’t say, well, be here from this to this, be there from that to that, you work this many hours, it’s just not that kind of thing. And so when you have someone who emails them and is disrespectful or rude or makes a snide comment or just asks about something that’s not something that moderators strictly deal with. I know in my case I always ask if anyone ever gives you trouble send it to me (laughs) because that’s what I’m here to deal with. Yeah, and I always say, hey, thanks for the note, I appreciate your concerns but just so we’re all clear here the moderator is just doing exactly what I say, and if there’s any issue let’s have a discussion right here.
帕特里克：真有趣。 而且，莎拉(Sarah)，您提到的我想强调的一件事是，除了保护您的社区并把人们引向需要更多基本关注之外的人，我想您可能会说，因为这也是我的职责，并且我认为这对于志愿人员尤为重要，这是SitePoint在论坛中所拥有的，您所管理的以及我在没有报酬的地方所管理的东西，这是一种“像他们想做的那样”的事情。 那里有一种承诺，但事实并非如此-您不能说，好吧，从这里到这里，从那里到那个，您工作了很多小时，这不是那种事情。 因此，当您有某人通过电子邮件向他们发送电子邮件时，不礼貌或无礼或发表粗鲁的评论，或者只是问一些不是主持人严格处理的事情。 我知道在我的情况下，我总是问是否有人遇到麻烦将其发送给我(笑)，因为这就是我要处理的问题。 是的，我总是说，嘿，感谢您的来信，感谢您的关心，但我们在这里很清楚地看到主持人完全按照我的意思做，如果有任何问题，让我们在这里进行讨论。
Sarah: Yeah, and the reason I do that is because, yeah, that’s what I’m paid to do, I want my mods to enjoy working for me and I want them to enjoy the job that they do, and they’re not there to take crap from anybody. If they want to that’s up to them, but yeah, that’s not an expectation of mine for sure, I get paid to do that.
莎拉：是的，我这样做的原因是，是的，那是我的报酬，我希望我的改装人员享受为我工作的乐趣，我希望他们享受他们所做的工作，而不是在那里从任何人那里胡扯。 如果他们希望由自己决定，但是是的，那并不是我的期望，我会为此而获得报酬。
Patrick: Right, yeah, I think that’s a good thing to do, and there’s a chapter in a section of my book that’s titled, Allow a Wrath to be Directed at you and Not Your Staff, and that’s what I try to do. If anyone’s mad, if anyone hates anyone it needs to be me. So with different types of online community there are different types of identity, and whether it’s online community or social media or whatever you want to call it, there’s certainly divided lines between the idea of real name identity and anonymous identity and kind of those two cultures. You have some sites where people expect a real name and people don’t expect a real name, and some cases people prefer just to be anonymous. So I wanted to talk a little bit about identity within community and how it differs. And I think all of us operate under the same general principle with our sites as far as I can see with SitePoint, with MetaFilter, with my network, where people aren’t required to give a real name, not that I can see on the sites, and there’s just a username they’re known by, the name that they give themselves, that’s what they’re known by. Matt, I’d like to ask you to talk about how MetaFilter’s identity system works and how you find it performance-wise.
帕特里克(Patrick)：是的，是的，我认为这是一件好事，我的书中有一章的标题是``让愤怒直指您而不是您的员工''，这就是我试图做的事情。 如果有人生气，如果有人讨厌任何人，那就必须是我。 因此，对于不同类型的在线社区，身份的类型也不同，无论是在线社区，社交媒体还是任何您想称呼的东西，实名身份和匿名身份的思想与这两种文化的类型之间肯定存在分界线。 您在某些网站上人们期望真实姓名而人们不期望真实姓名，并且在某些情况下，人们更喜欢匿名。 因此，我想谈谈社区内部的身份及其差异。 而且我认为，就我在SitePoint，MetaFilter和我的网络上看到的情况而言，我们每个人在我们的网站上都遵循相同的一般原则，在这里人们不需要提供真实姓名，网站，并且只有一个用户名，他们给自己起的名字，就是他们的名。 Matt，我想请您谈谈MetaFilter的身份系统如何工作以及如何从性能角度考虑它。
Matt: I find communities that get as close as possible to real people’s names tend to have more mature discussions because people are, I don’t know, kind of worried about their reputation kind of. So I tend to build communities where it’s mostly about having all this identification, if you want to opt out of all that you can, but I know in the backend as the guy running the place at least I know some more things about you so I can kind of — you can’t use that to abuse other people.
Matt：我发现与真实姓名尽可能接近的社区倾向于进行更成熟的讨论，因为我不知道人们在某种程度上担心自己的声誉。 因此，我倾向于建立一个社区，主要是要拥有所有这些标识，如果您想选择全部退出，那么我在后端知道，至少是管理该职位的人，我对您有更多了解，所以我可以-您不能用它来虐待他人。
Patrick: Right.
帕特里克：对。
Matt: I’m torn because I have a love of investigative journalism and the craft of journalism and whistleblowers, and anonymous reporting is actually important in sort of freedom of the press, but then as a guy running communities, like fully anonymous discourse is usually horrible and you think of things like 4chan is just being like anything goes craziness because there’s no consequences to any of your actions really when you can be completely anonymous. So I tend to favor having some identity out there, if you really want to opt out of it you can, you can just use a username that’s generic and strip your account of all public details about who you are. But when we have like straight-up anonymous stuff it’s always like vetted, it goes into a queue; on MetaFilter like on Ask MetaFilter, you can ask a question once a week, anything you want, you can instantly post it and it’s on the front page, but if you want to ask an anonymous question it goes into a pile and one of the moderators looks at it and has to approve it before it goes live, so we’re not approving like how to kill myself suicide questions, and then we’re digging into who asked that and trying to find local authorities that can help them deal with what drove them to that point. But we know that like there is value in anonymous communications, it just has to be — I mean as a community, someone running a community really has to stay on top of that really closely because I don’t know if you’re familiar with 4chan but it’s ridiculous (laughter), it’s absolute anarchy is really what you get when you totally allow anyone to do anything. But, I mean as Christopher Poole who runs 4chan will say, having a completely anonymous message board also has its positives which is people aren’t afraid to fail, people iterate over and over and over again, they’re basically failing all the time because it doesn’t matter, nobody knows who made that bad joke so you actually get good jokes; out of 400 people trying bad jokes eventually someone actually gets a success, and people don’t feel dejected that like, oh, if you look at my history nothing but duds, I mean because that doesn’t exist, there’s no history. So I’m torn, I wish I could allow for more anonymous speech, but the reality of it is it’s almost always abused.
马特(Matt)：我之所以感到沮丧，是因为我热衷于调查性新闻业以及新闻工作者和举报人的手艺，匿名举报实际上对新闻自由具有重要意义，但是作为一个人来经营社区，就像完全匿名的话语通常可怕的是，您会想到4chan之类的事情就像是疯狂的事情，因为当您完全匿名时，实际上对您的任何行为都没有影响。 因此，我倾向于使用一些身份，如果您真的想退出，可以使用通用的用户名，并在帐户中删除有关您的身份的所有公共详细信息。 但是，当我们喜欢简单明了的匿名内容时，它总是像经过审查的那样，排入了队列。 在MetaFilter上(例如在Ask MetaFilter上)，您可以每周问一次问题，无论您想要什么，都可以立即将其发布在首页上，但是如果您想问一个匿名问题，它会成堆出现，主持人会仔细研究它，并且必须在发布之前批准它，因此我们没有像如何自杀这样的自杀方式来批准，然后我们在深入研究谁提出了这个问题，并试图寻找可以帮助他们解决问题的地方当局是什么促使他们到了这一点。 But we know that like there is value in anonymous communications, it just has to be — I mean as a community, someone running a community really has to stay on top of that really closely because I don't know if you're familiar with 4chan but it's ridiculous (laughter), it's absolute anarchy is really what you get when you totally allow anyone to do anything. But, I mean as Christopher Poole who runs 4chan will say, having a completely anonymous message board also has its positives which is people aren't afraid to fail, people iterate over and over and over again, they're basically failing all the time because it doesn't matter, nobody knows who made that bad joke so you actually get good jokes; out of 400 people trying bad jokes eventually someone actually gets a success, and people don't feel dejected that like, oh, if you look at my history nothing but duds, I mean because that doesn't exist, there's no history. So I'm torn, I wish I could allow for more anonymous speech, but the reality of it is it's almost always abused.
Patrick: Yeah, and the funny thing is, and I’m not really a fan of 4chan, while appreciating the value of anonymity in certain circumstances, when 4chan is heralded as an example of an online community, I don’t really like that, I’m not a huge, huge fan of that. And it’s a funny story because the first year I was at South by Southwest, 2008, I went to my hotel, and this is also before I’d ever spoken before also, so I’m at really my first tech industry of any kind conference. So I’m going there, I’m at the hotel, the Hyatt Regency in Austin, and it’s in the evening and the bellman is — I got some help for my bags, so we’re going up in the elevator and he’s like, “Why are you here?” South by Southwest, I’m here to speak about online community. And he says, “Oh, like 4chan?” (Laughter) Like, ah, yes, kind of, thank you, here’s your tip. So, yeah, that’s kind of a funny thing. And I think you make a good point, there is a case for anonymity, there is a value there in certain circumstances. At the same time, though, I think it’s fair to say that that doesn’t have to be our communities, that doesn’t have to be this particular space, that doesn’t have to be your community or anyone else’s community, and I think the username versus real name thing also, usernames aren’t always anonymous obviously, and you didn’t say that but it just kind of leads to the next point here, usernames can be consistent. Like iFroggy, for example, is my username everywhere, that’s not anonymous, there’s nothing anonymous about iFroggy; you search for it, you find out as much as you want to know about me. So, a username can have — can follow you even more than your name can, especially if it’s a common name like John Smith, for example, which is the proverbial common name. That name might not mean much, but if he used that same unique username everywhere then they can follow you that way. So, Sarah, I wanted to ask you about identity within the SitePoint forums and how that works.
Patrick: Yeah, and the funny thing is, and I'm not really a fan of 4chan, while appreciating the value of anonymity in certain circumstances, when 4chan is heralded as an example of an online community, I don't really like that, I'm not a huge, huge fan of that. And it's a funny story because the first year I was at South by Southwest, 2008, I went to my hotel, and this is also before I'd ever spoken before also, so I'm at really my first tech industry of any kind conference. So I'm going there, I'm at the hotel, the Hyatt Regency in Austin, and it's in the evening and the bellman is — I got some help for my bags, so we're going up in the elevator and he's like, “Why are you here?” South by Southwest, I'm here to speak about online community. And he says, “Oh, like 4chan?” (Laughter) Like, ah, yes, kind of, thank you, here's your tip. So, yeah, that's kind of a funny thing. And I think you make a good point, there is a case for anonymity, there is a value there in certain circumstances. At the same time, though, I think it's fair to say that that doesn't have to be our communities, that doesn't have to be this particular space, that doesn't have to be your community or anyone else's community, and I think the username versus real name thing also, usernames aren't always anonymous obviously, and you didn't say that but it just kind of leads to the next point here, usernames can be consistent. Like iFroggy, for example, is my username everywhere, that's not anonymous, there's nothing anonymous about iFroggy; you search for it, you find out as much as you want to know about me. So, a username can have — can follow you even more than your name can, especially if it's a common name like John Smith, for example, which is the proverbial common name. That name might not mean much, but if he used that same unique username everywhere then they can follow you that way. So, Sarah, I wanted to ask you about identity within the SitePoint forums and how that works.
Sarah: Yeah, as you said, very similar to your network. I guess with the exception of an email address I don’t really know who anybody is; I can track them down in that way. I get emails sometimes from people who have passed themselves off as PHP experts to clients and then freak out when they ask a question about PHP formulating a client’s site using their real name or the client’s name or the client’s site address, so I guess identity can definitely be an issue in that regard. But I think that, as you say, that these days with the number of social networks, for instance, I’m Hawk on every single network that I’m part of unless that was already taken, in which case I am some other Hawk related head, or people can find out who you are, people can go to your Twitter page, they can find out where you live, they can find out who you are from Facebook. Identity these days, I don’t know, online unless you’re one of those people that’s clever and uses a different handle on every single site they use, identity’s not necessarily related to your given name anymore.
Sarah: Yeah, as you said, very similar to your network. I guess with the exception of an email address I don't really know who anybody is; I can track them down in that way. I get emails sometimes from people who have passed themselves off as PHP experts to clients and then freak out when they ask a question about PHP formulating a client's site using their real name or the client's name or the client's site address, so I guess identity can definitely be an issue in that regard. But I think that, as you say, that these days with the number of social networks, for instance, I'm Hawk on every single network that I'm part of unless that was already taken, in which case I am some other Hawk related head, or people can find out who you are, people can go to your Twitter page, they can find out where you live, they can find out who you are from Facebook. Identity these days, I don't know, online unless you're one of those people that's clever and uses a different handle on every single site they use, identity's not necessarily related to your given name anymore.
Patrick: I get those — not that I get those sorts of emails, but I do get those sorts of comments sometimes, once in a long while, and the one that strikes mind to me is there was a member who felt that someone shouldn’t be on my staff because they ask questions and didn’t just answer them, and I always die a little bit when I hear that type of comment because I think, and I understand it certainly, it can be seen as weakness to some people, but to me it’s part of the progression, so, I don’t know, I would hope that people could see that and understand that, that that’s how people gain knowledge in this day and age, but maybe that’s a little too idealistic. I think just to kind of summarize pros and cons of usernames or I guess you could anonymity/real names, I think, Matt, you made a great point with the comment about accountability, I mean I think that’s a big one, and I think that’s what people see when they require real name identification or even when someone requires Facebook Connect; even Facebook can be gamed, obviously people have fake accounts, but generally speaking when people login with Facebook they are more accountable, and there are a lot of sites that moved over to Facebook comments, TechCrunch probably one of the biggest examples, and some people say they didn’t like that because they enjoyed the troll-ish comments (laughs), so you can’t please everybody, right. But, I think they think they’ve had a higher level of discourse since flipping the switch, so I think it’s one of those things that varies by the site; for most communities I would probably say usernames would probably be for the best because it’s kind of an opt-an-identity in a way, because if someone really wants to be anonymous with just a username, as you pointed out, Matt, they certainly can be because they can name themselves whatever they want and don’t have to disclose that information to anyone else. But it allows their to be some level of accountability I would say with people when they’re not just a guest account or somebody who’s not logged in, but there is — they have to login, they have a username that people know them by, and so that’s a level of accountability in itself just beyond being anonymous. And dead (laughs).
Patrick: I get those — not that I get those sorts of emails, but I do get those sorts of comments sometimes, once in a long while, and the one that strikes mind to me is there was a member who felt that someone shouldn't be on my staff because they ask questions and didn't just answer them, and I always die a little bit when I hear that type of comment because I think, and I understand it certainly, it can be seen as weakness to some people, but to me it's part of the progression, so, I don't know, I would hope that people could see that and understand that, that that's how people gain knowledge in this day and age, but maybe that's a little too idealistic. I think just to kind of summarize pros and cons of usernames or I guess you could anonymity/real names, I think, Matt, you made a great point with the comment about accountability, I mean I think that's a big one, and I think that's what people see when they require real name identification or even when someone requires Facebook Connect; even Facebook can be gamed, obviously people have fake accounts, but generally speaking when people login with Facebook they are more accountable, and there are a lot of sites that moved over to Facebook comments, TechCrunch probably one of the biggest examples, and some people say they didn't like that because they enjoyed the troll-ish comments (laughs), so you can't please everybody, right. But, I think they think they've had a higher level of discourse since flipping the switch, so I think it's one of those things that varies by the site; for most communities I would probably say usernames would probably be for the best because it's kind of an opt-an-identity in a way, because if someone really wants to be anonymous with just a username, as you pointed out, Matt, they certainly can be because they can name themselves whatever they want and don't have to disclose that information to anyone else. But it allows their to be some level of accountability I would say with people when they're not just a guest account or somebody who's not logged in, but there is — they have to login, they have a username that people know them by, and so that's a level of accountability in itself just beyond being anonymous. And dead (laughs).
Matt: Well, you know, even with the option to just have a generic floofyfloo647 is your username and don’t put your real name or anything on it, it’s like 90% of the people that use MetaFilter either put their real name or a well known username they use everywhere because they want like everything on their permanent record, they want people to go, oh, that’s the funny guy on Twitter with the same name. And we just have this — I mean it’s 5% tops is like would rather not anyone know anything about them. And MetaFilter we’ve got like a leg up on probably every community in the world in that I require the $5.00 PayPal charge, so it’s like I get the real business name or PayPal account behind a user, which has like been awesome for spammers (laughs), like we can track down spammers so fast now because we know they own the site that they’re pimping all over the place.
Matt: Well, you know, even with the option to just have a generic floofyfloo647 is your username and don't put your real name or anything on it, it's like 90% of the people that use MetaFilter either put their real name or a well known username they use everywhere because they want like everything on their permanent record, they want people to go, oh, that's the funny guy on Twitter with the same name. And we just have this — I mean it's 5% tops is like would rather not anyone know anything about them. And MetaFilter we've got like a leg up on probably every community in the world in that I require the $5.00 PayPal charge, so it's like I get the real business name or PayPal account behind a user, which has like been awesome for spammers (laughs), like we can track down spammers so fast now because we know they own the site that they're pimping all over the place.
Patrick: And, Sarah, you made a point that relates to our final topic of discussion about how people are concerned about what a client might find. With SitePoint the obvious example who is someone who is gaining their knowledge in some aspect of web development or programming, and they weren’t always an expert or they weren’t always able to sell their services to clients, they didn’t have that level of expertise yet, and they used resources like SitePoint to grow that expertise to where they can do that now, and they’re concerned about that showing up in search engine results. And Matt also mentioned earlier off the recording some people who will come to him and say I’m 24, 26 now, I joined MetaFilter when I was in my teens, I said a lot of things back then but I don’t really want online, in your words, Matt, in an age of Google, because everything is so well-indexed now and so easily searchable that it makes it easier to find what we might feel are our past indiscretions and then people can then hold them against you.
Patrick: And, Sarah, you made a point that relates to our final topic of discussion about how people are concerned about what a client might find. With SitePoint the obvious example who is someone who is gaining their knowledge in some aspect of web development or programming, and they weren't always an expert or they weren't always able to sell their services to clients, they didn't have that level of expertise yet, and they used resources like SitePoint to grow that expertise to where they can do that now, and they're concerned about that showing up in search engine results. And Matt also mentioned earlier off the recording some people who will come to him and say I'm 24, 26 now, I joined MetaFilter when I was in my teens, I said a lot of things back then but I don't really want online, in your words, Matt, in an age of Google, because everything is so well-indexed now and so easily searchable that it makes it easier to find what we might feel are our past indiscretions and then people can then hold them against you.
Matt: Yeah.
Matt: Yeah.
Patrick: So, I guess you have to be sensitive to that and that concern, but I mean how do you address that within an established community like a MetaFilter or even a SitePoint, and I’ll ask you, Sarah, in a second, but where you have this — this is your history, right, the content on this site someone could have posted 5,000 times in 5,000 different blog posts on MetaFilter and those are all linked, I mean it’s all intrinsically part of MetaFilter, and those discussions people replied, it’s all linked in one another; how do you deal with that concern?
Patrick: So, I guess you have to be sensitive to that and that concern, but I mean how do you address that within an established community like a MetaFilter or even a SitePoint, and I'll ask you, Sarah, in a second, but where you have this — this is your history, right, the content on this site someone could have posted 5,000 times in 5,000 different blog posts on MetaFilter and those are all linked, I mean it's all intrinsically part of MetaFilter, and those discussions people replied, it's all linked in one another; how do you deal with that concern?
Matt: Well, we usually just like say you can pick out a handful at the most if it’s going to be a long thing. I mean the idea of it I think has merit is that when they were commenting in the year 2000, Google was just getting its legs going and it wasn’t indexing every page on the Web in realtime, and nobody ever thought the employers would Googling your name, instantly that would be the first cut and they’re hire you or something. So I mean I’m just really glad that nothing I ever did has — I mean I didn’t even go online until I was 23 or something, so in 1995, so I’m lucky that my previous ridiculous teen generation doesn’t exist online everywhere. So I would definitely say people today leaving comments anywhere probably know this pretty well, that like be careful what you say, be careful what you’re doing, Google’s always watching. But like things you did 10 years ago, like remember when Google bought, what was the Usenet search engine, not Excite, it started with an E, I thought, they used to be based in Austin, Texas, they bought like the Usenet archive and integrated it into Google Groups, and someone pulled up like a ridiculous — like my very first lame miscategorized HTML help post from like 1996, like I asked in a JavaScript forum a basic HTML4 question, and the replies were all like, ‘wrong forum, dumbass’ kind of. And it’s like that was funny, amazing that Google just bought this archive, made it online; stuff that no one ever thought would be searchable 10, 15 years later would be suddenly was, and it was just a weird change of perception that wasn’t there at the start. So I think if you’re designing a community today you’ve got nothing to worry about, I think everyone’s really up on this stuff and they’ll be careful what they say, but if you have 10 year old content, yeah, it’s like you do kind of have to be understanding of this.
Matt: Well, we usually just like say you can pick out a handful at the most if it's going to be a long thing. I mean the idea of it I think has merit is that when they were commenting in the year 2000, Google was just getting its legs going and it wasn't indexing every page on the Web in realtime, and nobody ever thought the employers would Googling your name, instantly that would be the first cut and they're hire you or something. So I mean I'm just really glad that nothing I ever did has — I mean I didn't even go online until I was 23 or something, so in 1995, so I'm lucky that my previous ridiculous teen generation doesn't exist online everywhere. So I would definitely say people today leaving comments anywhere probably know this pretty well, that like be careful what you say, be careful what you're doing, Google's always watching. But like things you did 10 years ago, like remember when Google bought, what was the Usenet search engine, not Excite, it started with an E, I thought, they used to be based in Austin, Texas, they bought like the Usenet archive and integrated it into Google Groups, and someone pulled up like a ridiculous — like my very first lame miscategorized HTML help post from like 1996, like I asked in a JavaScript forum a basic HTML4 question, and the replies were all like, 'wrong forum, dumbass' kind of. And it's like that was funny, amazing that Google just bought this archive, made it online; stuff that no one ever thought would be searchable 10, 15 years later would be suddenly was, and it was just a weird change of perception that wasn't there at the start. So I think if you're designing a community today you've got nothing to worry about, I think everyone's really up on this stuff and they'll be careful what they say, but if you have 10 year old content, yeah, it's like you do kind of have to be understanding of this.
Patrick: I think the company you’re thinking of that Google bought was it Deja?
Patrick: I think the company you're thinking of that Google bought was it Deja?
Matt: Yeah, Deja News, that was it.
Matt: Yeah, Deja News, that was it.
Patrick: Deja News, yeah, okay cool, yeah, I went to the Wikipedia page for list of acquisitions by Google. And that’s actually the first one listed by date, February 12, 2001, so as far as Wikipedia is concerned that’s the first acquisition Google ever made.
Patrick: Deja News, yeah, okay cool, yeah, I went to the Wikipedia page for list of acquisitions by Google. And that's actually the first one listed by date, February 12, 2001, so as far as Wikipedia is concerned that's the first acquisition Google ever made.
Matt: Yeah. Yeah, that’s very old.
Matt: Yeah. Yeah, that's very old.
Patrick: Definitely very old.
Patrick: Definitely very old.
Matt: I mean there are people like broke up with each other on Usenet; in a deep group you know that nobody like Sci-fi/Orsonscottcards/fans, you know they never thought the normal public would ever be able to see, and people are just pulling them up going check this out!
Matt: I mean there are people like broke up with each other on Usenet; in a deep group you know that nobody like Sci-fi/Orsonscottcards/fans, you know they never thought the normal public would ever be able to see, and people are just pulling them up going check this out!
Patrick: Our geekdom exposed! So same question but I guess with SitePoint, Sarah.
Patrick: Our geekdom exposed! So same question but I guess with SitePoint, Sarah.
Sarah: I think regardless of the site, I think the number one rule with the Internet is that the Internet is forever, and if you don’t remember that then you’re going to get yourself in trouble somewhere along the line; I get the same sorts of emails all the time asking for things to be deleted. The other reason tends to be that somebody has defamed somebody in their eyes or said something about their company when they didn’t own their company, any number of things, and they want me to delete the post and clear the Google cache (laughter), well, I can’t do that. I’d love to be able to do that, I can’t do that; I won’t delete the post either. We have a rule about not posting personal information, so if somebody that is new or doesn’t really know what they’re doing comes along and puts their email address or their own name or anything like that, then absolutely we will edit that out for you, but otherwise if you make a post your post is there, database integrity is important, people learn from posts; the whole purpose of a forum is that somebody can lookup a legacy issue and they can find information. So, obviously there are extenuating circumstances and we always listen, but as a general rule if you posted something that made you look silly or that you wish you didn’t post, then you probably should have thought about that at the time unfortunately because, yeah, the Internet is forever. I guess in the case of people who have had something bad said about their company, I mean we encourage them to signup and refute that information, that’ll go into Google too, it swings in roundabouts, but yeah, the bottom line is that the Internet is forever.
Sarah: I think regardless of the site, I think the number one rule with the Internet is that the Internet is forever, and if you don't remember that then you're going to get yourself in trouble somewhere along the line; I get the same sorts of emails all the time asking for things to be deleted. The other reason tends to be that somebody has defamed somebody in their eyes or said something about their company when they didn't own their company, any number of things, and they want me to delete the post and clear the Google cache (laughter), well, I can't do that. I'd love to be able to do that, I can't do that; I won't delete the post either. We have a rule about not posting personal information, so if somebody that is new or doesn't really know what they're doing comes along and puts their email address or their own name or anything like that, then absolutely we will edit that out for you, but otherwise if you make a post your post is there, database integrity is important, people learn from posts; the whole purpose of a forum is that somebody can lookup a legacy issue and they can find information. So, obviously there are extenuating circumstances and we always listen, but as a general rule if you posted something that made you look silly or that you wish you didn't post, then you probably should have thought about that at the time unfortunately because, yeah, the Internet is forever. I guess in the case of people who have had something bad said about their company, I mean we encourage them to signup and refute that information, that'll go into Google too, it swings in roundabouts, but yeah, the bottom line is that the Internet is forever.
Patrick: Yeah, and I’ll just — I can’t clear the Google cache by myself, but I’ll just give you my admin login, you go to Google.com/admin, here’s the username and password, and you can just clear that cache whenever you want.
Patrick: Yeah, and I'll just — I can't clear the Google cache by myself, but I'll just give you my admin login, you go to Google.com/admin, here's the username and password, and you can just clear that cache whenever you want.
Matt: Well, I mean like we do this thing when we delete a thread or something, that it’s still available at a URL, but like it’s not linked in the archives anymore so that there’s a — and we put a deletion reason so that other people can learn from that. But we actually put like Meta Tags for no cache because, yeah, we prefer deleted stuff not to be around in Google. The problem is when someone has a problem with a post, you know like a company mentioned in a post emails us the riot act and says they’re going to sic their lawyers on us, we’ll go like —
Matt: Well, I mean like we do this thing when we delete a thread or something, that it's still available at a URL, but like it's not linked in the archives anymore so that there's a — and we put a deletion reason so that other people can learn from that. But we actually put like Meta Tags for no cache because, yeah, we prefer deleted stuff not to be around in Google. The problem is when someone has a problem with a post, you know like a company mentioned in a post emails us the riot act and says they're going to sic their lawyers on us, we'll go like —
Patrick: Bring ‘em on, this is like the MetaFilter empire! (Laughter)
Patrick: Bring 'em on, this is like the MetaFilter empire! (笑声)
Matt: Well, a lot of times they go, oh yeah, like that’s a lame post, and yeah they’re kind of on the border of slander, I’ll delete it; and it will drop out of Google’s cache eventually. And then I’ll get an email everyday for like six weeks, ‘it’s still in Google’, ‘it’s still the number on result for our company’, and I’m like I can’t control Google, they will drop it out the next time they spider the site, that could be — sometimes it takes two months.
Matt: Well, a lot of times they go, oh yeah, like that's a lame post, and yeah they're kind of on the border of slander, I'll delete it; and it will drop out of Google's cache eventually. And then I'll get an email everyday for like six weeks, 'it's still in Google', 'it's still the number on result for our company', and I'm like I can't control Google, they will drop it out the next time they spider the site, that could be — sometimes it takes two months.
Patrick: Yeah, I don’t control Google, they control all of us, don’t you know how the world works right now? no. And one interesting point that I think Sarah and you both referenced is, and something I think about a lot is obviously there’s this wave to data portability, right, and that’s a hot term right now. And Google Plus basically launched, that’s a major selling point, it’s almost a shot over the bow at Facebook, you can go to the data liberation section and export all your stuff right now pretty much, but I see that and I think of how that applies to an online community much like ours, a structured online community that is very –has a very strong history, has a great network of contributors and contributions that are all integrated together, it’s not like it’s a personal space, it’s not like it’s a personal profile, it’s not a page that you go to and just put your updates on it, I mean it’s all together, people that are discussing things, there’s a million people involved and it all bounces off of one another; the value of one contribution is tied to the contributions it’s responding to or the ones that respond to it. So, when you think of deleting content from a community or just allowing people to wipe out that content then those discussions are then damaged, they’re fragmented, they’re not as valuable as they once were, and the contributions by other people are hence devalued as well along with that. So, I mean that’s something I always think about and what I don’t allow people to simply delete all their posts from my site by request because it damages those discussions. Like you said, Matt, send me a handful of things, if it’s sensitive, if it’s personal information like SitePoint does I’ll definitely clear that out, if it’s a picture of you I’ll clear that out, those sorts of things that are sensitive and personal I’ll definitely get rid of those and I’m willing to be flexible and listen if you’re reasonable. But I’m not going to delete all the content or somehow give you some sort of export of it which I can’t even do as a poor programmer, non-existent programmer. So I guess that’s kind of rambly but I mean, Matt, what do you think about the data liberation, data portability things, and then how it will work with a structured community like a MetaFilter?
Patrick: Yeah, I don't control Google, they control all of us, don't you know how the world works right now? 没有。 And one interesting point that I think Sarah and you both referenced is, and something I think about a lot is obviously there's this wave to data portability, right, and that's a hot term right now. And Google Plus basically launched, that's a major selling point, it's almost a shot over the bow at Facebook, you can go to the data liberation section and export all your stuff right now pretty much, but I see that and I think of how that applies to an online community much like ours, a structured online community that is very –has a very strong history, has a great network of contributors and contributions that are all integrated together, it's not like it's a personal space, it's not like it's a personal profile, it's not a page that you go to and just put your updates on it, I mean it's all together, people that are discussing things, there's a million people involved and it all bounces off of one another; the value of one contribution is tied to the contributions it's responding to or the ones that respond to it. So, when you think of deleting content from a community or just allowing people to wipe out that content then those discussions are then damaged, they're fragmented, they're not as valuable as they once were, and the contributions by other people are hence devalued as well along with that. So, I mean that's something I always think about and what I don't allow people to simply delete all their posts from my site by request because it damages those discussions. Like you said, Matt, send me a handful of things, if it's sensitive, if it's personal information like SitePoint does I'll definitely clear that out, if it's a picture of you I'll clear that out, those sorts of things that are sensitive and personal I'll definitely get rid of those and I'm willing to be flexible and listen if you're reasonable. But I'm not going to delete all the content or somehow give you some sort of export of it which I can't even do as a poor programmer, non-existent programmer. So I guess that's kind of rambly but I mean, Matt, what do you think about the data liberation, data portability things, and then how it will work with a structured community like a MetaFilter?
Matt: Yeah, I mean I’m right there with you on I don’t want holes in thousands of discussions, so I’ve never allowed people to delete their entire profile. We have offered and we do both on Fuelly and MetaFilter you can export all your data yourself just so you have a copy of everything you’ve ever said or done or did; Fuelly there’s like this miles per gallon tracker, it’s social, that I’ve built, and you can get all your data in a CSV file and you can pop it into Excel or Excrate so you can do anything you want, because a lot of people said sometimes you excel, sometimes I don’t want to see it on the Web, with MetaFilter you can download every comment you’ve ever written in this gigantic text file that sometimes is several megabytes for people, and I’m cool with that, I mean you own the words you said, and I explicitly give copyright to people so that I’m beholden to just display and not do anything else, I’m not trying to make a buck off what they said. But, yeah, the whole being able to delete, I know Digg was talking about the last time this was sort of a giant meme kind of going around blogs a couple years ago, Digg was saying that they were going to allow you to like erase yourself from Digg and there would just be like random Digg user would be the username on anything you ever did if you decided to bow out, so that the discussions were still there but identity basically went out the window to one generic account. And so if people did that en masse that would kind of ruin the community, but they wanted to give people a way out. And I was like that’s kind of a pretty good way to go, but yeah, I’m more of like, yeah, things should stay where they’re at, but to give people the chance to download everything they’ve ever done so if they want to do anything with it they’re more than welcome to.
Matt: Yeah, I mean I'm right there with you on I don't want holes in thousands of discussions, so I've never allowed people to delete their entire profile. We have offered and we do both on Fuelly and MetaFilter you can export all your data yourself just so you have a copy of everything you've ever said or done or did; Fuelly there's like this miles per gallon tracker, it's social, that I've built, and you can get all your data in a CSV file and you can pop it into Excel or Excrate so you can do anything you want, because a lot of people said sometimes you excel, sometimes I don't want to see it on the Web, with MetaFilter you can download every comment you've ever written in this gigantic text file that sometimes is several megabytes for people, and I'm cool with that, I mean you own the words you said, and I explicitly give copyright to people so that I'm beholden to just display and not do anything else, I'm not trying to make a buck off what they said. But, yeah, the whole being able to delete, I know Digg was talking about the last time this was sort of a giant meme kind of going around blogs a couple years ago, Digg was saying that they were going to allow you to like erase yourself from Digg and there would just be like random Digg user would be the username on anything you ever did if you decided to bow out, so that the discussions were still there but identity basically went out the window to one generic account. And so if people did that en masse that would kind of ruin the community, but they wanted to give people a way out. And I was like that's kind of a pretty good way to go, but yeah, I'm more of like, yeah, things should stay where they're at, but to give people the chance to download everything they've ever done so if they want to do anything with it they're more than welcome to.
Patrick: Yeah, to the point what Digg has discussed doing, that sounds a little like what I allow people to do with their accounts when people say delete my account, I’m angry, you removed one of my posts, I hate you forever, I want to go. I’ll say, well, I can’t really — we don’t really delete accounts, that’s like a policy, we don’t delete accounts, but, I can close your account and what I mean by that is I will wipe your profile clean, they’ll be no more data on there, you won’t have your email or whatever, and I’m going to change the username to something generic like username12345. And that way those contributions can all be tied to a single account rather than having guest contributions which just gets messy, with the database and with organization and with searching you kind of lose all that history in the recordkeeping. So I kind of allow that as sort of a go-between to be flexible between, okay, I’m not going to do anything with your account, I’m not going to close it at all, I can’t do anything, and straight out remove the account and mark all the contributions as just the generic guest, so that’s kind of what I do. And I think it’s safe to say that SitePoint has pretty similar policies to what Matt explained, right, Sarah?
Patrick: Yeah, to the point what Digg has discussed doing, that sounds a little like what I allow people to do with their accounts when people say delete my account, I'm angry, you removed one of my posts, I hate you forever, I want to go. I'll say, well, I can't really — we don't really delete accounts, that's like a policy, we don't delete accounts, but, I can close your account and what I mean by that is I will wipe your profile clean, they'll be no more data on there, you won't have your email or whatever, and I'm going to change the username to something generic like username12345. And that way those contributions can all be tied to a single account rather than having guest contributions which just gets messy, with the database and with organization and with searching you kind of lose all that history in the recordkeeping. So I kind of allow that as sort of a go-between to be flexible between, okay, I'm not going to do anything with your account, I'm not going to close it at all, I can't do anything, and straight out remove the account and mark all the contributions as just the generic guest, so that's kind of what I do. And I think it's safe to say that SitePoint has pretty similar policies to what Matt explained, right, Sarah?
Sarah: Yeah, exactly, although I deal with it in the same way that you do, yeah, I’m happy to remove people’s information, I’m happy to change their name, I’m happy to change their password so that they can never login again and they can pretend we don’t exist, but yeah, I won’t remove their posts either. If I was to do that then not only would there be holes all through the database but, yeah, anyone that got angry with me would be able to come and signup again and we don’t allow people to do that either; those two things are kind of related actually, aren’t they (laughs), anyway, yeah, our policy’s the same as yours.
Sarah: Yeah, exactly, although I deal with it in the same way that you do, yeah, I'm happy to remove people's information, I'm happy to change their name, I'm happy to change their password so that they can never login again and they can pretend we don't exist, but yeah, I won't remove their posts either. If I was to do that then not only would there be holes all through the database but, yeah, anyone that got angry with me would be able to come and signup again and we don't allow people to do that either; those two things are kind of related actually, aren't they (laughs), anyway, yeah, our policy's the same as yours.
Patrick: And, you know like Matt said it’s a key difference there for people to understand because I think people are sometimes concerned about who owns what they post online, where the communities like mine with SitePoint and with MetaFilter, and I think the vast majority of communities, but you should always read their terms of service, is that you’re giving them the right to display that information, usually in perpetuity, as long as they want, maybe with some exceptions but you’re not signing over the copyright. And whenever big community sites try to sign over a copyright it never, never works well, it’s always a big PR disaster and no one’s ever really happy with it once they find out, so for that reason a majority of online communities, I find, will simply say it that way, you’re giving us this non-exclusive license to display what you contribute, and otherwise you own it, you can do what you want with it. So, excellent, I’ve really enjoyed the discussion and I thank you guys, both Sarah and Matt, for coming on and joining us for this episode. So let’s go ahead around the table and tell people where they can find you online; Matt, why don’t you go first.
Patrick: And, you know like Matt said it's a key difference there for people to understand because I think people are sometimes concerned about who owns what they post online, where the communities like mine with SitePoint and with MetaFilter, and I think the vast majority of communities, but you should always read their terms of service, is that you're giving them the right to display that information, usually in perpetuity, as long as they want, maybe with some exceptions but you're not signing over the copyright. And whenever big community sites try to sign over a copyright it never, never works well, it's always a big PR disaster and no one's ever really happy with it once they find out, so for that reason a majority of online communities, I find, will simply say it that way, you're giving us this non-exclusive license to display what you contribute, and otherwise you own it, you can do what you want with it. So, excellent, I've really enjoyed the discussion and I thank you guys, both Sarah and Matt, for coming on and joining us for this episode. So let's go ahead around the table and tell people where they can find you online; Matt, why don't you go first.
Matt: I’m at Metafilter.com, also I run Fuelly.com, which is two L’s, ly.com, A Whole Lot of Nothing is my blog, on Twitter I’m @mathowie, just my name phonetically, Matt Haughey, and I think that’s about it. Oh, I guess my last name, Haughey.com.
Matt: I'm at Metafilter.com , also I run Fuelly.com , which is two L's, ly.com, A Whole Lot of Nothing is my blog, on Twitter I'm @mathowie , just my name phonetically, Matt Haughey, and I think that's about it. Oh, I guess my last name, Haughey.com .
Patrick: Yeah, that’s H-A-U-G-H-E-Y.
Patrick: Yeah, that's HAUGHEY.
Matt: Yeah, that’s why there are points to everything I do.
Matt: Yeah, that's why there are points to everything I do.
Patrick: Excellent. Sarah?
帕特里克：太好了。 Sarah?
Sarah: Yep, you can find me at Sitepoint.com in the forums, and on Twitter @ilovethehawk.
Sarah: Yep, you can find me at Sitepoint.com in the forums, and on Twitter @ilovethehawk .
Patrick: And Sarah curated the new community powered book from SitePoint, Thinking Web: Voices of the Community, which you can pick up at Sitepoint.com. Ralph Mason, one of the authors, was actually our guest host on the show last week for episode 120. And even though she wasn’t here, Venessa Paech wanted to mention the conference that she’s organizing with Alisa Michalk, they’re co-organizing Swarm Sydney which is an upcoming online community focused conference in Sydney Australia on November 10th; Swarmcity.com.au, for details. And, finally, I am Patrick O’Keefe, I wrote the book Managing Online Forums and you can find me on Twitter @ifroggy, i-f-r-o-g-g-y. You can follow my usual co-hosts Brad Williams, Louis Simoneau and Stephan Segraves; @williamsba, @rssaddict and @ssegraves respectively, and you can follow SitePoint @sitepointdotcom, that’s SitePoint d-o-t-c-o-m. Visit us at Sitepoint/podcast to leave comments on this show and to subscribe to receive every show automatically, email podcast@sitepoint.com with your questions for us, we would love to read them out on the show and give you our advice. The SitePoint Podcast is produced by Karn Broad, thank you for listening and we’ll see you again soon!
Patrick: And Sarah curated the new community powered book from SitePoint, Thinking Web: Voices of the Community , which you can pick up at Sitepoint.com. Ralph Mason, one of the authors, was actually our guest host on the show last week for episode 120. And even though she wasn't here, Venessa Paech wanted to mention the conference that she's organizing with Alisa Michalk, they're co-organizing Swarm Sydney which is an upcoming online community focused conference in Sydney Australia on November 10th; Swarmcity.com.au , for details. And, finally, I am Patrick O'Keefe, I wrote the book Managing Online Forums and you can find me on Twitter @ifroggy , ifroggy. You can follow my usual co-hosts Brad Williams, Louis Simoneau and Stephan Segraves; @williamsba , @rssaddict and @ssegraves respectively, and you can follow SitePoint @sitepointdotcom , that's SitePoint dotcom. Visit us at Sitepoint/podcast to leave comments on this show and to subscribe to receive every show automatically, email podcast@sitepoint.com with your questions for us, we would love to read them out on the show and give you our advice. The SitePoint Podcast is produced by Karn Broad, thank you for listening and we'll see you again soon!
Theme music by Mike Mella.
Mike Mella的主题音乐。
Thanks for listening! Feel free to let us know how we’re doing, or to continue the discussion, using the comments field below.
谢谢收听！ 欢迎使用下面的评论字段让我们知道我们的状况，或者继续讨论。
扫一扫
6496
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
