The fault doesn’t lie with the trolls. They are what they are, they’ve been what they are for almost 20 years, and nothing is going to silence them or change them. They can’t help themselves.
The fault lies with Substack’s commenting system, which doesn’t allow us to block or mute them, and which nests hundreds of garbage comments underne…
The fault doesn’t lie with the trolls. They are what they are, they’ve been what they are for almost 20 years, and nothing is going to silence them or change them. They can’t help themselves.
The fault lies with Substack’s commenting system, which doesn’t allow us to block or mute them, and which nests hundreds of garbage comments underneath whatever comment has the most upvotes. It reminds me of the way the Washington Post comment sections were in 2002 (when I was a sweet summer child who still read mainstream newspapers).
I share your frustration, though. It’s clear that the comment section could be great here—there are smart and reflective people in every thread. But Substack does the standard internet thing, and drowns out every conversation with awful noise.
And SOME commenters phase back and forth from absolute logorrhea, to *sublimely interesting commentary ! Most of us know to whom I refer ! One-size-fits-all "fixes", are rarely *either. Thanks for your post.
Hmmm - so how do you decide who the "smart and reflective" people are? And would you "block or mute" anyone you decide is not "smart and reflective", does it have to be both? And is any comment made by someone you don't consider "smart and reflective" not worth reading? Or vice-versa?
As you indicate, it is barely up to the bottom level of coding for this kind of an app. It allows for "message creep" such that a comment to one user quickly drifts down queue and appears to apply to another user. My small effort at combatting that problem is to address my comments as you see above. This will not stop the drift, and the originally intended target of the comment may *never see it, but it helps a bit when some other unsuspecting commenter sees my scrap under *their last entry. With the labeler, then, they have half a chance of suspecting that the "floater" comment was not originally intended for them.
This is clearly not satisfactory. Substack takes the cheapest possible software, apparently maintains it, but only on an "as needed" basis (no upgrades or improvements) and then just allows subscribers to "deal with it". Keeps overhead down, but makes users feel as if they are in a supremely sticky and grimy comment room somewhere beneath a big city subway.
With the number of worthy writers here on Substack, the software is an insult to *all involved in the Substack "service".
The fault doesn’t lie with the trolls. They are what they are, they’ve been what they are for almost 20 years, and nothing is going to silence them or change them. They can’t help themselves.
The fault lies with Substack’s commenting system, which doesn’t allow us to block or mute them, and which nests hundreds of garbage comments underneath whatever comment has the most upvotes. It reminds me of the way the Washington Post comment sections were in 2002 (when I was a sweet summer child who still read mainstream newspapers).
I share your frustration, though. It’s clear that the comment section could be great here—there are smart and reflective people in every thread. But Substack does the standard internet thing, and drowns out every conversation with awful noise.
@Antoine Doinel
And SOME commenters phase back and forth from absolute logorrhea, to *sublimely interesting commentary ! Most of us know to whom I refer ! One-size-fits-all "fixes", are rarely *either. Thanks for your post.
One man's troll is another man's delight :)
Hmmm - so how do you decide who the "smart and reflective" people are? And would you "block or mute" anyone you decide is not "smart and reflective", does it have to be both? And is any comment made by someone you don't consider "smart and reflective" not worth reading? Or vice-versa?
@Mybrid
As you indicate, it is barely up to the bottom level of coding for this kind of an app. It allows for "message creep" such that a comment to one user quickly drifts down queue and appears to apply to another user. My small effort at combatting that problem is to address my comments as you see above. This will not stop the drift, and the originally intended target of the comment may *never see it, but it helps a bit when some other unsuspecting commenter sees my scrap under *their last entry. With the labeler, then, they have half a chance of suspecting that the "floater" comment was not originally intended for them.
This is clearly not satisfactory. Substack takes the cheapest possible software, apparently maintains it, but only on an "as needed" basis (no upgrades or improvements) and then just allows subscribers to "deal with it". Keeps overhead down, but makes users feel as if they are in a supremely sticky and grimy comment room somewhere beneath a big city subway.
With the number of worthy writers here on Substack, the software is an insult to *all involved in the Substack "service".
I agree on the dysfunctionality of this comment format which may be a major reason I eventually give up on Substack, as well ....
@SH
Sad to say, but I completely concur. I don't need to waste my time wrestling with substandard, Substack software !
@SH
Now, you *know that this comment was not issued to the last comment from e.pierce, yes ? ;-D ;-D
Oh, but I would miss you terribly - seldom have I had someone spend so much time responding to my "drivel" ...
So now that you have established that - you don't need to keep repeating it. eh?