Daily Archives: June 5, 2006

The Sourcing Innovation Blog Comment Rules

The purpose of the comment feature is to allow for a multi-way discussion that can enrich the usefulness of the blog. Comments should add or complement the content being presented, not detract from it or steer the user off on unrelated tangents. Although commenting rules of etiquette on the ‘Net should be well understood by now, there are always those that seem to forget. As such, these are the commenting rules of Sourcing Innovation.

  1. No spam, where spam is defined as the posting of advertisements, abusive, unnecessary, or content-free messages. This includes posts whose sole intent is to advertise a(n unrelated) product or service.This does not mean that you cannot advertise an article, product, or company in a limited fashion (as I permit in my guest posts), but that you must do so in a tasteful and relevant fashion (with no “marketese”) in a comment that is on the topic of, and adds to, the content of original post. Spammers who violate the rules will have their e-mail address added to the Sourcing Innovation Spammers Wall of Shame.
    • This also means that comment-bombing is against the rules.
  2. No churlish or boorish comments, be civil.
    This does not mean that you are not free to point out negatives with ideas, solutions, etc. discussed on the blog, just that you should maintain a decorum of respect while you do.
  3. No personal attacks on an individual or a vendor.
    This does not mean that you cannot criticize a company or their product, but, as per the previous rule, it must be done fairly, and in a civil (or satirical) tone.
  4. This also means there are no direct attacks against anyone who posts or guest posts on the blog.
    This does not mean you are not free to disagree with the blogger, including the editor, including a comment to the effect that his or her opinions are dumb, and that you would not trade a molding loaf of bread for 99% of their outstanding stock, but keep it civil and focus on the issue, not the person.
  5. No impersonations. If you want to comment anonymously, that’s fine, but don’t break any of the rules.

The editorial staff reserves the right to change or update these rules at any time as well as the right to edit or delete comments if they are determined to be spam, impersonated, disrespectful, or purely speculative without substantiated evidence or evidence of an honest effort to discover evidence to back them up.

This being said, the editorial staff makes every effort to insure that every comment that follows the rules does not get taken down, even if the editorial staff disagrees with those comments.

Please note that comments will not be posted unless you provide a valid e-mail address and validate it. The first time you comment, you will be sent an e-mail to the address you provide. If you do not confirm your e-mail address within a timely fashion, the (inactive) comment will automatically be marked as spam and the editor will not review it. Only (pending) comments (that do not violate the rules above) from submitters who have confirmed their e-mail address will be posted.

Astute readers may notice that some comments appear faster than others. This is because some submitters* have been added to the list of approved commenters that do not require moderation.

* If the editor knows you or the editor notices that you have made multiple comments that have contributed to the content of the blog, you may be added to this list, which is entirely at the discretion of the editor.