Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down on Comments – Should I Keep Them? A Poll

You never know, I might do more polls after this – I have an idea! – I could have a poll to find out what to have a poll about!



Filed under Blogging, Polls

50 responses to “Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down on Comments – Should I Keep Them? A Poll

  1. ecojon

    Tbh I would rather something was done about the trolls who park on the site and never ever add anything of any value and I immediately think of carson and alex.

    • Jono

      I totally agree, and in addition, some of the “better” commentators are often to easily riled and simply add fuel the nonsense. I find I’m checking on this site less and less because of that.

      • ecojon

        @ Jono

        Well I wouldn’t place myelf a one of the ‘better’ commentators but I am one who is a regular poster who wants the site to remain as a place where open debate is encouraged.

        However I do get riled – it is up to others to decide whether I do so too easily or not. However some days it is incessant nonsense and bile that is spouted from a small core of so-called Rangers ‘supporters’ who have no wish to debate but only to disrupt.

        Unlike yourself I will stay and not let them drive me and other decent poters, from any club or none, away.

    • MrNice

      Key issues :
      is this free to post site (no real registration) good ones, bad noes, newbies, trolls et al ?

      Or MUST to login first – and then its a club of sorts. Login forces id – stops me posting as someone else, limits newbies, but then its more controlled.

      In a club you can be suspended for a while, or ever. In a free-for-all its everyone for themselves.

      Would be nice to limit posts/day as it can get overloaded with junk (and xmas videos – grrr, easter will be worse ? etc ), and then the gems are missed.

      Happy time of year! 12 days till mid-winter…. ooohh cant wait.

      • MrNice

        Well done Paul fab site – reading for ocer year and stll loving it,

        I think allowing nesting of comments beyond 3 is the key issue, it allows flame-wars and turf fights…

        Maybe think about just 3 levels only,

        – reply
        – retort

        No more than that, as this allows more opinions to surface, beyond 3 and you seem to be in the handbags-at-dawn, she-said,he-said, oh-no-you-didn’t,oh-yes-he-did malarky. Simple config change, or poll on how many levels folks want.

        Its cold out, but by the moon is close venus (3 fingers – to left), mercury (1 hand down – left) and saturn (1 hand up – right) – catch it this morning if you can.


        • ecojon


          I hear what you say about the three levels but what happens when a small organised group fills the three-levels meaning no opposing view?

          Perhaps I am misunderstanding the three-levels thing. I think one of the easiest, quickest and non-intrusive ways is not to allow sign-up with a free email address. If you are a genuine poster you have no problem using your ‘real’ email address. Seems to work well on a lot of other sites.

          • MrNice

            fair point ecojon, if you want your post read, to dont post at bottom, but at the highest point with a reply unfilled, etc etc

            This were does not allow own-plugins with anti-trolling multi-poster-avoidance, ie you get one post per thread, rather than 20 each and its conker times and big-bill always wins (william the conkerer k-tish!). Nice if members got 2 two posts.

            this were evolution will kick in somehow.

  2. mick

    the thumps up and down are a good way of feed back to views and comments and is a way of expressing opions lately the blog as decented in to whatabout you am as guilty as most in it but there is just no reasoning with some on here lets have a poll and comments on the goings on of alex and adam and carson the sevco we do have history but not much to debate other than msm points ,also lets have a poll and comment on a banning system so that if we go of topic on non topic issues then we get banned we could have a yellow and red card system or similiar as there is a lot of academic people from all around the world that last thing we want is for them to be picked on by the commentors and for them to think were all mad

  3. PAUL
    you can do anything you like as long as you continue
    to have a site to which I can log into and follow as this
    is the first time I have ever used the laptop for such things
    and hope to continue doing so and read and learn every single day
    it has given me some thing to do every day since I retired so please please
    continue as since I have stopped all the daily paper in SCOTLAND I need
    the site more and I can still get all I need about CELTIC and other honest
    sport and your most of your american sport
    GOD BLESS you and your family and keep up the great work you
    are doing for us all
    I receive your emails at this moment

    abbaj hail hail

    • Hetraq67

      Totally agree ,John stopped reading Scottish dailies many moons ago .I thoroughly enjoy the debate and variety of views expressed on Pauls blog.I may not always agree with posters but I am always informed and often entertained Keep up the good work

  4. mick

    โ€œSome Rangers fans believe the clubโ€™s history, which would end with liquidation, must be protected but there is a shameful part of that history which they should want to forget and any newco should make it clear a new beginning means exactly thatโ€ฆโ€

    James Traynor, Director of Sevco Communications
    sevco became the tribute to the rfc the worlds most bent club ever

    • Mike

      mick, see previous statement – you are a troll who has long ago lost the right to be given the right to be listened to.

      • ecojon


        You sound like some of the objectionable ones who have infested us recently in terms of you appear to think you make the decisions as to who has the right to post.

        Paul is the only one with that power. As to mick, he may be many things, but I certainly don’t see him as a troll and there are often nuggets in what he says.

        So do not attempt to remove my right to decide I want to read what mick says because that is what you are doing. I decide who I listen to not you!

  5. I voted for a thumbs up. I go along with John Quail. I learn so much from the various bloggers, It has become daily reading for me. So this is a good
    opportunty to wish Paul and his family a very,very merry and peaceful Christmas and to thank him for the opportunity he has given us to speak our minds. I reckon Paul enjoys what he is doing, but, as I am a retired journalist, I also realise the hard work that he puts into his articles. And remember fellow bloggers there is no monatary gain for Paul. Maybe that will change in time as advertisers become aware of the pulling power of this site. I hope so. And a merry Christmas to all the other bloggers.

  6. nickmcguinness

    I’d rather bans were handed out to obvious trolls.
    And for the posting of endless numbers of music videos.

    • Mike

      By that I guess you mean the obvious troll called mick

      • Mike,

        If you don’t like mick’s posts, just ignore them. His style is not to everyone’s taste (as can be said about mine, and yours too possibly.) mick has been a long time contributor and even though the occasional burst of exuberance goes over the score, he normally reins himself in. The blog would be a poorer and less diverse place without him.

        So leave him be.

        If he annoys you that much, skip over his comments.


        • Mike

          good point, well made!

          As someone who prides himself on keeping a balanced point of view, it appears I have let others get under my skin – I appreciate your blog too much to let my comments irritate you Paul, so I will try and restrict myself to commenting to the point of the post…I just wish other would do the same.

        • mick

          thanks paul for your support in mike abuseing my comments am thick skined and and can handle it easy a have great experiance in the blogging thanks to the blog this year and can cope well with it .a am going to try to keep to topic and stop enggeing with trolls as it just makes it worse

    • ecojon


      I would have thought that you might have oberved that mick posts the vids to break-up the organised trolling attack. These aren’t individual but and organised little gang of facists attempting to disrupt and destroy the site because it is challenging certain agendas.

      Lots of very strange people posting here in recent times and almost none of them wanting to debate but just to attack those who do debate and put up guest posts. They really are having a right go at the site and it has escalated as the Flotation got nearer. I actually wonder how many are Ranger supporters or are actually getting paid to disrupt.

  7. Budweiser

    thumbs up/down for that

  8. zoyler

    Is the voting by PR or FPTP?

    Seriously I don’t mind that much one way or the other as long as you keep up the good work up

  9. Well, early exit polls suggest that the thumbs will stay, which has surprised the pundits (ie me!).

    However, we need to await the results of the Austrian jury … come in Vienna, Vienna, can we have your votes now please…

  10. And I should have said that the kind words here, and on other posts, are greatly appreciated.

    As I have said repeatedly, it is the community of comemnters and readers which makes this what it is.

    I think it helps too that it it is mine, and not a collective, nor an effort to “change the world”.

    And I think it is a lot better to avoid the hassles that advertising on the site would bring (and if asnyone tells me there is advertising alreday, then I don’t see it as I am running Adblock, and if there is advertising, no one has sent me a penny for it!)

    • Mike


      I am hugely appreciative of your posts and look forward to your new dissection every day of a public comment.

      I have however, become increasingly fed up of the pathetic comments of the likes of mick and indeed the blind side of the usually reliable ecojon.

      Adam, try to actually engage in the argument rather than just giving us your point of view – it would be nice if just one time you gave us an oipinion rather than a diatribe.

      Rant over, Paul, I find your blog to be the best thing online I’ve ever read – if only some of the commenters were as good!

      • Adam

        I dont really understand Mike. If im giving you my point of view, is that not the same as my opinion ? The problem I have is that people just seem to want to attack all the time. Very rarely does anyone ask what my views are. Instead they take the lazy option of thinking they know what my views are.

        For anyone that has asked my view, then ive gave it, if i saw the question.

        • Mike

          Adam, I apologise if I’ve not read your comments correctly, but I have to say I’ve increasingly become used to glossing over your comments, as I could pretty much take as read what they were saying.

          I will make sure I read every word you write from now on, but I have to say that the comments I have read so far do not lead me to think there has been much true cogitation going on other than a defend Rangers at all costs thinking.

          All I’m asking is that anyone commenting on Paul’s blog uses as much of their own critical faculties as Paul does.

          • Steven brennan

            Paul was trying to tell you in a polite manner to rein your self in.
            Everybody who posts is entitled to their opinion, and should be accorded some civility. The reason I like this site is most people Behave like adults, MOST of the time.
            So off to bed and get out the right side tomorrow.

            Just remember we are having a party in the chamions league

            • Mike


              point taken: I will shut up until I have an actual point to make. Thanks for giving me a reality check!

        • ecojon

          @ Adam

          I know I said I wouldn’t respond to your posts again which bts is not the same as ignoring you because I still read them.

          But you are doing it again and you can’t see it – You should post your own views instead of posing questions of other people. If you state your view then people will know it and either respond or ignore it.

          And it’s not a question that people are taking the ‘lazy’ way – mot people have seen you in action and formed an opinion about you and some have no desire to get into one of your convoluted arguments which usually end with you re-writing history.

          I thought, given your skills, that we might see an objective analysis of the accounting techniques used in the Flotation but you don’t seem to have done that. On the Darkside websites the deafening silence and lack of any critical analysis of the Flotation document is utterly amazing.

          If you were more careful about how you ‘use’ other people’s comments especially when you take them out of context then you might find the ‘attack’ level would drop from red to amber although I have to say I doubt if it will reach green ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Adam

            My opinion is that it is not restricted to Rangers fans who spout nonsense and bile on here and i therefore object to your accusation as such.

            As for wading through the numbers, i have commented on wages, expenses and also pointed out that trying to get a reasonable view of things from a 3 month snapshot is almost impossible. I dont think the prospectus tells us very much and perhaps the reason im not dissecting it piece by piece is that it means nothing to my decision to invest. I will put some money in as its my club and i know i will never see it again.

            Any Rangers fan painting a tremendous picture of how good the results are and pointing to any positives is in the wrong.

            Any Celtic fan painting the end of the world doom and gloom picture of how bad the results are and pointing to any negatives is in the wrong.

            The harsh reality is that the snapshot is not sufficient enough to make sold and sound calculations.

            In my opinion. ๐Ÿ˜‰

            • ecojon

              @ Adam

              You are the numbers man and it may well be that your opinion (not advice of course) if seen as considered and balanced may help Bears to reach a concluion although we have always said it will tend to be an emotional one.

              But the snaphot could eaily have been for much more like 6 months if Sep, Oct and Nov had been added. Why do you think they weren’t included?

            • Adam

              Knowing the way Deloittes work, it will probably be down to a timing issue. The report will have taken time to write and it will depend on when Deloittes went in to do their piece.

      • ecojon

        @ Mike

        I really am surprised at you totally ignoring the supposedly Rangers-supporting trolls who do so much to disrupt this site. They are the real problem.

        I don’t have a blind side and if you look at when I lose my cool you will see that it is invariably after a sustained troll attack. You might also have failed to observe that a lot of these troll attacks are aimed at mick and myself.

        Sometimes I lose my cool at Adam and I can’t really explain myelf without making very personal and hurtful comments about him so I will desist on that. Adam isn’t a troll and indeed, has declared against one of the Rangers groups whose members troll this site in a little pack.

        I have tried to explain to Adam why and how he creates ire but he either refuses to or is unable to grasp what I am saying. And I make no comment about Adam’s beliefs as he has a right to them and I actually agree with some things that he posts. But he is bloody infuriating as well.

        As to the vids I repeat again that Mick uses them to break-up the impact of the troll attacks. Yea p*sses me off too but it’s the trolls that are causing it not mick.

        I have pledged to myself to ignore the trolls – will I? We’ll see. I certainly hope that Paul starts to take action against them to preserve the site.

  11. Dhougal

    Paul ,i never use th thumbs thing ,rather comment . But check every day for an update . Keep up the good honest work and have a merry xmas

  12. This comment was left by hawkeyethegnu on the poll itself. I thought it worth sticking on here too.

    Please leave the thumbs up and down. Your comments page will end with, instead of the voting system , many, many posts just repeating the same opinions over and over again and readers/voters will more often than not feel they need to add/endorse certain viewpoints, that they either agree/disagree with. Also there are posts that get put up where you just like to say you appreciate or not, like Mick’s video clips or the ongoing ‘in’ jokes and quips. In my humble opinion you run the risk of cluttering your post area to the point where it becomes a sort of cyber rabble, like trying to listen to every conversation in a busy pub all at once. Just think if even half the votes were converted into comments like, “I agree/disagree” or “I enjoyed that” or “that was funny”, how much time and space that would take up.
    No don’t change the voting system, a lot of the time I just read and if there is nothing I feel I need add or argue against then I vote or not accordingly and it is a system I do appreciate.
    Thanks for asking us though.

    • ecojon


      I think that is a very useful post especially about the cyber-babble. I had never thought of that before but a really valid point.

  13. Night Terror

    I’m against thumbs in order to prevent subsequent comments referring to the thumb count of various posts.

    A reduction in the number of comments on thumb counts and trolling would be welcome.

  14. TheBlackKnight TBK

    Personally I think the “reply to” is a bad idea.

    It allows trolls or persons with a particular agenda to monopolise the blog.

    Referencing date and time and poster (as was done successfully on RTC) would be a better option IMHO

    • ecojon

      @TheBlackKnight TBK

      I can see the advantages in that as it can be difficult keeping track when posters jump-backward and I do it myself. Might keep things more logical by tying actual developments on the thread to actual time. And anyone who goes off-topic badly can be readily identified and sent to the sin-bin ๐Ÿ™‚

      • TheBlackKnight

        good point but perhaps for the less forensic minds the post by post (ie no reply) is a lot easier. That way you can look out for salient points or posters of interest rather than wading through ‘tit for tat’ /ad infinitum/ circular arguments many seem to have…… Oh and it also helps to pin down certain posters who choose not to answer a direct question instead of claiming it being being lost in the ether or for them to decide which ‘easy’ questions they choose to answer to suit their particular stance……

        as an example (soon to be lost in the ether)………………

        We can argue about rules/ regulations etc all day …… no-one will win.
        We can argue what ‘assets’ or good will were sold …. no-one will win.
        We can argue about who owns what and where and when…. again no-one will win.
        We can argue legal and moral standpoints etc all day ……no-one will win.

        These will always be entirely subjective points without the salient facts.

        Meanwhile the mantra (aided and abetted by the SMSM) continues…. “then, now, forever” blah blah blah

        Rangers 1872 lasted for 140 years. The life and times of Rangers Football Club, formed in 1872, were celebrated at the weekend by those who refuse to believe they are gone.

        That 140 years held an impressive history of achievement on the field, very much less so, off it.

        Rangers Football Club, formed in 1872 still made it to 140 years. It will not make it to 141 years. It no longer exists!

        And so…… Here is the ONE question not one of the Sevconians like or choose to answer:

        …………. what ‘entity’ (Football Club) was incorporated on the 27th May 1899 and is now being liquidated……

        The above cannot be answered without admission it was the Club formed in 1872 that was incorporated in 1899 and is now being liquidated. That would mean the current incarnation is indeed a NEWCLUB.

        Yeah………., the mantra continues……. but it should be ……………..Rangers Then, Rangers Now (In Liquidation) New Rangers from now on……

        but then again……..NOTHING lasts forever!…… does it! ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • Night Terror

      No way – that’s the best bit on the comments here – a particular argument or discussion is grouped together.

  15. bill

    Keep the thumbs, sell the comments and thumbs to some psycological research company , post the analysis of us all. Then run like f–k .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s