Update (rather lengthy, sorry!)
My thanks to all those who have taken the time to provide their input. The feedback has been most useful.
I did consider the possibility of restricting comment length about six weeks ago but could not find a satisfactory way of doing so. My search came up with two WordPress plugins that perform this function. One is a non-starter because it gives no indication of the limit nor does it inform the person typing how much of the limit has been used. All it does is reject the comment and display a notification that the limit has been exceeded after the comment has been submitted. It’s too late then!
The other plugin doesn’t have this shortcoming but, in order for it to work, everyone who wishes to add a comment would need to register with the site and login before doing so. This is something I would prefer to avoid if possible (even though it would reduce the amount of spam and remove the possibility of duplicate usernames).
Another problem, common to both plugins, is that the maximum comment length would be set globally and, as can be readily seen in this post, there are times when longer comments are necessary and/or desirable. Also, as has been pointed out in one of the comments below, a character/word limit can be easily circumvented by posting two or more comments, so what is the point in having one.
To be honest, I’ve no desire to restrict the number or length of comments, nor the content (within reason). Prior to the start of lockdowns, I was happy for comments in a particular post to have around 25% of the total not being directly, or only slightly, connected to the puzzle under discussion, with perhaps the occasional excursion of up to a third if the topic(s) were likely to be of interest to a reasonable number of visitors. Since March I have considered a third to acceptable more frequently (as a maximum, not a target!), again dependent on the likely interest.
I have now had time to analyse the feedback that you have kindly provided. Rounding off the figures a little (because I have had to try and interpret what people were saying in some cases), the view regarding off-topic content and its moderation has been as follows:
There should be stricter control of off-topic content – 5%
There should be less control of off-topic content – 5%
The balance of on- to off-topic content is about right as it is – 55%
Neutral or view not expressed – 35%
So, it looks as if things are generally fine as they are but a few improvements could perhaps be made. One point mentioned several times is to put off-topic comments, or parts of comments, inside square brackets – [ ] – so that those whose only interest is in the puzzle itself can more easily ignore off-topic content. Another is to provide a reminder about this, the number/length of comments and the amount of off-topic content on a regular basis. I will cover these in a separate post.
A comment yesterday has caused me to post this explanation.
Back at the end of March when lockdown began in the UK, I decided to relax my policing of off- or nearly off-topic comments for two reasons. Firstly, I felt it was better for people to be exercising their minds (and fingers) rather than just vegetating and, secondly, I foresaw a need for more social interaction on this site to compensate for the lack of it in real life. The latter has certainly been welcomed by a number of people around the world.
I anticipated an increase in the number of visitors during the recent restrictions but the number of new participants has surprised me a little and so the increase in the volume of comments has been greater than I expected. I can understand your reaction at having to wade through 100+ comments on a post. I read every comment that is added to the site (along with many more that end up in the spam queue for moderation) and will readily admit that I too have become rather frazzled by the increase during the last six months. People having more free time, or working from home etc, has resulted more, and in some cases somewhat longer, comments.
As with everything else that is going on, I am sure we will get back to something close to normality eventually, but I cannot see that being anytime soon, alas.
If you would like me to revert to a more stricter policy on off-topic comments please let me know.
As a regular reader and (very) occasional commenter I think you’re getting it right. Keep up the good work
Nope, it’s all good. The more the merrier.
One possibility would be to have a box with a maximum number of characters. As a setter, I skim most of the stuff, interesting though much of it is.
I do like to read all comments for curiosity and it is good that there are more. However, some posters have taken to writing essays everyday, taking us through their progress through the crossword.
Therefore I agree with Bradman that there should perhaps be a word limit. This would make it easier for you and others who like to skim through all the views.
Thanks for asking Gaufrid
This is my first ever comment, but having both had more time to do cryptics and discoverd fifteensquared during lockdown I’ve found it a great help in improving my parsing and to have a good, friendly atmosphere. So I’m pretty happy with it as is, though I should qualify that by adding I concentrate on the Independent, which I know gets fewer comments than some of the other puzzles.
I confess that, as a long-time user of 15-squared (from which I have greatly benefited), I have stopped reading through all the posts and have only contributed brief comments on the prize puzzle where in the US I can be an early participant. I’m more likely to join the discussion on the FT. Ars longa, vita brevis.
You say “I can understand your reaction at having to wade through 100+ comments on a post”, but no-one *has to* read them all. They’re welcome to skip or skim-read some of the replies. Or ignore them all if they just want to read the blog for the parsings.
I rarely comment as I usually do puzzles later in the day, and by then (say the first 20 or 30 posts) most things have been covered. YMMV, but it’s all fine by me.
I’m a long-term lamenter of the departure of the Guardian blog from its initial intentions. It is crammed full of diary entries and irrelevant asides. When anything worth discussing does arise, the comings and goings are quickly derailed by someone popping up to set out in tedious detail the geography of their solve or to head off on some oblique tangent “inspired” by a word that happens to have appeared in the crossword. My view, Gaufrid, is that you should be rewarded for all your excellent hard work in maintaining this site by respect for the site rules. It would be nice if people were to reflect before they posted whether their comment was worth putting before yourself and the blogger of the day. I would personally welcome more ferquent interventions to put people back on track. Thanks again for your work.
No problem w/ a character limit.
I am certainly seeing an increase in comments to my blogs and, for me, it is a modest, manageable and very welcome increase. I have never seen anything close to a hundred comments. So, as far as I am concerned, all is well.
It’s only the Guardian threads that get so many posts. The others (such as EV) often receive lamentably few. I tend to skip the long posts unless they form part of an interesting discussion about an aspect of clueing. It’s true that many of them are a blow-by-blow account of the order of clues solved, new words learned, which clues the poster struggled with etc. Nothing wrong with that per se – this is a crossword site after all – but there are only so many free hours in one’s day!
On the other hand, I see nothing wrong with a few words thrown in as an aside, such as “she’s my favourite singer” or “he’s my favourite composer” as an addendum to a comment on a clue with a musical answer. It adds a touch of human interest, and if it provokes a discussion, the posters concerned can always be redirected to the General Discussion thread, which is under-used at the moment.
Perhaps a word limit is the answer, one which is generous enough to allow people to express themselves clearly but which also curbs the worst excesses. Even though it would probably get this post removed…
Gaufrid, thanks for all the thought you put into this site. I think you’re right to allow a bit more leeway in these strange times, but the occasional gentle reminder about keeping posts short and to the point would still be good.
Firstly, many thanks Gaufrid for your sterling work in running and monitoring this site.
There was a suggestion (sometimes adhered to by posters) that somewhat off-crossword-topics should be put in square brackets. For those just wanting to discuss the nitty-gritty of the crosswords, these could easily be ignored. If you don’t wish to add a word limit, perhaps it would be worth restating this suggestion (or make it a rule).
I had a look at the recent Vlad blog and the overwhelming majority of comments are short and reasonably on point. And anyway, what’s variety if not the spice of life? If I find a comment dull or verbose I just skip it.
If there’s anything I’d like to see less of, it’s people whose only contributions to the forum are criticising other members
Gaufrid, I’ve worked in IT for over 30 years so have some inkling as to the hard work that goes into keeping a site like this going and I’d like to say a massive thank you for everything you do. This forum has been a real intellectual lifeline during this difficult time. Maybe once some form of normalcy returns we’ll see a reversion to mean for the number and content of posts?
If this weather continues, I shall have to limit my cycling, which could cause more posting to 15/2.
I’m sorry that one of the unintended consequences of COVID has been to add to your already significant workload in keeping this site going, Gaufrid. I don’t mind a brief off-topic comment, in fact I welcome it, as long as it’s part of a post which discusses the crossword, but if a stricter policy and perhaps a word limit is going to make things more manageable for you, I’m happy to fall into line.
I second the above comments and thanks for your work for the site. As a small personal contribution, I’ll try to keep my comments more succinct.
I agree that a character limit would help. The occasional off topic comment can sometimes be quite interesting, more so than a long explanation about which clues went in first. I have been coming to this site for a couple of years, and rarely posting. I’m really grateful to Gaufrid and the bloggers, it has enhanced my enjoyment enormously.
I’ve always thought that what makes this site so attractive and entertaining is precisely the mixture of, on the one hand, debate about the working of clues, and on the other, semi-related comments such as personal recollections, or little-known facts about people/things featured in the crossword. The personal comments (like Eileen’s on Wednesday about her son auditioning for Adrian Mole) help create a sense of community, which posters often say they appreciate.
I know that on the Guardian pages the number of comments has often been very high in recent times. But any arbitrary limits, on either size or number of posts, would I think be too much of a blunt instrument. Occasionally a long post can be required to make a perfectly valid point about clue types or workings.
Gaufrid, many thanks not only for all your work running this site, but also for raising this point in such an open and considerate way.
Those of us who say that there should be no limits on the number of Comments or the wordage in a Comment can think how we can help the busy Gaufrid. As of now he is the sole administrator, I think. Imagine how many Comments he has to go through to ensure that there is nothing inappropriate (apart from having to eliminate any spam). It will be worthwhile for a few members to volunteer and take care of this aspect by sharing the various topics that we see in the side bar. All higher decisions wrt important aspects of the blog may rest with Gaufrid himself. Gaufrid, I have always appreciated your work and I think I have expressed my gratitude to you in private mails.
There seem to be 2 issues, off-topic comments and over-long ones. I am often guilty of the first, but try to put my ramblings in square brackets, so that the reader can skip them easily. As to the second, verbosity is hard and unpleasant to try to curb.
Thanks for the site, Gaufrid. It is a welcome (and free!) lifeline.
Combining a couple of good ideas here, would it be possible to set a limit on how many words are not enclosed in square brackets (probably not, I suppose)? This would mean one could easily skim to see what points have been made about the crossword itself. I have found it tough going lately, because I don’t like to comment until I have read all the previous comments. This is so I don’t (unlike some others who obviously don’t read other comments) repeat points already made (although I may mention agreeing/disagreeing with a particular point of view where there has been or could be contention).
It is of course only the Guardian blogs that we are talking about. I do the puzzle every day, but I gave up a long time ago contributing to the thread, mainly because it had become so bloated and full of irrelevant comments about personal details or experiences and other random stuff that had little or nothing to do with the crossword. It also seems to have been taken over by a small number of posters who make multiple comments throughout the day. My concern is that this is putting off newer solvers from contributing – one of Fifteensquared’s strengths is that it is an ideal forum for those learning the dark arts, and seeing a cliquey, often off-topic thread every day is unlikely to encourage them to offer their own comments. So I for one would welcome a return to the original (and still current) site policy on keeping to the matter in hand.
And yes, General Discussion is there for those that really want to go off on one.
Thank you for this. I would be in favour of a word limit. Mostly that would not change what people write but it might make the more prolix consider their priorities. If we wanted to post poems as I dud recently (and worried they might be too long) we could put in a couple of verses and a link.
Many thanks for all you do! It is a great site and I gave learned so much from it.
Thanks Gaudrid. I can only warmly echo the expressions of gratitude for your management of the the site, your moderation and your helpful, clear and timely interventions in discussions.
I had noticed the increased traffic, and understood it just as you did as a symptom of the times, and a sign that the site is offering fellowship, diversion, learning and space for expression.
As a long term visitor and very occasional poster, I have found some of the comments over-done or occasionally a bit less polite than I’d like(not just the long ones, nor the personal diversions, some of both of which I have enjoyed, though I think some are less interesting). This may be an inevitable reflection of the general emotional climate. It’s what any community has to face at the moment. It will just go with the territory of offering the valuable community resource you do.
I’ve been impressed by the way many questionable/off-colour contributions have been politely ‘contained’, sometimes challenge, some with humour in the discussions. I find it cheering that the discussions usually proceed with good nature and relevance.
I think that, for now, a friendly request on each blog for care not to make over long or disrespectful posts would be enough. If the workload for you is overwhelming, though, then I’d support a word limit – which I’ve now well and truly broken, sorry!
Many thanks again.
….Gaufrid, of course. Ageing fingers on an iPhone….sorry!
I would welcome a reversion to a more strict policy on off-topic posts, and a limitation on verbose posts (and multiple verbose posts). Whether and how best to do this I leave to Gaufrid, to whom thanks are due for his continued hard work.
Like K’s Dad @22, I have given up posting here recently. I think a character limit would be helpful, maybe for a trial period?
And thanks Gaufrid for your hard work!
I’m new to cryptics having been an innocent by-stander for 30+ years. The Lockdown (which apparently we must always capitalise as if to emphasis the incompetence) has given me the time to learn and a desire to connect with others.
I’m guilty of a few “off-topics” which like others I put in [] but I enjoy reading the comments of others very much – in fact, it has helped me connect to kindred spirits in “T.L.”
I also dislike the current TL;DR culture – writing is NOT a set of bullet-points on a PowerPoint; you are supposed to engage through form and content and I think this site strikes the balance between informative and entertainment very well.
The occassional “oy – keep it relevant, matey” is fine and I think is generally well (and self) policed.
But more importantly than ALL of this, I want to say “thank you” to Gaufrid and everyone on this community. You have given me a new joy in wordplay and cryptics; one I first attempted (and failed at) 40 years ago as a schoolboy on a choir trip to Wales (it rained) and which I am now sure will stay with me for the rest of my days. Thank you – the people here have been a deity-send in T.L. and I will always think of you as “friends.” David.
Kathryn’s Dad @22 – “My concern is that this is putting off newer solvers from contributing” – for me, quite the opposite. What I like about 225 is the fact that we’re seeing some of the personalities behind the contributors.
If I want “the answers,” I read the top and go no further. As I get busier again, I suspect I’ll have less time to contribute. I often thoroughly enjoy delving into the “off-topic” conversations. Given many of us are used to 200+ emails a day and can quickly scan for the relevant bits and discard the dross, I genuinely don’t think that censorship is the way to go.
I don’t comment as much as I used to a few years ago, mostly because more often than not I don’t have anything very interesting to say, but I always enjoyed the digressions and side discussions and would be sad to see them go.
I assumed we are reporting on our solving experience to provide appreciated feedback to the setters. Is that true? If so, are we providing the right info?
We could reduce the word count load on Gaufrid by taking the thanks to setter and blogger as said and not having to apologise if someone else posts while we type or if we make a typo.
This thread though does seem appropriate though to say thanks to Gaufrid, the bloggers and the wider community for helping me get great enjoyment out of a hobby that would otherwise be closed off. I’m glad of a bit of side chat to get a better idea of the people behind the usernames and for a little post-solve diversion.
I’m a long time visitor and occasional contributor to Fifteensquared. On a typical day I tend to drop in just once, when I’ve had enough of that day’s Guardian puzzle. I’ve gained a lot from it over the years and still find it worth coming most days, mainly for the parsings that have stumped me. Thanks very much to Gaufrid and the bloggers for keeping the site going. Thanks also to (almost) all the contributors for keeping it intelligent and civilised on the whole. That’s rare in online discussion forums.
These days, however, I mainly just skim the comments that have been made up till the point when I arrive, looking especially for the regular contributors whose observations I have learned to particularly respect. Increasingly, if it’s late in the day, the words ‘wheat’ and ‘chaff’ come to mind; some people will have made multiple comments, with most adding little value, in my opinion.
I’m with beery hiker @30, who says he doesn’t comment much, mostly because he doesn’t have anything very interesting to say. I’d encourage some of our more prolific contributors to self-censor rather more rigorously, to ask themselves – before hitting the keyboard – whether what has come into their heads is really worth saying.
I’ve already had my say, but would like to thank Van Winkle @8 and Kathryn’s Dad @22 who express my concerns with the current situation more eloquently.
I get that some like to hear about contributors’ past lives and experiences, but I feel it should be the realm of ‘social nertworks’ rather then 225.
Firstly many thanks to Gaufrid for maintaining the site. As for the nature of the blog I’m in beery hiker’s camp, having given up commenting because I haven’t much to add but still enjoying the diverse nature of the blog and welcoming anything that encourages conversation, even if they are virtual. If a word limit made your job easier Gaufrid I’d support it.
I suspect most people don’t read the guidelines before posting the first time (I didn’t and ended up being reprimanded by someone who likes the rules to be adhered to) so the suggestion of a gentle occasional reminder of the guidelines is one worth considering.
Thanks again for your work.
Coming back here again today, I went through the newer comments. I was intending to say something like what Rishi @19 said – perhaps the success of 225 means that one moderator is not enough, and that the load should be spread a little. Guafrid, you do a fantastic job, but is it time to delegate a little?
Me @35 – *Gaufrid – apologies [proofread, Tim!]
Thanks for all your efforts Gaufrid.
Some people may only be interested in forensic analysis of the puzzles, but there should also be room for social interaction and occasional fun! I see no need for a word limit. It’s not difficult to skip any post that you don’t want to read. I
I enjoy solving puzzles from a variety of setters and I’m grateful for the work of all the various bloggers. I find some people’s comments more interesting that others, but I try to respect the fact we’re all different and not to criticise. My vote is for greater tolerance.
Huge thanks to Gaufrid, as so many have already expressed. Like Penfold above, I’m another who appreciates the more liberal approach.
I am happy with where we are at present, I’m sure we will adjust further as the current situation changes.
I am a bit puzzled by some of the comments. I am one of the newbies to cryptic crosswords and have recently started to contribute to the blog comments. I have not seen anything about rules – is that the site policy? When I started reading the comments I noticed that many said how much or not they liked the puzzle how difficult they thought it and listed favourite clues, LOI etc. So when I started so did I. Others commented in more detail on particular clues and would often start a conversation about how the clue was worded and perhaps be amended/improved/not allowed. Some of the comments above state that people should not comment unless they have something interesting to say. So should comments about difficulty etc not be included?
And I often like the interesting asides people add – as do the bloggers.
I find it interesting to see what people say – and if the comment is too long / not interesting to me I just skip it.
I see no need for change.
And Thanks to Gaufrid
I am happy with it .
My Tuesday FT is one of the less-visited blogs, which is fine. Double-figure posts are always a thrill.
The puzzle is usually straightforward and attracts a select coterie – hi, guys, you know who you are – of regular posters plus a slowly-growing bunch of new solvers, typically from overseas which is of course also fine and vaguely intriguing.
I do slip the occasional aside into the blog but, for what it’s worth, my personal rule is that I only go seriously off-topic once the discussion of clues and parsing seems to have abated, say by late (London time) evening.
When I do, I will usually apologise specifically to Gaufrid, to whom, once more, our heartfelt thanks for this major contribution to or our gently sophisticated pastime.
I’m an infrequent poster here but a keen reader, and I would be sorry to see the interesting digressions and occasional flights of fancy censored.
I don’t mind people commenting on difficulty: it is useful (if sometimes humbling) to know whether others found particular puzzles/clues fiendishly hard or ridiculously easy, or fell into the same bear-traps that I did. (Mind you, it is much easier to say “this puzzle was too easy” than to admit that “I found this too tough.”)
This discussion has caused one of the frequent commenters on the Guardian blog to reconsider his continuing contributions – see here (#5). I am not sure that this was necessarily Gaufrid’s intention when starting this thread on Saturday.
I can understand why some people find the growing volume of comments daunting and off-putting. Equally I can understand and empathise with those who find aspects of the discussions welcoming. I join with others in appreciation of Gaufrid’s efforts in keeping this site ticking over, and in wishing that we could alleviate the extra burden imposed by the increased traffic in the last few months. But should the present discussion become instrumental in causing people to drop out of contributing?
People come and go for various reasons. I was a sporadic poster for many years when I was still working, as I seldom got enough time to finish a crossword and would sometimes end up completing two or three on my days off, by which time it was too late to comment. When I took a redundacy package and retirement beckoned, I intended to spend a lot of my time on bike trips to some of my favourite parts of the country, and it was only when the effects of the pandemic on such things as youth hostels and train services began to bite that I became a full time solver and regular contributor below the line. If/when things return to something like normality, I reckon my appearances btl would become rarer.
I think it would be detrimental to introduce a character limit, and increased policing of off-topic discussions and of contributors with a tendancy to prolixity might have the effect of making the site appear less friendly than at present. I’m with those who have said they would prefer to leave things as they are, but perhaps there needs to be an occasional reminder about going off-topic, with a link to a place, such as General Discussion, where it would be apprpriate for such posts to be redirected.
I think having people realize that long posts are self-defeating because many others skim/skip them is a better solution than character limits, but that leaves open how to convey that.
When commenting on clues, I’ve always tried to stick to what is ingenious or flawed about them, rather than what I like or what my journey has been, because, I was thinking, who cares?! (But I’ve never had the nerve to say it so bluntly) It seems this sentiment has been expressed by others above, so I don’t feel so alone.
There seem to be several issues here, mainly focussed on the length of comments and their relevance to the puzzle.
I believe it was Alan B’s comment @58, on Friday’s Vlad puzzle that prompted Gaufrid’s explanation, which he posted on Saturday. I think Alan’s comment was concerned with the effect of the number and length of the comments on his own contributions, which have always been careful and considered. “(I have been caught out a couple of times very recently and have felt the need to acknowledge that I have repeated or missed something.)”
We seem to be caught in a kind of vicious circle.* The number and length of the comments is a deterrent to a careful reading of them, which results in the repetitiousness that I, as a blogger, confess I do find rather irksome. From time to time, I find myself saying, ‘Why haven’t they read the blog / not noticed that this point has been made umpteen times already?’, which I realise is not always reasonable, considering the amount of stuff there is to navigate by the time they have the opportunity to read it. (* I see now that Dr. WhatsOn has made a similar point above.)
From the comments above, it seems to be that off-topic content is not the major cause for concern for most (but not all) contributors. Speaking for myself, I’ve always welcomed the opportunity for some personal input from myself and others. In these strange times, this site is one of the few opportunities for social interaction that we have and, with more time on our hands, the inclination towards lengthy posts is understandable.
Perhaps if we all adopted the use of square brackets for ‘asides’, it would be easier for solvers who visit here only for the sake of the puzzle to skip over what to them seems trivia. The wide variety of comments above reflects a general air of goodwill, I think, and a genuine concern for the well-being of all contributors. I share the general feeling of dismay at losing any of our contributors. I’m aware of several that we haven’t heard from lately -and it’s good to see some of them back.
I delayed responding to Gaufrid’s post until I’d had a chance to see how today’s blog would go. Ironically, this is the first time for ages that I had no typos – and I didn’t need any help in parsing today – so that cut down the repetition in the first bunch of comments. 😉
Thank you all for your constructive and good natured reactions to Gaufrid’s post and, of course, I add my thanks to him for his wise, diplomatic and indefatigable management of the site.
i
I decided to stop posting a few weeks ago. I thought the increase in comments was becoming tedious and I was skipping most of them.
I found the site both useful and enjoyable in the past,and it certainly improved my solving. I was as guilty as anyone of going off topic so I can’t criticize those who do the same, and I’m not sure how a limitation on the length of contributions would work.
I still do the Guardian crosswords and consult the blog which I still find useful but I rarely read the comments now.
I would like to thank you,Gaufrid, for the work you continue to do and the help you continue to give. I hope those who continue to use the site find it as useful as I have done.
There are too many comments on this post; I can’t keep up!
This is one of the few sites I’m aware of where the comments section is consistently worth reading. As far as I’m concerned, you’re steering an excellent course. Thank you for all your work!
A quick scan of recent pages suggests that the major increase is pretty much restricted to comments on Guardian puzzles; the others seem to be as per normal. Might a cap of, say, 30 comments per (Guardian 😉 ) post do the trick? Keep up the good work, Gaufrid!
Re self @23: Apologies for the typos: typing late at night
and on my phone…
Having read the new posts in this thread and also today’s Guardian blog, I wanted to affirm that on the whole I very much enjoy the kinds of discussion that go on here. Thinking about the length question, one of the issues is probably format. I find the longer posts don’t look long at all on my laptop (where I am now), and here on the laptop the post numbers also show. With that that ths scroll funciton, it is relatively easy to navigate the discussion, or get back to the blog. On my phone though, where I normally do the crossword and read the blog, the longer posts look really long (ca. a whole screen), and that, combined with the lack of post numbers, can make it difficult to navigate back to the blog to find a clue, or to scroll through the comments to a specific point if I want to comment on/reply to something. I would be happy with a word/character limit, as I said above, but I suspect that I would not see the need if I were only looking at 15^2 on my laptop.
It appears that another contributor has been discouraged from posting. I’m fairly new here but was this really the intention? It seems ironic that a thread entitled “the increase in comments” is giving rise to a further increase in comments, not just here but on other threads as well.
An observation: the current idea is that off-topic posting should go to the general comments thread but that’s not easy to find / know about so is under used. Would it make sense to try an experiment? Pin a weekly “The ‘a bit off-topic’ Thread” for the music recommendations etc. Have some house rules at the top to stop it getting too out of hand. Then the blog comments may be more concise / useful and the off-topic thread could be a little easier to police. Splitting it would also enable the delegation of comment checking?
Gaufrid, just a couple of brief points. I think if we all stick to the rules we will be fine. However, it has been noted that not everyone knows what those rules are so it might be helpful to reiterate them and maybe post them somewhere we can all refer to them if we are in doubt.
Rigorous use BY ALL of square brackets and the General Discussion page should result in less off topic but still very interesting material ending up on the main blog.
In order not to spoil a very valuable asset we should all act responsibly, but please do not leave the site permanently. I am sure this is NOT what Gaufrid wishes to happen.
Finally G very many thanks for all your hard work
Can’t see the problem really – no-one’s being forced to read all the comments. It’s a great site (many thanks, Gaufrid) and I’d say it’s fine as it is.
While no-one is forced to read all the comments, it helps to do so to avoid needlessly repeating the same points. I like to do it for this reason, so I personally have found the increase a little irksome at times and, occasionally, a reason not to bother adding the thread. I wouldn’t like to see posters discouraged from posting though. I think the square brackets ([]) convention for posting asides not directly related to the puzzle is a good idea and would help if more people were aware of the convention. I’m not sure the word limit idea would work, as posting multiple times is the obvious way to circumvent the limitation.
I find it a shame that some posters have chosen to stop posting because of this thread. It is only a discussion and any changes to site policy haven’t even been implemented yet. I find it more distressing that some posters have chosen to stop posting because of a perception that they’re being ignored (which I can understand, but think is more perception than reality).
Thanks for all your efforts, Gaufrid, and for those of all the bloggers.
I echo Phitonelly@55’s comments.
I generally can only do the crossword in the evening, so everything worthwhile has generally been said by the time I read the blog, so don’t contribute often. I do always try to peruse all previous comments, which some posters seem disinclined to, and that aspect is the main irritant. As to diversions, it’s fairly easy to mentally filter any of lesser individual interest. That said, diversions shoudn’t be discouraged – they add personality to the site. The only thing to be definitely discouraged is unseemly spats and touchiness.
Particular thanks to Gaufrid for his unstinting management.
phitonelly @55, I agree that when you come to blog and there are already 80 odd comments, it can be a deterrent to posting – at least to those of us who like to read others’ posts before adding our own.
But perhaps that’s a good thing? The result is that threads which are already very long are prevented from getting even longer, while those with fewer comments may attract more.
Maybe that kind of natural balancing-out effect lessens rather than increases the need for top-down regulation?
Beobachterin@50: on my (prehistoric) Android, I can toggle into a readily scrollable/navigable mode (in the Firefox app) that looks exactly as per the PC, but with Lilliputian font, of course.
I agree wholeheartedly with phitonelly & nametab @55 & 56. There’s no need for anyone to stop posting just because Gaufrid has raised the subject.
If you choose to revise your reasons for posting, fair enough. But I for one am always pleased to read what others have to say. (There are others who just write what they want, without seemingly being bothered about whether it has been raised previously – presumably by the same token, they never come back to see if there’s been any response.)
Encouraging the (fairly recent?) convention of using square brackets for (slightly) off-topic posts seems like a good idea. Could the site policy be amended to include this, and could the policy as a whole be brought to contributors’ attention from time to time (as some people have expressed ignorance of it)?
SPanza @53 – sorry, should have included you @59, when saying I agree wholeheartedly!
As one blogging on this site from its very start, I remember how neildubya who started it all was really delighted when for the first time ever there were twenty comments on a blog and posted a comment to celebrate it, if I recall. Moved on a lot from then and from strength to strength, but a gut feeling is that comments should not be discouraged or shortened unless they were totally irrelevant to the crossword, which I think very rarely happens. And I add, as others have said, my praise for Gaufrid’s wonderful management of the site.
As usual I agree wih Eileen @45. It’s not the off-topic comments that I find irksome (just as well as I am guilty of posting them) but repetition whether posters have read the previous comments or not. I’m not a fan of lists of favourite clues either.
As a late solver I was dismayed to find 115 comments by the time that I had finished Pasquale’s contribution last week. As someone said, it took almost as long to read the comments ss it did to solve the puzzle.
My son is a regular solver who now only comes to 15sq for post-solving help with parsing when necessary and has been put off the comments by their number and repetition.
Many thanks to Gaufrid for the hard work and good- tempered contributions.
Thank you to Gaufrid for giving us the space to comment. I have read and considered what was said on Friday’s Vlad and yesterday’s Vulcan blogs, as well as the preceding comments on this thread, about the length and nature of the living organism that is our Guardian 15² forum. I do intend myself to try to be more succinct in some of my comments as a result of reading what others have said. But I just want to reiterate how much I appreciate the variety of perspectives and the general sense of camaraderie that characterises our online international community. I truly value and admire what Gaufrid does as site administrator, and all the work of our setters and bloggers. I sometimes get my knickers in a twist about repetition and the occasional lack of courtesy as I do think posters should consider what the blogger and preceding contributors have already said, even though I know I have sometimes been guilty of that myself. I feel saddened particulalry if people are put off engaging on the forum for any reason, though hurt feelings and any sense of being undervalued would worry me the most. As personal circumstances change though, it is inevitable that some of our contributors will come and go. If this site has helped some folk to connect through the COVID pandemic, I am glad. That is certainly true for me. We all have our own different styles and for me, inclusion, tolerance, connection and gratitude are important aspects of human connection. Despite my own frailties and blind spots, I would like to improve my own application of those valuable principles as best I can here on 15².
[And then I saw repetition in my own comment, thus proving my point about my own flaws.]
Julie @63, I completely agree with your comments about the site, Gaufrid’s dedication, the contributions of others and the camaraderie between all of us solvers.
I probably agree with the other 62 comments as well but I couldn’t be bothered to read them.
I have read most of the comments above as I actually had some spare time today. I rarely (almost never) read all the comments on the blogs, so it doesn’t worry me if posts are long or off-topic.
I usually only read through some comments if the blogger was unable to parse a certain clue. When I find the parsing in the comments, I stop reading the rest of the comments.
My own posts tend to be short and to the point, mentioning which clues I liked, which ones I could not parse, and which ones I failed to solve. I do it for the setter, not the readers of the blogs. Readers are free to skip my posts!
I agree with a couple of people who posted above that perhaps Gaufrid might consider getting some people on board to help him with moderating?
Thank you, Gaufrid, for all that you do – and the bloggers as well. I learnt so much about solving cryptic crosswords because of this site. It is an excellent resource for new solvers.
Trouble is that on the Graun thread we often encourage new solvers to come here-maybe they just read the blog and keep quiet.
If loads pf people have already commented I like to limit mine to something like “what Eileen said”
Long live this thread. the blogs gave been first rate
Oh, so many people with so much to say. What a waste of crossword solving time
Sorry if I am repeating here but life is too short to plough thru all 68 comments above.
1. Please do whatever is easiest for you. You have taken on a burden, which I for one would not want to stretch too far.
2. I would prefer a word limit.
3. As a compromise to 2. Is it possible to initially show only the first so many words. Something under say 70. Then give the option to read more of really long posts in the often unlikely event (at least for me) that our appetite has been whetted?
As a long time reader of the blog, but a rare contributor I would like to say that my husband and I do the crossword after breakfast every day and have usually finished it by 10ish. We then turn straight to “the blog” as we call it for explanations and comments from both the blogger and others. E.g today we had never heard of Bo 16D so it was interesting to see other’s comments.
After that we rarely look at it again during the day.
I do like the idea of just seeing the first part of a blog as in @69 above, but realise that might prevent some interesting comments being seen at all.
So overall I think keep it as it is, and the numbers will fall back post Covid, but the site will have gained some new contributors and maybe welcome back some others.
Thanks Gaufrid.
Character limit encourages brevity and clarity: the personal side will still shine through
Thanks Gaufrid, I share your concern.
Gaufrid – thanks for the update, analysis and proposed actions. That all seems sensible to me.
Thanks Gaufrid for the thoughtful way you have approached this thorny problem (and more generally for sustaining the site over the years). I entirely agree with your conclusions.
Like some other long-time followers of the blog I’ve found myself contributing less in recent times. This is partly because I tend to tackle the crossword late in the day, when others have already said a lot. It may be my imagination, but I think we have also collected more visitors from other time zones, whose contributions appear at different times to those of the ‘home’ crowd. I hasten to add that this cosmopolitan aspect is one of the most valuable and endearing features of the site, adding greatly to the social value to which many have referred.
There is no black and white solution. I would greatly miss many of the explorations of non-crossword arcana and personal experiences. Perhaps all we can do is encourage people to exercise restraint and avoid prolixity (as I’ve tried to do over the years). Less can be more.
Many thanks, Gaufrid, for the prompt, fair and expert way you have approached this issue, sought our views and presented your conclusions. I agree with practically everything g larsen has said in his comment (@74), and I could not have expressed it any better.
The only change I would suggest is some system to ensure that two or more people do not have the same user name. That would just be too confusing. I am not in favour of square brackets for certain types of comment. The fewer rules the better, in my opinion. I am aware that, as I no longer post very frequently, you may feel my comment has less weight, and that would be fair enough. I do lurk though! And I’m ready to pounce when a linguistic comment is required ….
Oh yes, forgot. Many thanks to Gaufrid and, indeed, all the bloggers on this site.
Oh yes, there was one more thing. Is it possible to enable the use of letters from foreign alphabets on these comments? I’ll go now.
Anna @76-8
Nice to know you’re still there in the lurkosphere. Regarding foreign letters, Eileen posted this a while back which I find really useful.
(Though it doesn’t cover Greek/Cyrillic/IPA phonetic symbols. Also I’m on Windows; I understand it may not work on an Apple device.)
Gaufrid – many thanks for your analysis and conclusions – happy to agree.
You beat me to it, essexboy! Glad you’ve found it useful, as I have, addressing things to my family in Denmark. (But I, too, of course, would love to a find a site with Greek script!)
I come, as so often, extremely late to the discussion, having read through most of (but not all) the previous contributions. So, apologies etc etc.
I confess I tend to enjoy the vicarious sense of community I get from reading what may become known as [square bracketed material]. I don’t enjoy the occasional carpings and whingings- particularly when they’re directed against the setters.
And (I never thought I’d say this!) I’ve come round to wishing for a Thumbs-up facility, so that one could acknowledge somebody’s contribution without having to add to the load of comments to say so.
Well said, Gaufrid! I loved all your percentages!
Anna@76, 77 and 78, I can’t tell you how happy I was to see your name pop up. I have missed you greatly from the site. It pleases me to know that we still have a connection.
Gert@81, thanks for your summary of how you see things too. I always appreciate your contributions.
essexboy@79, the term “lurkosphere” gave me a big smile! Thank you for that reminder about the foreign letters.
Gaufrid and Eileen, your infinite patience and wisdom make you both legends in my book.
And a public thank you to Alan B for initiating a robust discussion that was both timely and necessary – I feel it has made us all more aware of our responsibility to be courteous and careful in terms of our membership of this cryptic crossword community.
JinA: Thumbs up!
Yesterday’s Brummie comments were about 25% down on average so maybe at this rate we’ll soon be at Indie/FT levels 🙂
Two issues raised incidentally here:
Not having to log in to the site is an attractive feature that I am often grateful for, particularly when not using my usual device. The extra spam must be a considerable nuisance, and yet at the user end we are never troubled by it. Thanks to Gaufrid for that invisible benefit, as well as everything else.
I am one of a few who somehow gets away with using their (common) given name. Occasionally another James pops up which gives me a moment’s anxiety if it’s a comment I disagree with or in an uncharacteristically positive tone. But I don’t think I should have any proprietorial rights over my name. Here’s a suggestion: there could be a site policy that if you want to use a common name you should add an identifier, as many already do. This being pointed out to new posters who use a bare name could hardly give offence, and there would be no argument about who got there first. A note to that effect could even sit next to the box where you enter your name.
James @1above, as you may know, I used to post here just as ‘Tony’ but had exactly the situation you mention arise, where someone wrote to me, surprised at a comment ‘I’ had made, so I decided to use my full name. Others, of course, may prefer to use a distinctive pseudonym.
(I assume I’m writing to the James I also know by other names anyway?)