Pseudonymous commentary online is the best! (with data)

A new post by Erick Schonfeld up at techcrunch points to some data from online comment management system DISQUS.

The take home as interpreted by Schonfeld:

According to the data, 61 percent of all Disqus comments are made via pseudonyms, versus 35 percent anonymous and 4 percent using real names (i.e. Facebook). People with pseudonyms also comment 6.5 times more than those who comment anonymously and 4.7 times more than commenters who use real names.

Okay, but what about the trolls? Disqus maintains that only does allowing pseudonyms produce more comments, but the quality of the comments is also better, as measured by likes and replies. Disqus maintains that 61 percent of pseudonymous comments on its system are positive in that regard, versus only 34 percent positive for anonymous comments (I knew it!) and 51 percent positive for comments made using real names. People who use pseudonyms post better comments on Disqus. Their comments are liked more and generate more discussion.

There you have it folks. Data to prove what I’ve maintained nearly constantly since starting a pseudonymous blog that allows anonymous commentary. And, more specifically, since I’ve started pointing out that online venues that 1) overtly desire vigorous commentary and 2) require real name registration are shooting themselves in the foot….after tying one hand behind their back.

Why do we blog, the kiss-and-makeup edition

As I have been beating the decidedly undead horse of Nature Network over their recent introspection post at the Of Schemes and Memes blog, I better take up the challenge from steffi suhr of the Science behind the scenes blog.

This recent kerfuffle (again, if you’ve missed it, good!) has – for me – just reinforced how important it is to allow different styles and accept and tolerate (blog-)cultural differences. So, in the general spirit of kissing and making up, I invite you to join in and answer these slightly different questions¹:
* What made you start blogging?
* Is a sense of community an important part of blogging for you, or do you prefer blogging ‘solo’?
* Are there blogs you never look at? If yes, why (be nice and don’t name names)?
* Who are you blogging for/who are you talking to?
* Do you think you may be getting people exposed to some science through your blog who otherwise wouldn’t be?
* Do you think any non-blogger cares about any of the above things?

My answers after the jump.

Click for Haiti

The January payout for all of the eyeballs we manage to snare here at the blog will be donated to Doctors Without Borders / Médecins Sans Frontières. It ain’t a lot but every little bit will help. I’ll do my part by trying to keep the posting rate up. If you keep reading, we’ll send a little of Seed Media Group’s cashola to where it can do some good.
DM

The #retweetFAIL

I know, I know. A diversion from our usual. I’m actually not making fun of WEb2.0AwesomeszEleven!!!w00t!!! for once.
This thought connects, however, to a frequent problem I have with software companies. See this complaint about a cockup pulled by my favorite reference manager software, EndNote.

Endnote version X2, however, pulls a Microsoft-esque blunder in screwing with one of the fundamental features dear to this user. And they have the nerve to tell others who complained that it is the user who is just not giving this kewl new approach a chance! ‘sclowns…

Now Twitter is pulling the exact same crap with their #retweetFAIL debacle.