![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[site community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/comm_staff.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
"Named guest" commenting proposal
Hi, all! Here is the main body of my proposal for working on "named guest" commenting. I hope someone will be working on this project this summer. Whether the person chosen turns out to be me or not, I know the project will benefit from any comments people choose to make on this post.
I'd like to work on getting "named guest" commenting available for Dreamwidth. A lot of my online friends who don't have Dreamwidth accounts have never gotten the hang of OpenID and so they leave anonymous comments or none at all, which is unsatisfying for all concerned. "Named guest" commenting is a project that would have immediate utility and it would give me a lot of satisfaction to work on it.
I've been looking at Bug 759, http://dw-suggestions.dreamwidth.org/158419.html (my own suggestion), and http://dw-suggestions.dreamwidth.org/185824.html , and I'd like to combine the best aspects of the three. Here are my preliminary thoughts on how to do it and what the challenges and ramifications might be.
I can see two ways this could work. I'm leaning toward option 1 as probably easier for a guest to understand and use.
1) A comment option labeled "Name and URL" that would be used for both "named guest" commenting and OpenID. As in the second suggestion linked above, a visitor would enter their name and blog/journal URL, and if the blog or journal host supports OpenID, the visitor will be authenticated using OpenID; if the host doesn't support OpenID, the visitor will be treated as a named guest, with a pseudonym of their choice attached to the comment. I would like the entry field to have text underneath it saying "OpenID supported" or something similar. It would be nice if we could also have a row of symbols there signifying the most common OpenID hosts, similar to how Blogger does. (Question on interaction of OpenID and pseudonym: if a person fills in a pseudonym and supplies an OpenID URL for verification, is the comment displayed with the pseudonym or the OpenID? Whatever we do, we should make it clear to the commenter how it will be handled.)
2) A new "Name and URL" field in addition to the current options. This would work similarly to the option described above, but it would be a separate item from OpenID. However, I think having this listed in addition to OpenID might be unnecessarily confusing to guests who are already confused about OpenID, so if we use this option, I'd like to add a link from the word "OpenID" to the Dreamwidth FAQ on logging in with OpenIDs, and add the common OpenID site icons as I mentioned in option 1 for increased recognition. (I started to type "increased visual recognition," but I assume we'd be adding alt text recognizable by a screenreader to identify the OpenID site icons.)
1) Icons such as Gravatars and/or those monster icons that can be generated based on one's website or email address. I know someone mentioned the need to avoid basing them on email addresses due to privacy concerns, but I don't know if there is truly a privacy issue there--is the monster-generating algorithm something that someone could decrypt to arrive at the originating email address?
1.5) The ability for the journal owner to select what set of icons will be used for pseudonymous commenters (as suggested by Kat/Zarhooie in a comment on http://dw-dev.dreamwidth.org/50515.html ).
2) One thing I definitely want to include if I can is the ability for a "named guest"-level user to get email notification of replies to their comments if they provide an email address. If we provide this option, we should also provide the ability to opt out of email notification--probably via a checkbox one could check or uncheck before submitting the comment. (I'm envisioning something similar to what Wordpress blogs have.) This leads to other questions, though: how expensive would this be to offer--is this something Dreamwidth can afford to offer to non-account-holders? Also, would we offer any way for someone to change their mind and stop receiving email notifications on a given post? Wordpress does offer that, so I know it's possible, but I don't know whether it will be feasible here. It's something I think we should include if we can.
1) Should this replace true anonymous commenting? Once this is implemented, a person who wanted to remain anonymous could enter a deliberately vague pseudonym, especially if the website/email field(s) is/are made optional. Is there a reason to keep true anonymous commenting once this is implemented? (Azurelunatic pointed out that there are games that rely on anonymous commenting, which I hadn't been aware of.)
2) The starter spec states that a commenter's email address must be hidden from the journal owner. This is the opposite of what I'd have expected. To me it makes more sense to have the journal owner be able to see the email address used, similar to how a lot of blogs handle commenting--especially since the pseudonym could be changed and so an abusive commenter could change their pseudonym with each comment in an attempt to escape banning. This point is my only area of real disagreement with the starter spec. Yet I'm sure there's a reason the spec was written as it was--what is the reason? (If the email address is shown to the journal owner, we should add a warning similar to the warning shown on journals whose owner has chosen to log commenters' IP addresses.)
3) That last brings up another point: banning. A journal owner can ban an individual logged-in user from leaving comments on their journal, but cannot ban an individual anonymous commenter without banning all anonymous comments. Is it possible to ban individual pseudonymous commenters? I'd need to talk with someone with more experience to know whether it's possible to ban by email address provided, website address provided, or (least desirable) IP address. (I say banning by IP address is least desirable because I see a lot of public computer labs where the IP has very little connection to the person using the computer, and might lead to other users of the computer being barred from commenting as well.)
First, the potential negative impact: It's possible that there are currently people creating Dreamwidth accounts solely to be able to comment, who would not otherwise have Dreamwidth accounts (for instance, to comment on journals where anonymous commenting is disallowed.) If that's true, then the rate of account creation should be expected to slow after this change is implemented because commenting will be easier for non-Dreamwidth accounts. (And is that a bad thing? Do we want a high number of existing accounts or a smaller number of committed users, or something in between?) However, I don't expect it to work out that way; instead I think that by making it easier for non-Dreamwidth users to comment, we'll be fostering goodwill and making it more likely that people will stick around, see how great Dreamwidth is, and possibly create an account with the intent to start journaling here.
The potential positive impact: more Dreamwidth users getting comments from non-Dreamwidth users, and ease of use for the non-Dreamwidth users. And as I mentioned in the last paragraph, ease of use for non-Dreamwidth users may lead to more of them sticking around and creating journals because of a desire to be involved with the site.
I don't expect any negative impact on accessibility, I'll work to keep the new option at least as accessible as the current options are. I'll need to consult Dreamwidth's accessibility team to learn more about what that entails; what I know already is that it includes making it screen-reader friendly and not including any visual-only CAPTCHAs.
Proposal:
I'd like to work on getting "named guest" commenting available for Dreamwidth. A lot of my online friends who don't have Dreamwidth accounts have never gotten the hang of OpenID and so they leave anonymous comments or none at all, which is unsatisfying for all concerned. "Named guest" commenting is a project that would have immediate utility and it would give me a lot of satisfaction to work on it.
I've been looking at Bug 759, http://dw-suggestions.dreamwidth.org/158419.html (my own suggestion), and http://dw-suggestions.dreamwidth.org/185824.html , and I'd like to combine the best aspects of the three. Here are my preliminary thoughts on how to do it and what the challenges and ramifications might be.
The basics:
I can see two ways this could work. I'm leaning toward option 1 as probably easier for a guest to understand and use.
1) A comment option labeled "Name and URL" that would be used for both "named guest" commenting and OpenID. As in the second suggestion linked above, a visitor would enter their name and blog/journal URL, and if the blog or journal host supports OpenID, the visitor will be authenticated using OpenID; if the host doesn't support OpenID, the visitor will be treated as a named guest, with a pseudonym of their choice attached to the comment. I would like the entry field to have text underneath it saying "OpenID supported" or something similar. It would be nice if we could also have a row of symbols there signifying the most common OpenID hosts, similar to how Blogger does. (Question on interaction of OpenID and pseudonym: if a person fills in a pseudonym and supplies an OpenID URL for verification, is the comment displayed with the pseudonym or the OpenID? Whatever we do, we should make it clear to the commenter how it will be handled.)
2) A new "Name and URL" field in addition to the current options. This would work similarly to the option described above, but it would be a separate item from OpenID. However, I think having this listed in addition to OpenID might be unnecessarily confusing to guests who are already confused about OpenID, so if we use this option, I'd like to add a link from the word "OpenID" to the Dreamwidth FAQ on logging in with OpenIDs, and add the common OpenID site icons as I mentioned in option 1 for increased recognition. (I started to type "increased visual recognition," but I assume we'd be adding alt text recognizable by a screenreader to identify the OpenID site icons.)
Neat extras to be considered if possible:
1) Icons such as Gravatars and/or those monster icons that can be generated based on one's website or email address. I know someone mentioned the need to avoid basing them on email addresses due to privacy concerns, but I don't know if there is truly a privacy issue there--is the monster-generating algorithm something that someone could decrypt to arrive at the originating email address?
1.5) The ability for the journal owner to select what set of icons will be used for pseudonymous commenters (as suggested by Kat/Zarhooie in a comment on http://dw-dev.dreamwidth.org/50515.html ).
2) One thing I definitely want to include if I can is the ability for a "named guest"-level user to get email notification of replies to their comments if they provide an email address. If we provide this option, we should also provide the ability to opt out of email notification--probably via a checkbox one could check or uncheck before submitting the comment. (I'm envisioning something similar to what Wordpress blogs have.) This leads to other questions, though: how expensive would this be to offer--is this something Dreamwidth can afford to offer to non-account-holders? Also, would we offer any way for someone to change their mind and stop receiving email notifications on a given post? Wordpress does offer that, so I know it's possible, but I don't know whether it will be feasible here. It's something I think we should include if we can.
Points for discussion:
1) Should this replace true anonymous commenting? Once this is implemented, a person who wanted to remain anonymous could enter a deliberately vague pseudonym, especially if the website/email field(s) is/are made optional. Is there a reason to keep true anonymous commenting once this is implemented? (Azurelunatic pointed out that there are games that rely on anonymous commenting, which I hadn't been aware of.)
2) The starter spec states that a commenter's email address must be hidden from the journal owner. This is the opposite of what I'd have expected. To me it makes more sense to have the journal owner be able to see the email address used, similar to how a lot of blogs handle commenting--especially since the pseudonym could be changed and so an abusive commenter could change their pseudonym with each comment in an attempt to escape banning. This point is my only area of real disagreement with the starter spec. Yet I'm sure there's a reason the spec was written as it was--what is the reason? (If the email address is shown to the journal owner, we should add a warning similar to the warning shown on journals whose owner has chosen to log commenters' IP addresses.)
3) That last brings up another point: banning. A journal owner can ban an individual logged-in user from leaving comments on their journal, but cannot ban an individual anonymous commenter without banning all anonymous comments. Is it possible to ban individual pseudonymous commenters? I'd need to talk with someone with more experience to know whether it's possible to ban by email address provided, website address provided, or (least desirable) IP address. (I say banning by IP address is least desirable because I see a lot of public computer labs where the IP has very little connection to the person using the computer, and might lead to other users of the computer being barred from commenting as well.)
How it would affect Dreamwidth:
First, the potential negative impact: It's possible that there are currently people creating Dreamwidth accounts solely to be able to comment, who would not otherwise have Dreamwidth accounts (for instance, to comment on journals where anonymous commenting is disallowed.) If that's true, then the rate of account creation should be expected to slow after this change is implemented because commenting will be easier for non-Dreamwidth accounts. (And is that a bad thing? Do we want a high number of existing accounts or a smaller number of committed users, or something in between?) However, I don't expect it to work out that way; instead I think that by making it easier for non-Dreamwidth users to comment, we'll be fostering goodwill and making it more likely that people will stick around, see how great Dreamwidth is, and possibly create an account with the intent to start journaling here.
The potential positive impact: more Dreamwidth users getting comments from non-Dreamwidth users, and ease of use for the non-Dreamwidth users. And as I mentioned in the last paragraph, ease of use for non-Dreamwidth users may lead to more of them sticking around and creating journals because of a desire to be involved with the site.
I don't expect any negative impact on accessibility, I'll work to keep the new option at least as accessible as the current options are. I'll need to consult Dreamwidth's accessibility team to learn more about what that entails; what I know already is that it includes making it screen-reader friendly and not including any visual-only CAPTCHAs.
no subject
2) We don't provide the ability to contact a logged in commenter via e-mail when they comment on your journal. If they've got an e-mail address or if they've turned on private message, you can hit them direct, but if they don't you're stuck with commenting publicly.
Your e-mail address is your own personal information, and we generally don't require anyone to share personal information with other users in order to use the service.