All About Nortel - Latest Comments in A Comment Conundrum

Re: A Comment Conundrum

less — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 09:36:34 -0000

Nortel doesn't care what happened to their stock 6 weeks ago, much less months, or even 6 years ago. Mondays' "Ever forward" as spoken by the CEO is all a potential customer and/or stock buyer needs to research.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Mr Real — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 00:01:39 -0000

Nobody but you cares what happened years ago on what yahoo message board and who call you by what name back then.
it's your life, you don't HAVE to grow up, but seriously . . . isn't this story getting old?

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Mr Real — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 23:59:21 -0000

Some idiot may post something completely false, but who will take it seriously? Only the other idiots :)
I'm sure it's a pleasure for yourself or other officials to come out and clear things up every once in a while.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Mr Real — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 23:52:12 -0000

Yes, but there is very little difference between "negative" lies and "positive" lies. We have been told many positive lies in the past too, but nobody except the idiot apple cheer leader brings that up. How ironic is that? :)
I'd really rather read something more coherent on that subject.

My point was simply that labeling posts "negative" or labeling posters "negative nellys" isn't going to help anyone.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Another Nortel Watcher — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 23:30:56 -0000

Seconded. It's the same post every time.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

exnt — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 20:23:19 -0000

I propose we throw yes4aapl off the blog!

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Stan Piasta — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:46:38 -0000

Mark, I’d like to post my say about your blog because you asked for that.
Your blog is used by all players and all parties and as you see popularity of your blog is just growing and your posts are reprinted in the main stream media.
We are attracted to your blog because you are a good and very intelligent moderator.
You have shown time and time again that you can be the best judge. I don't mind, you did not post two of my posts and you were right about them.
Your blog is about NT stock as well. The stock market consist of 2 opposite forces, Bulls vs Bears. Rating _smating
Bulls were able to get 250 negative ratings against the brightest poster on yahoo NT message board 4 years ago. Yes, anything he posted looked like a crazy talk for us who just didn't see the message. I know and remember all his messages and they were just brilliant to foresee the future. If the ratings of all idiots who did not like the message and the messenger would eliminate him from the game it would be a loss.
Yes, Bulls on NT did not argue the message just the messenger, his English language skills and other technical points. He would save money for those who listen to him; all who trusted him saved money.
Bulls on Yahoo accuse him of destroying NT stock. They accuse you of doing the same here! Haha
What a nonsense. If he is so powerful why they call him an idiot all the time? If he is so powerful he would be a millionaire now. Nope He is just one of the defrauded NT shareholders same as other 30 mill Joe Plumbers who invested in NT at the top. They lost about $300 bill!
If there were any logic in such accusation he would go to any stock message board and destroy any stock and make money shorting! Let ask him if he would destroy AAPL stock?
Why do I write it here?
Because even you, Mark, are sometimes expressing your fear to be labeled by Nortel.
I say, the day NT would accuse you of misleading or bashing would be the best day of your life. You would easily win the case and get more popularity than you dreamed about.
in conclusion
Mark, feel free to do whatever you wanted on this blog. It's your blog.
If someone does not like it, he/she should leave.
We will judge you for every post you make and you can trim our posts the way you have been doing it so far. Don't fix what is not broken.
btw
Few months from now there will be no more NT stock, so what's the problem?
and as I said wait for Q3 CC to see the new and lean NT! There is no more guessing games about what Mike Z will say…on my part.
One more trading day!

Re: A Comment Conundrum

The Psychiatrist — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:59:48 -0000

Dear Mark, I think you should follow the lead of several popular websites by implementing a comment rating system where every comment can be either positively or negatively scored, and where the highest ranked comment goes to the top of the page and lowest rank comment goes to the bottom. Comments below a certain threshold, say -5, become invisible unless you specifically choose to read it. This way, nonsense comments are effectively self regulated down to obscurity.

The problem with a rating system like that,is that it eventually becomes bias and just reflects what the majority sentiment is,and just like on the yahoo board, Mark's blog has become overrun with negativity,hence most negative posts would end up being ranked high as a result.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

NT_slave — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 11:28:36 -0000

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Bo Gowan — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:42:01 -0000

What's the definition of "attempting to be factually accurate"? On the separate post about the Nortel Microsoft alliance, multiple comments from someone called "fact" (ironically) falsely claim the alliance will expire in a few months.

That comment has now been referenced as a "source" in another industry blog post: http://tinyurl.com/6zpfx3

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Spotticus — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:40:59 -0000

There is a difference between relaying bad news, and rumors, distortions and in some cases outright lies

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Tj40 — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 09:06:59 -0000

I stopped reading the comments on stories (I read the blog though) basically because the vast majority had nothing constructive to say or were off topic negative rants.

Look at the comments below - how many are answering or discussing the question you posed? How many are merely negative rants.

I would be in facour of deleting all the off topic negativity and keeping it down to a small number of on-topic discussion points.

I agree this would be a lot of work but perhaps you could enlist some external moderators?

Re: A Comment Conundrum

LongLiveDaCOE — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 06:08:47 -0000

Your wasting your of time.

AAN will soon stand for All About Nothing, because Nortel will cease to exist within a year as its pulled apart and absorbed by other companies.

Start looking for another topic Mark.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Another Nortel Watcher — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 01:05:07 -0000

I like it.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Nortelhand — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 23:18:44 -0000

Mark,
To be honest I don’t think ANN will mater that much in the next year or so. Nortel has continued to deteriorate and now the world economy is heading for recession for the next year or two. As much as I hate to say it, Nortel will most likely not be around in another year give or take, so why try and police this blog? It will be too much work, and how would you really know when someone had real solid information? I don’t think knowing that is very easy.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Mr Real — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 22:31:40 -0000

Mark, I'm sorry but I feel that this post of yours may be yet another tool out of the panderer's toolbox, if you will.
Based on how you are keeping this blog around so far, I believe that you know very well how this should be done and how you want it done!
So are you looking for confirmation?
If so, yes, you are the maverick, keep up the good job.
If not, please stop doubting yourself, you are doing just fine, let's talk about real issues instead.
Any news on the layoffs?

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Mr Real — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 22:28:27 -0000

There is nothing wrong with negative comments. Given the history, I would rather call most of those comments REALISTIC rather than negative. I believe it would be a shame if this blog was just another platform for cheer leaders to post their point of view without opposition. They already have Nortel blogs for that don't they?
I believe personal attacks and profanities should be removed, anything else is acceptable. No company has ever died from a dose or reality. NT is in a tough business, in a tough overall market and in a very tough position. So yes, it must be tough to hear some of the feedback from those who lost their best years of their careers or perhaps their life savings on it, but so be it. If I was NT management I'd listen, perhaps (not likely, but still) they could learn a little something as well.
This is very much a platform for investors to voice their opinion. I'm sure when NT stock starts hitting 52 week highs every day instead of 52 week lows, the tone here would be quite different as well. Would you then argue for censoring the cheer leaders? Somehow I seriously doubt it.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Nortel Retiree — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 21:43:46 -0000

Here's one rough rule of thumb for screening content. If the blogger's message doesn't reach a threshold suggesting the need for anger management and/or is attempting to be factually accurate, keep it. Otherwise give it the hook.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Nortel investor — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 19:29:17 -0000

Mark
This site always seems to be negative about Nortel as are the commentators. Quite frankly , it is down right depressing to read. A lot of other company's are going through similar situations out there but don't seem to have this constant negative bantering going on. There is very little news about the positives that Nortel is working on , no comments on new business opportunities booked , tecknolgy advancements or break throughs made or anything else. Always the same rant and cut up management or BOD attitude. I thought ALL ABOUT NORTEL means positives or negative comments on the progress or situations in the company.
If comments are Rude, Obnoxious, Belligerent, or non constructive then cut off the poster permantenly. There is no room for any of this in any business.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Desk Jockey — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 19:23:33 -0000

Sounds like a good idea. The idea of being able to vote up/down comments seems to work at sites like Digg, etc. but can also sometimes silence unoffensive, but unpopular, viewpoints.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Mark Evans — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:47:20 -0000

...which is why I'm pretty meticulous about comments. As a former reporter, I well aware of libel issues.

Mark

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Mark Evans — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:20:54 -0000

Thanks. :)

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Mark Evans — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:11:35 -0000

ANW,

Thanks for the counsel. One thing I have enabled is the ability to "flag" a comment. It may be one way to have the community do some self-moderation.

Re: A Comment Conundrum

dogbert — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 16:38:23 -0000

There's not point in censoring comments, we can make up our own minds what to read.

People come here to read the rumors. Everything else can be found in the press releases.

That said, unsubstantiated serious allegations pertaining to named executives or anyone else should be removed promptly. Libel is libel and even if you (Mark) don't get your ass sued, can you sleep at night knowing you may have provided a forum for the tarnishing of someone's reputation and even the destruction of their family life?

Re: A Comment Conundrum

Another Nortel Watcher — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:54:00 -0000

Mark, as I stated previously, I think you're between a rock and a hard place because censorship is bad (I don't advocate that) but allowing the trolls to run unchecked will degrade the value of the blog until the trolls are all that's left, IMHO.

I have just a couple of suggestions...

1. Don't censor content. That's a lot of work and a slippery slope.

2. Publish a very basic code of conduct and enforce it with zero tolerance. An example could be something as simple as "no profanity and no irrelevant personal attacks on anyone or any group". You break the rule and you're gone. There is a difference between 'criticism' and 'personal attack', and while it may be difficult to articulate, it is not difficult to discern.

Tough one. Good luck.