Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston

A small update on the debate re moderation of comments, as Andrew West begins to learn some of Margo's hard-learned lessons:

DUE TO THE OVERWHELMING RESPONSE, THE ONLY COMMENTS THAT WILL NOW BE ACCEPTED ARE THOSE THAT ARE SIGNED OFF WITH A GENUINE NAME -- FIRST NAME AND SURNAME -- AND WITH A GENUINE EMAIL ADDRESS LISTED.

Tony P: replying to your first point:

Ads, as announced, will be on the new site from day one. When we don't have ads from webdiarists, we'll have Google AdSense and Referrals material.

On the user statistics, that too will have to wait for the new site. I quote partially from the text of an unresolved Help ticket awaiting an answer from Typepad:

The PV counters are all still highly erratic - all following numbers from memory, so are order of magnitude rather than gospel: 7pm AEST last night (midnight PST) was showing something like 646K total to date 19K since midnight GMT - three hours later was showing 633K total to date, 4K since midnight - right now (7pm PST) is showing 655K to date and 28K since midnight ...

So, the information in the "Advertise on Webdiary" post is still the best info available right now, and cannot be improved on until we get better stats in January.

Subscribe to post / free read has been under discussion in the team since well before the break with Fairfax - and still is!

It seems to me a key problem is obviously money. At the same time trolls and sheer hate mail add to a editing workload already overwhelming and under-renumerated.

I would suggest (and please forgive me if this is just repeating what the committee already knows and is addressing)

(a) ads need to start running as soon as possible, even if only google ad sense ads. (I think advertisers need more inducement than is currently on the site, little info is given about even numbers of page views let alone a break down of audience)

(b) there must be a campaign to get the address out there, even if its only webdiary T Shirts that also raise some money.

(c) a conventional subscription service will not work but why not a subscribe to post system. Say $40-50 a year for membership and unlimited postings within the guidelines (ie no guarantee of posting anything you want, or multiple and endless postings if the policy is one (that was tried and abandoned?) of limiting the posts per day per person. As an alternative for casual users a pay as you go posting, say a $10 voucher (using pay pal) that entitles one to say 12 posts over 6 months (again provided withing guidelines)or if this is too restrictive unlimited contribtions to 12 threads across 6 months. This would cut down hate and troll posts, non-subscribers would be filtered out without the need to be read, and if they subscribed they would at least be making a financial contribution and still be subject to guidelines. At the same time readers of web diary could continue to browse as it suited them. (re my point about advertising you could have free registration for some or all sections, this would give you some reader profiles)

Hamish, David: I appreciate the point.

From the outside it looked like you got hit with a sudden decision, and had to make an equally quick decision. It was on that premise that I wrote as I did.

If in fact this was not the case, or if in any case management is certain of their direction, such contributions are merely a distraction. I wish management and Webdiary every success.

Hamish: thanks Peter. Your support, and your intentions, are hugely appreciated.

Ross Chippendale, replying to your second post. Trevor Kerr, not trying to cut in, but I would like to see some serious discussion underway on where Webdiary is going. The following is a straight lift from ‘Seattle Post Intelligencer’.

Please be sure this comment violates our Terms of Service before submitting it for review.
Inappropriate posts include content that is:

1. Defamatory or libelous
2. Abusive, harassing, or threatening
3. Obscene, vulgar, or profane
4. Racially, ethnically or religiously offensive
5. Illegal or encourages criminal acts
6. Known to be inaccurate or contains a false attribution
7. Could expose the P-I to liability
8. Infringes copyrights, trademarks, publicity or any other rights of others
9. Contains a virus
10. Violates someone's privacy
11. Impersonates anyone (actual or fictitious)
12. Deliberately disrupts the discussion area
13. Off-topic or spam
14. Solicits funds, goods or services

Explain why this comment should be removed (optional)

Ross’s fear of upsetting advertisers is, I believe, unfounded. People responsible for placing advertising check out the medium. At the moment most people looking at advertising on a commercial decision, as opposed to well-wishers, would be a bit wary. They know what Webdiary has been.

David Roffey: I realise that the management team is probably up to your necks at the moment! However I suggest that you consider switching discussion of what options you have, where you are headed — I am assuming that you want/welcome input — to a new discussion.

Alternatively, if the management team has decided on its future, tell us and we will leave it alone.

Ross your first post raises issues for discussion.

ed Hamish: The management team is fairly set on the editorial policy which Margo put in place, but we would be stupid to cut off people making suggestions without fear of favour. Forgive us if we don't jump every time a suggestion is made, because many of these discussions are multiple repeats for us, but that does not mean that we are not listening to the opinions of users. Thanks Peter.

Hey Trevor, I couldn't see a violation button on that page, or under the forums page. Do you need to post to see it? Perhaps you could explain how it works for me. The concept sounds good but if it only rejects certain words, phrases etc. then it wouldn't prevent any abuse from those that are determined. They can be polite and abusive too remember, as well as deliberately posting material they know to be fake etc. This site has been the target of such people.

Even when moderation is provided on a site there are still people who play silly little games simply to have something published that only they would look for which they can boast about to their mates in the telephone box they meet in. Or, in most cases, to themselves only.

The main reason moderation doesn't always work is that there are people who take advantage. Myself when angry for example, although not preconceived. Moderation also allows the site owner the ability to maintain standards they wish to stick to rather than allow publishing and removal which is my experience of unmoderated sites. Something offensive goes through, someone complains and the whole set of comments disappear. Anyone want that?

As one volunteer I'm happy to commit to editing when needed, or to a certain time each week or whatever within my own limits. If others were able to commit to such times and agreements as well as those that have been doing so for long periods already then perhaps the editing function would not take so great a toll of the time of those that need to be managing rather than editing. That would be up to Hamish and David I think though.

If there were enough volunteers that Hamish, David and others were happy to accept as editing for them then most of that burden could be lifted. Of course not all of us may be good at editing and may feel slighted if not accepted but I'm sure there are always tasks that can be done by volunteers that site owners may delegate, under advice.

That's the key to it I think, volunteers would need to know clearly what standards are acceptable and what is not. Disagreeing with those standards would not be acceptable to the site owners obviously. And, above all, being able to commit to times and adhere to them or at least arrange a suitable replacement.

With advertising as well the site owner(s) must be able to guarantee certain standards else advertisers have no certainty who their product(s) are being marketed to, and how.

For Peter, I couldn't agree more with what you say mate. Looks to me like you have bought in and I think you will be a big help too. Make that a second time in 50 years.

My view on the web site is that the owner(s) have, to date wanted to provide mainly a place for people to discuss political issues with little restriction. A service but also needing to generate income which is difficult as the big players don't want real opposition and will protect what they see as their patch with all they have.

Naturally they too deserve and would want to make a living providing that service, particularly given the efforts of those people behind the scenes who have done most of the work to date as well as cope with the unfortunate abuse that becomes very personal.

Clearly Margo has done much of the writing to allow the currency of political issues. Without someone where she has been, in the Press gallery, there will be a hole in the service but this can be partially replaced by the Press release idea. Of course that is dealing with acknowledged spin but we do know what sort of spin is on it before it appears here. It's no surprise then is it?

More of your views as you want Peter, they are needed.

David, the still is inspired could be cut to just inspired ie Created and Inspired by Margo Kingston

At the risk of being a pedant Still is is a bit clumsy and sounds like such inspiration could stop or wane sometime down the track.

Trevor Kerr: looks good to me. I would also exclude 'disrespectful' tags, nicknames or whatever.

The Seattle Post Intelligencer, eg here, has a different way of moderation. There is a 'violation' button with each post. The Violation page has a list of non-conformances that could justify deleting a comment.

Original concept and established by Margo Kingston.

David Roffey, almost everything!!!? This is a first in my 60 odd years! Thanks.

You're very kind, Dee, especially after the grammar in my last post. I'm not sure I'm in the right league for that, but I'll think about it.

We have someone in this thread who is good at writing... Roooooooobbbbbyyyyyynnnn!

What about something on rural health?

We need someone that's good at writing... Maaaarrgo!

Well, Robyn, CM, it's one of the things that is relatively easy to change, so keep batting the good ideas around and we'll either rotate between several or eventually settle on the best ...

Sorry C McArthur, but I don't think its quite right yet. "Inspired and made possible," doesn't really acknowledge Margo's enormous effort. "Created by Margo Kingston" is the best I can come up with but I'm not sure about that either.

Gee, I'm impressed (with myself) That's a bit like the time I rang the fire brigade to tell them about a spot fire that had broken out in the gulley and five minutes later a chopper zoomed into view. What power! I'm off now to conquer new horizons!

JHC: good point generally. One of the most-commented on (and most useful) posts in the last few months was the 359 comments on the PM's WorkChoices press release, which we put up initially as a placeholder while we awaited considered reaction - but we rapidly got lots of detailed (and considered) reaction from Webdiarists...

Peter Hindrup: agree with almost everything you wrote ... More detailed and considered response later.

Can I just put on the public record somewhere that Crikey plays very dirty tricks. They've just published a letter of mine, but scrambled the paragraphs to make me seem illiterate. So much for integrity!

CM: Quite agree - this should not look like an obit. Webdiary has been a launching pad more likely although Margo is probably not feeling great from this particular part of the launch into the next phase of her life journeys.

David: well, let's try that - after midnight on Wednesday I was just concerned to ensure that we'd acknowledged the change and to be clear that this is Margo's creation.

On the topic of important state issues consider this on the stolen indigenous wages matter.

Queensland and NSW to the fore again!

Hey Terry, couldn't agree more really. Those long exchanges are posts I generally don't read. I admit I've had several myself and felt like shit afterwards so it doesn't make me feel any better to be involved, in fact, worse as no one actually "wins" anything in those exchanges.

One suggestion on that could be for the editor to step in and ask them to take it outside the site by exchanging emails. Not publish which brings cries of censorship, usually invalidly but done in that belief. Perhaps the editor could simply suggest any further exchange be done via email and trust the people to do that for themselves rather than impose it.

Difficult to know when to do that but I believe a direct email exchange between two people would automatically tone down the abuse and allow a more pleasant discussion back on WD.

Also not all of such exchanges are bad news either and that makes it hard to decide on the merits of a post.

Maybe as Glen suggests, publish it on a separate page for those who do want to be involved or read such exchanges. Although that would include left wing rants as well as right and middle.

Clearly I don't think Howard has done much good and has taken our country somewhere it shouldn't go but balance is needed if the people are going to oppose our governments.

I also like the Press release idea. When better to review or comment on what is being done or proposed than when the government hopefully states it's intent? It would also allow those here who see through such spin to share their views before any swallow it whole. Separate thread each day or release would be good. The warning label could read

"WD advises that reading this thread may do irreparable damage to your mental health"?

Russ, isn't it wonderful that Johnny decides what we need and when? That way we are relieved of the burden of thought for ourselves. About time Big Brother was open about that don't you think?

What a ridiculous statement for him to make. When the tax base is so overtaxed that all Treasurer's in this country cannot create a deficit budget it is time for reform. Could I suggest removing the bloody GST? Now that's reform I would like for one major reason. GST attacks the poor, including those stated by Government's to be not paying any tax. They are the first to suffer with GST tax and the like.

I just popped back and saw the heading Our Founder atop Margos' photo. Jeezus guys, makes her sound like some kind of dead relic from the distant past. How about "Webdiary was inspired and made possible by Margo Kingston". Simple, true, concise.

Our Founder . . really! You may as well colour the photo sepia and draw a grey beard on her!

Oh and and Robert, do you really think the Howard Government needs Webdiary's support? I think they manage to promote themselves quite well enough. By all means tell us of the Government's good news story but dig a little deeper and I think you'll find the rot is rather systematic.

I would certainly agree that life in all spheres could be made more real by less 'spin and bullshit'.

Thanks for the editor's comment Hamish but it's a shame that you couldn't have made some comment when Glen made his outlandish statement. Or, for that matter, when that idiot made the comment I quoted below.

David: on the last point, Margo published a lot of that stuff without comment, I guess to show people what was coming in that we normally moderate. I have no comment to make on her decisions on that myself. Anyone who's had the task of trying to clear the backlog in Margo's e-mail box wades in bile and corrosion. Some of what wasn't published was a lot worse than that.

To the 20+ people who have mailed or transferred nearly $3000 to us in the last 48 hours, profuse (and humbled) thanks.

Kevin, maybe the banner for the DGPR (Daily Government Press Release) should be "The following is from [source] and WD cannot vouch for its factual accuracy or veracity. If you have questions about it's content please contact [e-mail of PR officer concerned]. WD is pleased to host discussion of this important issue."

Hi Hamish, thanks for your response.

I believe that it would be crucial that WD have a separate thread headlined “Government Press Release” in order to correctly alert readers to what they are reading.

As you know the problem is that very many Govt Press Releases make their way into ‘news’ items as fact - rather than unacknowledged as the govt. spin that they are. Govt Press Releases seem to be the stock in trade for a lazy journalists who can’t be bothered chasing stories or digging beneath the surface.

Hamish: true, but they don't have interactive audiences. Your point is taken though, and it would have to be very clear what it is.

What WD should avoid like the plague is any pretence that a Govt Press Release is anything other than what it is. No pretending its ‘fact’.
One problem that I still have with even this suggestion is that WD then becomes another forum for the Howard Govt to post it’s message. There are plenty of Govt and Liberal Party sites where these press releases appear. I’m not sure what’s to be gained by another site for these releases.

But having said that, at the very least on WD it needs to be made explicit that what people are reading are Press Releases, then they can decide if they even want to bother reading them.

Many thanks, Ross, for your thoughtful understanding of exactly what I was proposing. And me, I can't think of very much that the current federal government has done that's worthwhile, either (as my "modest proposal" made clear)... but, we ought to acknowledge same when it occurs, 'cause otherwise we're merely pretending that they're demons - a task that is, of course, only viable as satire.

And, yes Hamish, I agree, albeit I'd also want to say that Webdiary should be VERY selective about posting press releases, as otherwise it would be swamped. Mere tendentious dishonesty is not enough to qualify, methinks... such treatment ought to be reserved for breathtakingly-insulting nonsense (from whatever source), so that the PR flacks might well start to fear such treatment - and hopefully lift their game in response...

All the best.

Today's comments by the PM are a classic as to why we need WD types of sites. How dare he say this country does not need tax reform and that he'll give us "tax relief". What nonsense. Most serious commentators from all sides of business and politics have been calling for REAL tax reform for years and years (about 15 from memory).

Sure tax relief is a nice way to buy votes again but the socially responsible thing for government to do is reform the tax system, simplify, clean up, reform the inconsistencies, reduce the burdens on large and small businesses, create proper support for the disadvantaged, fix the thresholds which are based on ideas 20 years old (even with some recent politically motivated adjustments) ... the list goes on - just ask you local accountant or financial advisor.

Glen Condell, you're absolutely right. Except, you got the wrong side of politics dear.

For example, "One thing I will never agree with though Margo is your attempt to engage those on the right. I just hate their guts. I cannot and will not engage with them. People like John Smith, T Tazman, Daryl Numan, A Mills et al. I hope their children die in car accidents and their houses burn down with them in them."

ed Hamish: Wednesday was an emotional day, and a billious day for some. You're right, A, to point out that the Right have no monopoly on abuse, but wrong if you want to imply that the Left do. Please everyone, argue vehemently, with courtesy.

'The sheer volume of obscene and unreadable junk that was submitted yesterday would make the site unreadable for its designed purpose of civilised discussion on contemporary issues and politics in its widest sense.'

I agree, but that stuff has an intrinsic value. It should be put onto a dedicated page, accessible via a sidebar, so that people can see the... er, quality of right wing thought in this country at this time. Some might think the US has a monopoly on this kind of angry fascistic thought but those of who browse a lot of blogs know otherwise.

It might be ugly but it should not be buried.

Plenty of good ideas here, but it seems to me that there's an issue that hasn't, publicly at least, been canvassed in relation to editor workload.

After being an enthusiastic reader and poster through most of 2003 and 2004, this year I've found it increasingly hard to justify the time to wade through the seemingly interminable to and fro between regular protagonists minutely dissecting each others posts and 'sources' in some sort of manic internet equivalent to arguments over angels dancing on pin heads. These, often quite long, posts must take considerable editing time without really contributing much of substance to the overall debate.

A very few extra words could reduce this avalanche of spiteful verbiage. Instead of "X is a mindless cretin", use "I think X is a mindless cretin". Of course, as you type a post you know that you're expressing your opinion, and it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect that others would understand the inferred "I think" as they read your post, but so often the long exchanges seem to centre on literal readings. If the post is obviously branded as your opinion it may well prompt some discussion, but is less likely to generate the sort of endless non-arguments that we've all seen in Webdiary all too often.

And quite apart from the potential saving in editing time, it is a much more civilised way to conduct a debate. Just because our nation's leaders behave like kindergarten kids doesn't mean we have to emulate them.

Ross, excellent points - maybe the new WD could have a section for each state (Tassie gets up to a few!), in WA the DPI is in the process of further decimating regional air services and nary a whimper - rural WA? What rural WA? Who cares, "we" all live in Perth ... sick.

Worth trying the press releases. Very good idea. There are lots of them to choose from (RBA, consumers groups, health, etc). Public domain, fast, inexpensive and very much "of the moment".

Kevin, I'm with you; way too much of all Australians' tax money has been squandered by this and previous governments. A site like WD can help make them more accountable but we should not be another mouthpiece; might as well pack up and go home if that were the case.

Much as some feel otherwise a great deal of what goes on here is considered critical thought. That doesn't mean it is neutral. There is a lot of passion here about rights, truth, fairness and social justice. The Howard huggers will never like to hear the other and tend to engage poorly on the IDEAS as opposed to the "true believer" nonsense.

And, sorry, but this government isn't doing a great deal well - major negative impacts on health, education, critical infrastructure, environment, human rights, indigenous issues, work place fairness, equity, citizen rights, REAL security, serious border protection, water!, rural sector (mostly forgotten by urban centric pollies of all types but especially the Nationals) ... it is a very long list. Oh yes, and the economy? Read the fine print - Christmas is looking a bit rough ... many indicators the last three weeks (see other thread here in WD where I've tracked some of these).

But, having stated my view, maybe JHC you should do a piece on "What this government is doing well" and put it up "on the wall" here and see what others think ... would be a good discussion but let's be prepared with the data (eg, like the quality of the bodgy employment stats the last few years) - long discussion of this in the Archive. Can't talk meaningfully about "full-time" employment if we've defined it out of existence for example.

Hi all, John Henry has hit the target with this statement:

"Foolish/genuinely-counterproductive utopian crap (from both left AND right) we already have."

So does Robert, more kindly really.

I see no point in simply pushing one point of view, from either side of politics. After all as WD focuses on Feds who is critiquing the State governments? Anyone heard what Beattie is up to today? An absolute disgrace and, to me, the last step of our governments away from the people. He is thumbing his nose at the public and smiling while he does it.

Could I suggest a thread for anyone to add what they think are the best and worst aspects of Howard's reign? Add a thread for Keating/Hawke for those who see good and bad in that era for balance if you like. I dislike Howard's politics intensely but there are some things that people actually think are good. They voted him in 3 times so that must be true.

One example (I can't think of much myself) is the access to Superannuation whilst still working. That is a boon to those who are nearing retirement but still want to work part time but maintain an income level. Others may see that as bad but I don't.

It seems to me that barracking for a politicial party is really the dumbest thing any Australian can do. Does anyone here actually believe that either side has got all the answers? Does anyone here think that continually disagreeing on issues because a party supports a view is productive?

Lastly, does anyone here believe that either major party will change at all unless we (both sides of politics) demand the change as a group rather than accept them as a ruling class with mandates for everything when they win an election? In other words we, left and right and middle, have to get along as at the moment the major parties know they only have to satisfy 50% or less of us to win government.

Hamish, I think the press release idea is a winner - and I would extend it to include press releases from any number of interest and lobby groups too - Unions, ACOSS, Employer Groups, environmentalists, Think Tanks etc etc etc.

Even better if you can set the new site up in two (or maybe three) columns and post WebDiarists comments and responses on the left, right and centre of the page as appropriately interpreted by the editors and moderators. ;-)

Robert Bolser and JHC, damn stupid suggestion!! Howard’s govt has enough media muscle without the need for any for more under the rubric of ‘balance’.

Lets just look at the facts: The Howard Government already spends in excess of $100 million of OUR money on propaganda dressed up ‘government information’; there are government media spruikers in every media outlet and I don’t mean reasonable fair minded commentators but ludicrous one eyed pamphleteers such as Bolt, Albrechtson, Devine et al; the Howard Govt has stacked the ABC Board with party flunkies and mates and de-fanged our ABC of its critical faculties. The ABC has become easy listening, lite and easy ABC, which no doubts suits a Government so adverse to criticism; Howard and his board of directors use the full range of Howard Media Mates to announce new policy or run ideas up flagpoles, simply witness the sheer volume of visits Howard has given to his ex chief of staff Alan Jones and Andrew Peacock’s son in law on Melbourne radio?

Howard’s directors rarely allow themselves to be critically examined, preferring the soft interview with a sympathetic media host who bowls the questions up underarm; the Australian newspaper nationwide and the Daily Telegraph in Sydney provide an endless stream of pro govt stories and just as assiduously play down or ignore stories and issues which are critical of Howard’s team.

As I’ve said Howard does not more soft balls and pats on the back. What WD can excel at is the CRITICAL examination of Government policy with aim of making that policy better by pointing out it’s flaws and pitfalls. But it seems to be this very act of critically examining the actions of Howard’s Govt that so gets up the nose of Howard supporters. They seem to want us to take our medicine and say thank you, or at the very least say nothing at all.

WD has achieved the popularity it has because of its critical role, if it becomes another Govt media outlet I couldn’t see the value in continuing to visit.

ed Hamish: but WD is not a passive audience. What about running a Govt Press Release as it comes, designed for a passive newspaper audience, and then letting the community have fun with it? Some will defend it and some will pull it to bits. Blatant lies certainly won't work on our community, and spin will be unspun. What do you think Kevin?

Ex-hippies and old lefties like myself who have succumbed to mild forms of capitalism and benefit from it would agree with you John Henry Calvinist and there are regular calls for someone to do as you suggest. Perhaps Webdiary needs a regular contributor to present the Government's side of business in plain understandable terms and, as you say, without the "spin". Difficult but achievable.

There is one problem. Much of the government's new legislation is "faith based" and introduced with no preceeding model to demonstrate where it has been successful although there are examples through recent history where it may have not been so.

Someone presenting the government's view would have to give demonstrable examples of success without the avalanche of ideological info we receive about their policies and the so-called future benefits. This is one of the main problems I perceive of all governments. They will not tell the truth and say that most of what they do is experimental. They simply state their new policies and ram them through Parliament with their majority and expect us to believe that issues like unemployment will be shortly solved but never say, that it's only theoretical. I believe the public would accept a truthful government that proclaimed it's human fallability.

ed Hamish: I like the suggestion, despite the problems. Like everything around here (and everywhere else last I looked) someone would just have to do it. I'm wondering if I should just use Government Press Releases occasionally as a post for us to chinwag about.

So Hamish if this works your name will be in bold, and italics will be italicised, yes?

Hamish: yep, thanks. David Candy, thanks for the advice, but the 'xmp' tags don't work on typepad. So I still have to resort to clumsy methods of showing you code.

I did not intend to buy into this!

As an irregular contributor and regular reader for the past 12 months or so, and occasional visitor previous to that time, I am uncertain as to whether those running Webdiary intend it to be an expensive hobby, a business or a public service.

There can be little doubt that we need sites similar to this, especially in the present political climate. I know a bit about newspapers, particularly small newspapers, and a bit about advertising.

I have also given a lot of thought to an opinion/ideas site over the past four or five years but been put off by the fact that I could not see a way to make the project at least cover costs.

The idea of a site for letters rejected by major newspapers appealed to me, couldn’t see how it wouldn’t go well. Surely any person who felt strongly enough to write a letter to the editor that was rejected would want it to be read?

Somebody started ‘rejected letters’, http://groups.google.com.au/group/Rejected-Letters?, and proved me wrong.

If the current directors of Webdiary would/could write out a business plan — detail what the product is intended to be, club, association, private company, what are its goals, how it is to be run, — trying to run a business with volunteer labour is hell! — how it is to be financed.
Regular contributors are an essential component. Do you see them having any meaningful input into shaping the product, administration, policies?

Ditto for your volunteers.

If your readers/contributors know where they stand they know whether to do as I am doing now, or to butt out. You have a substantial pool of ideas, knowledge and experience that could be tapped. If Webdiary is to sell advertising space, they are entering an extremely competitive market.

While any medium has the right to restrict the type of entities it will accept advertising from, or for, and they have the right to refuse any advertisement, laying down rules about the content or presentation would, I believe restrict your potential advertisers to well-wishers.
Among the comments I see that some believe that Webdiaryists would, or would not be interested in some products or services. With respect, I suggest that this is as diverse as any other group. Allow advertisers to try their luck, those who get results will stay, those who don’t will disappear.

Reading ‘Advertise on Webdiary’ it appears to me that it is intended/expected to sell space as in a physical publication.
In this medium space is not the issue. It is difficult to believe that anybody advertising won't have their own web site, so they need a good high visibility ‘grab your attention’ ‘button’ — wrong word but I cannot think of a better description — down the side of the screen. This will link to their site where what they have on it, and how they display it is of no consequence to Webdiary.

That said, depending on price of a ‘button’ spot, restaurants could well be interested and Glebe Books would have to be worth talking to.
For those who want to advertise who have no website, perhaps Webdiary could offer a facility where the button linked to a separate page, once again this ought to dispel any fears of offence to readers as only those interested in the product would need the lead.

This could also help some of your volunteers earn a bit of income. Provided Webdiary was content to accept the advertising revenue the payment for creating the advertisement page could go to the person doing the job.

This would mean that Webdiary’s involvement was limited to taking the advertisement and arranging for the page developer to contact the advertiser. Believe me, ascertaining what it is somebody thinks they want in an advertisement and setting it up is a time consuming business, and unless the person involved in creating it is directly involved with theadvertiser, is all but impossible.

I would expect some advertisers to go to interactive and/or animated displays. It is certainly what I would be suggesting to clients if I were still in the business.

I note that management is adamant that the site will not be unmoderated. Others have nominated sites where other strategies have, or are successful. I am with those who think that everything ought be on the table at this time.

A brief and succinct set of guidelines — nay rules — could make life easier for the production team.

There is (almost ) no restriction on ideas or views that can be discussed.
Personal abuse or denigration will not be published.
Derogatory personal remarks, and derogatory nicknames will not be published.
Foul or crude language will not be published.
Potentially libellous or defamatory material will not be published.
[Do you have anybody on production who has an understanding of defamation and libel?]

As a simple guide:
If you don’t think the editor of a major newspaper would accept the style or manner in which you have written, do not expect Webdiary to publish it.

I have no doubt that can be improved upon. It is offered as a starting point, for discussion, to raise issues.
It is intended to be helpful!
For those totally opposed to advertising offer a subscription version sans the ads down the side!

Robert, bloody-good suggestions! One of the problems here is that there's NO sense that Howard & co might be doing some positive things (as ALL governments manage), however badly their overall report-card reads.

Even more, however, I agree with your second. Because, given the evident failure of both "major" parties to suggest real alternatives - even via dissidents (who almost entirely concentrate on opposition/previously-established models) - it is, quite simply, left to the citizens to attempt.

But, let's not be indiscriminate here. Foolish/genuinely-counterproductive utopian crap (from both left AND right) we already have. Instead, let's see Webdiary attempt to avoid same, and, instead, deliver some novel/straightforwardly targeted-models/proposals that could easily be "sold" to the citizenry, but that contemporary "realities" insist - largely due to vested-interests - could "never" get up.

Think hard, folks...because that's EXACTLY where Webdiary could have a real impact, over time ... assuming we "bothered" to cast aside our ingrained prejudices (on "both" sides), and actually made a genuine effort?

All the best.

Webdiary was always the wellspring of the Australian people. It has undergone several incarnations as the people (us all) for whom it serves one way or another, provided our input.

It may well reinvent itself from the input of the people, yet again.

To add two things I'd like to see in a reinvented Webdiary:

*) More pro-government content minus the spin and bullshit. Let's get knowledge on what valuable things are going on that otherwise don't get aired or get aired poorly in other media.

*) More alternative policy. No idea how this can happen, or if it's viable on this website. The new site I believe has the facility. What sort of policy? Yours. Whoever you are. Let's give air to that as well, in fair and reasonable doses.

Hey David,

Looking good from here. The money coming in is obviously the big problem, both short and long term. State the obvious, I'm good at that.

Anyway, I was just wondering if one of us happened to find a sponsor, advertising wise that is, what sort of things would you (WD) not accept. As an example, porn sites are off limits I would assume. Are you able to give guidelines on what you would accept and who any such sponsor should contact, and how?

I don't have a specific company in mind or anything like that, I just know that if all reading maybe raised it with companies, people etc when an opportunity may exist then maybe we can help at least point people to WD if they are looking for sites to back.

Ideally maybe you could also publish number of daily hits so the potential advertisers know what they are buying?

Just thoughts, but I am prepared to ask companies I use if you think that's a possibility. I'm sure others would too. Plus any word of mouth is good advertising for WD as well.

David: can't say it better than I already did on the Advertise on Webdiary post: "we will accept any advertisement that fits within Webdiary ethics – ie essentially does not offend, abuse, incite, defame or otherwise have legal problems."

Yeah, ok can someone post a fools guide to easy html drafting?

Craig R: this bare bones guide to html should satisfy your needs Richard.

Umm, why not, instead of putting up wierd links like that "Coat of Arms: A SPIRE" thing - instead of this - sell advertising space.

You must surely have the web traffic to get something for this - if you're pulling $4k in donations that's a SERIOUS achievement.

And don't put up too many links to things that are already on the site. The workplace relations stuff - people can go to the ACTU site for that. They're running probably the most effective campaign the Australian Left has run for decades on this stuff. Save your space for advertising.

Is the new site going to require html?

Hamish: Nope. That is, it will be in html but there is automatic tools to bold etc things, so you won't need to mess with it.

The things you miss when you don't have the net. Even private health insurance doesn't give you WiFi in hospitals. What happened?

Great idea, Robyn and I hope I'm not the last to say so...

[Now, did those bloody bold tags work, dear editors? ...cause I'm truly attempting to clean-up mine act here]

ed Hamish: it's hard to demonstrate code because if you do it properly it works, so I'm replacing '<' with '[' and '>' with ']' to talk about it. You typed, '[b]Robyn[b]'. The opening tag is right but the closing tag needs a slash before the 'b', like this: [/b]. If I didn't fix it the whole page beyond the opening tag would be bold. Lots of html is like this, so for italics you write [i]italics[/i]. Thanks heaps for commiting yourself to this Damian. I'll help as much as I can.

One problem I think we might come up against as we continue will be to maintain the quality of the header pieces which kick off our discussions in Margo's absence. Her own contributions as well as those which came out of her personal network of contacts will be hard to replace.

An idea I've had today while pondering this, which might help a bit, is to host a series of online "events" - perhaps one a month - where we set out to seriously examine an issue of importance to the general community, announce it ahead of time, advertise (perhaps just online and word-of-mouth), invite stakeholders to participate (maybe sending them a header piece in advance) and invite the community generally to engage directly with the powers-that-be on that day and challenge them to come up with solutions. It could even be called the Webdiary "Community Challenge" if people liked that idea.

The issue which sparked the thought for me was the shortage of GPs in my area, which means people must often wait three weeks to get in to see a doctor. Its something which affects everyone locally, is getting worse because people are moving in to several new developments and because many of the GPs that are here are nearing retirement. I understand it is a problem on all the metropolitan fringes, but the cause here is variously put down to limits on provider numbers, lack of GP training spaces, lack of financial incentive to practice in general practice, too many interstate undergraduates in SA's medical schools, distance from things like theatres which might attract doctors etc etc. While everybody blames everyone else, nothing changes.

It occurred to me that we could invite the College of GPs, the AMA, Tony Abbott and staff, the Divisions of General Practice, GP training providers, the Consumer's Association, the Consumer's Health Forum, patient groups etc - anybody else that people can think of, indeed anybody that wants to participate - and moderate a discussion where answers are demanded by the community.

The same could be done for other issues of general interest to the community eg. why, when we have such a sizable federal budget surplus, do our kids have to put up with dilapidated buildings in our public schools? And no, the feds blaming it the states and vice versa won't do, what can be done to fix it?

Etc. See what you think. Just one for the mix while all sorts of things are up in the air.

ed Hamish: thankyou, and keep the brainstorm going.