Moderation in Moderation?

I moderate my comments, mostly to ensure that there's no spam getting through. But sometimes I end up in a quandary about whether to publish a comment that does not participate in the conversation and is aimed to incite or sell some other service. I tend to not publish these types of posts. Maybe I should (more later).

Here's an interesting case in point. Last night a comment came in on a post I made about LotusLive Engage last week. The comments were more of an anti-IBM and LotusLive rant and went into a Silverlight endorsement. I decided to think about publishing the comment since it was a week late and borderline off-topic. Then I looked at the comments to my friend Volker's excellent blog post summarizing LotusLive, Microsoft Online, and Google Apps pricing. Lo and behold an identical comment to the one I received, word for word from the same author, was on Volker's post.

I mean if your going to troll the Internet for blog postings on a certain topic and write negative comments about the product and/or vendor, you might as well have some imagination and make each comment unique. Otherwise, what a boring job? Needless to say, people following blogs that talk about specific topics and vendors are likely to see duplicated commentary and consider the comment author a fool or at least someone not to pay attention to.

This is not in defense of IBM or LotusLive, that is better done elsewhere and through a community that is interested in the product and the discussion. It's about any commentary on any vendor or topic that serves no purpose. In general I don't want to have my blog become fodder for off-topic sniping, and I have the inclination to control it. However, this is the sort of stuff that comes with free-range social software and I should probably let nature take its course. What do you think?

For the record, I'm not going to post the comment since it clearly isn't serious.

Tag! You're it!

All the kids are playing Blog-Tag! A new game described as a "virtual cocktail party" with a twist (or an olive) where bloggers list five little known facts about themselves and then"tag" five other bloggers to follow suit. I got tagged twice, does that mean I have to list 10 facts and tag 10 bloggers? I'll start with 5 until I get a ruling:

1. My first job in IT was at the font company Bitstream supporting the VP of product management. I can pick out fonts based on name. Helvetica happens.

2. I have a BA in Art History, with focus on Architectural History. I've come to find out many of my colleagues share my interest in buildings.

3. My 8th grade science project was to build a punch card reader using a pocket calculator. I'm not sure who had more fun with the project, myself or my Dad.

4. I was accused of being a foodie this weekend. I don't mind.

5. Despite my denial, my life is managed by a 13# Jack Russell Terrier, but many of you probably know that.

So who's next?

Volker Weber
Chris Herot
Rocky Oliver
Kathleen McGivney
Richard Monson-Haefel

I have Peter O'Kelly to blame for this.