If you’re a regular reader of the blog, you’ll notice that I’ve switched the Livefyre commenting system back on, after using the vanilla WordPress option for the last few months.

I was one of the early beta users of the system, and loved the way it took blog commenting and turned it into a real-time chat (as this experiment and the subsequent results show).

However, along with it not really fitting into the blog’s redesign at the time, there were some features that Livefyre lacked, which saw me revert to the standard WordPress comment system (albeit one that was heavily optimized by Bonsai Interactive’s Creative Director, Lisa Kalandjian). But I’ve always kept eyes on the system, and met the team at a conference earlier this year.

And I’m glad I did, because today’s Livefyre is a completely different beast from when I was test-running it, and the features that weren’t around then have made it into the new version. So the time seemed right to switch it back on. So what’s new?

Latest Post or Conversation

Perhaps one of the biggest things that Livefyre lacked previously was the latest post option (or Conversation, as Livefyre calls it). This is what the CommentLuv plug-in offers – the option for anyone leaving a comment to have their last post visible as a link back to their blog.

Where Livefyre’s version differs is that it’s (currently) only for those with a Livefyre account. While it doesn’t offer the same benefits of CommentLuv because of this limitation, it’s a clever way to encourage sign-up. And the cool thing is, if you have multiple blogs, it pulls the last post from the newest publication, so it gives all your blogs an equal amount of promotion.

Simple Site Wide Moderation

When I first had Livefyre switched on, its dashboard area was pretty basic. There were your account details, and the blogs you had registered, and that was pretty much it. It didn’t really allow for analytics or moderation (something the Disqus platform was better at). Not any more.

With the new and improved dashboard, you have much more control. This includes white-listing commenters, banning spammers, marking comments that are offensive so Livefyre can learn them, and more.

It’s a far better system, and makes running the back-end of your commenting system a much easier task.

Improved Social Sharing Options

A lot of bloggers – myself included – have wondered about the effect social networks have on blog comments. Do tweets and Facebook conversations mean fewer comments on the blog (though more overall)? And will the freestyle comment stream of Google+ affect this even more?

Either way, there’s no doubt that a lot of conversations about a post are missed, because they’re taking place on Twitter, Facebook, etc, and not everyone has an account on these platforms. This is where Livefyre is stepping in, to really cultivate the conversation around a post.

Their new SocialSync feature gives you the option to have tweets and Facebook posts become a part of the post’s comments. This is similar to the Reactions feature on Disqus, with a difference – Livefyre’s way of doing things seems better suited to social conversations being part of the comment stream.

For instance, simple retweets aren’t counted (or shoudn’t be). Instead, only extended conversations around a post are pulled into the comments. The same goes with Facebook – if you share a post on your Facebook Page, then any wall posts by your connections will be pulled over to your post.

It’s not perfect – for example, I’d love the option to be able to reply to Facebook posts from the blog comment (much like you can with the Twitter sync). Additionally, the SocialSync conversations currently split the comments if there are more than 50, as opposed to being at the end of the comment stream (although Livefyre have said they’re looking to fix this). But as a first attempt at really integrating all conversations around a post, it’s a great start. Especially if Livefyre can work a way to include Google+ comments.

The Little Things

So these are three of the main differences in the Livefyre system since last being activated on here. They’ve also added some nice little features – more sign in options (Google and LinkedIn), along with the option to view oldest comments first. Couple these with more CSS options, so you can code Livefyre to suit the design of your blog a bit better, and Livefyre has pretty much got most options covered for a one-stop commenting system.

There are some more features on the way, too, with perhaps one of the most-asked for additions due imminently – the option to allow guest commenting, where you don’t need to have one of the current sign-in options to leave a comment.

I was a big fan of Livefyre before. I think it’s fair to say that, with the new features, I’m pretty much sold on them as the best commenting option out there. Obviously there might be some hiccups along the way, but I’ve always found the Livefyre support to be second-to-none.

And you can’t ask for much more than that.

Welcoming Livefyre Comments Back to the Blog originally appeared on Danny Brown - under a Creative Commons license.

This is a guest post by Danny Iny.

Have you heard of comment trading communities?

It’s a new fad that seems to be sweeping the blogosphere (or at least a few corners of it). Basically, the idea is that a bunch of people get together and agree to comment on all of each others’ posts.

Some bloggers are experimenting with the idea, some love it, and others hate it.

I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. A short while ago, I emailed a successful blogger whose audience I thought would be interested in a post I had written, asking for a link (this wasn’t out of the blue – I’ve corresponded with this blogger on a few occasions).

The blogger responded that I could go ahead and post the link in the comment community – everyone else would take a look and comment, just so long as I did the same for them.

I thanked the blogger and said that I would head on over, but I didn’t – and I probably never will.

Okay, before we go any further, it’s time for full disclosure: I had participated in one round of this blogging community, which means that I commented on nine blog posts, and nine other people commented on one of mine.

It wasn’t a great experience, for two reasons:

1. A few of the blogs really stunk. Most were pretty decent, and some were great, but I felt very uncomfortable being committed to leave a comment on a blog that I was completely unimpressed with.
2. A few of the blogs were about things in which I have no interest. They were good blogs, near as I can tell, but they were about subjects that I neither know anything about nor have any interest in exploring. And yet, I was committed to leave a comment.

So what did I do? Well, I had made a commitment, and I take commitments seriously – on the good blogs that interested me I left solid comments, and on the others I left comments that were friendly and encouraging, but vague and non-specific.

I feel like I’ve littered on the blogosphere.

Contrived, but reasonable?

My experience was mixed, but I’m not ready to make blanket condemnations. I discovered some really great blogs through it, and sparked a couple of great online relationships. And I’m not the only one.

The most commonly heard argument against these communities is that if people have to leave a comment, then that comment isn’t really worth anything, but I’m not sure that I agree.

I mean, sure, if people leave crappy, fluffy comments, then there’s no value to them, but if the comments are well thought-out, and insightful, then what’s the problem? Bloggers want others to read and interact with their stuff, and at the same time they’re looking for blogs for whom they can do the same. Isn’t this just a way of formalizing and adding some structure to what they want to be doing anyway?

In other words, some might see it as contrived, and I agree – it’s a contrived solution to a very specific problem, but maybe it works?

My hesitation from doing it again is that I’m not comfortable having to comment on blog posts that I don’t like, or have no interest in.

Maybe this is a solvable problem…

Niche-specific, approval-required communities?

What if a blog commenting community were created that met the following two criteria, to address the main issues that I had with my comment community experience:

1. Each community is around a specific niche, so that everyone is – at least in principle – likely to be interested in everybody else’s writing.
2. Each community is moderated, and blogs are reviewed before being admitted into the group. This will make sure that terrible blogs never make it in.

If these two criteria were in place, I would give it another shot, and my guess that a good number of other bloggers would do the same. But I may be wrong…

Now I’ll turn the conversation over to you – I had a feeling that this post would spark a lot of debate, which is why it’s being published here, where the microphone is a little bigger that over at Firepole Marketing.

What do you think? Do you think this middle ground solution makes sense? Do you think blog commenting communities are a false economy, or the best thing since sliced bread?

Let’s get the debate going!

About the author: Danny Iny is an author, strategist, serial entrepreneur, and proud co-founder of Firepole Marketing, the definitive marketing training program for small businesses, entrepreneurs, and non-marketers. Visit his site today for a free cheat sheet about Why Guru Strategies for Blog Growth DON’T WORK… and What Does!, or follow him on Twitter @DannyIny.

Building an Audience with Commenting Communities: Smart, or Sleazy? originally appeared on Danny Brown - under a Creative Commons license.

So today was meant to be the third part of the 7 Days to Turn Your Blog Into a Social Media Hub series. This will appear tomorrow, as something’s been chewing on my mind today (and apologies to anyone who was expecting the Hub post).

When I write a blog post, it’s obviously my point of view. Once it’s in the open, though, it then becomes a shared point of view with you, the readers – and your point of view is what builds the discussions around a post. Sometimes you’ll agree with me; other times, not so much. And that’s what makes the comments after a post such a fervent breeding ground for ideas.

I don’t even mind if you attack me for my views. Heck, I’m big and ugly enough to take your shots, and it shows me that you’re passionate about a topic – and I would never discourage passion.

Besides, I’m the person that’s invoked that reaction, so if it’s an attack, let’s have it open and unfiltered.

What I won’t accept, however, is attacking other commenters. They’re like you – simply offering an additional view on the starting topic. By all means, attack me – the blog is my home and as the owner, I’m responsible for what goes on inside. But attacking another commenter – that’s poor form.

I’m a firm believer in an open comment policy; I don’t moderate before publication, because I feel that stints genuine interaction and conversation. Going by the conversations that have happened over the months, it would appear that most agree.

Let’s play nice and keep it that way. Like I say, attack me if you wish – as the instigator of discussion, I’m open to all views and words. But let’s treat the guests (and that includes you) nicely.

What say you – fair?

photo credit: Martin Deutsch

A Slight Intermission on Blog Comments Respect originally appeared on Danny Brown - under a Creative Commons license.

The fact that the system was being used on more blogs, and also had social media integration with its Reactions feature that pulled stats from anywhere else your blog was being discussed, seemed pretty cool.

Yet, lately, DISQUS seems to have had some continued issues.

One is that the Reactions (the comments from Twitter, Digg, etc, that show up as trackbacks) seem to be stop-start as to whether they show or not. Another issue (and far more serious) is that DISQUS doesn’t seem to be set up for commenting when viewing a blog on a mobile or smartphone.

At first, I thought it may just be me, but then Ari Herzog pointed it out as well. Considering that more people use their smartphones for browsing now, this is a bit of an issue.

So, time to swap back to the good old WordPress standard comments option. I can also switch CommentLuv back on, which for community is one of the best WordPress plug-ins ever (CommentLuv shows your last blog post and is great for finding new bloggers).

I will say this for DISQUS – their customer support is usually pretty top-notch. If they can get the mobile aspect sorted, and also stabilize the features like Reactions (which means stopping the unrelated porn links that can appear), I’d be more than happy to try again.

In the meantime, I kinda like the new stripped down approach. How about you?

photo credit: David Reece

Goodbye DISQUS, Hello WordPress originally appeared on Danny Brown - under a Creative Commons license.

This is a guest post following a great chat I had with Valerie Merahn Simon, and is a nice follow-up on my recent post about Twitter and blog comments.

If you’re like me, you read a lot of blog posts. Many of them are good posts. Some you’ll even share via Twitter or email. But only once in a while will you be motivated to comment. Commenting is a contribution. It requires time and effort and thought.

So why are readers willing to invest themselves in someone else’s blog post?

Controversy

Sometimes it’s hard not to “jump in”. When David Mullen & Lauren Fernandez asked Should Newspaper Have Outed an Intern for Plagerism? on Communications Catalyst, 107 comments ensued. A recent post on the Bad Pitch Blog regarding the controversial outing of the “reverse bad pitch” of “Mike Hendricks and the Laws of Shamelessness” resulted in 57 comments.

Another Bad Pitch post entitled “Simply put, thank you” about the very successful Bad Pitch Blog Night School garnered 0 comments. Of course controversy does not have to mean scandal. One of the most highly commented recent posts on Marketing Profs Daily Fix was Help! I Have Social Media Rejction Syndrome which inspired a spirited debate over whether it is appropriate to connect with those you don’t know on LinkedIn.

Expertise

Do you believe you can offer value and insights to the conversation? That the post needs your expertise? When Jeremy Porter posted The Best Schools for Journalism on Journalistics, his community was well prepared to contribute (28 comments). Whether they agreed with the schools on his list, or they felt he left off a school, his readers know journalism schools and felt compelled to share their opinions.

Similarly when Lauren Ferenandez asked her readers The 1.2 Million Definitions of PR: What’s your take? a discussion including 50 comments emerged. Her community understood the question, had an opinion and felt that were well suited to make a contribution to the conversation.

Questions

Is the blog a conversation with the reader, or simply offering a monologue? Jerimiah Owyang does a fantastic job of integrating questions alongside valuable insights to engage readers. A great example of this is Owyang’s recent post How to Kick Start a Community- An Ongoing List. With 72 comments the list did become a community undertaking.

Chris Brogan offers a similar example with his recent Simple Touch Points of Loyalty post, which offered 9 Simple Touchpoints of Loyalty and asked for help identifying more. Over 112 comments followed. One of his least commented posts Why I Will Promote Teaching Sells (just 8 responses) doesn’t speak to readers, so much as speak at them. In his words, “I wanted to share that with you clearly, and tell you a bit about the program, what I like about it, and then, I’ll let you go take a look for yourself.”

Does every post demand comments and interaction? Not necessarily.

Many of my favorite bloggers, brilliant thought leaders such as Shel Holtz, rarely receive more than a comment or two per post. These posts may be viewed by hundreds and shared by many, yet fail to evoke the often elusive comment. There is a unique skill, an art even, to crafting posts that elicit a written reaction from readers.

What was the last post you commented on? Why were you compelled to leave a comment?

Valerie Merahn Simon serves as a Senior Vice President at BurrellesLuce media monitoring and measurement, and writes a national public relations column for examiner.com. She is also co-founder and host of #PRStudChat, a monthly twitter chat between PR professionals and students moderated by Deirdre Breakenridge. She can be found on Twitter or LinkedIn and once in a while, if sufficiently motivated, commenting or even guest posting on a blog!

Why Would You Bother to Comment? originally appeared on Danny Brown - under a Creative Commons license.

Personally, I’ve used the comments on some of my posts (and those on other blogs) as inspiration for new posts here. I’ll add my comment on the original post, and then expand on it with a new or slightly different take. That then opens the discussion up even further, both on the new post and the original (play fair – always link back to your inspiration).

While content may be the instigator, it’s the conversations by the community that often make the content. And maybe it’s just me, but Twitter seems to be taking more of the conversations and making them 140-character bites.

I’ve seen many great posts by some truly remarkable bloggers be tweeted, and the conversation remain on Twitter. Points and questions raised in the post start the conversation rolling, but instead of via the comments section on a blog, they take place on the little blue bird nest. And that’s a shame.

There’s nothing wrong with this, of course – after all, Twitter is the king of instant feedback and interaction. And weekly events like #journchat and #blogchat , and others like them, show just how effective a medium Twitter can be for conversations. And yet…

Imagine how much a conversation could build without the limitations of 140-characters. Imagine how opposing views could be fully fleshed out with unlimited text. Imagine how communities could be forged, and new friendships built, through the reasoning and acceptance that long tail blog comments can offer. Imagine being the catalyst or inspiration for a blog post by your favourite blogger, all from a single comment you left.

Of course, you could say that it’s down to the blogger to make the content as open as possible, to encourage discussion – and this is true. Yet at the same time, maybe we (as readers) need to take part more as well? Maybe we need to encourage bloggers more by being part of their community, as opposed to rubbernecking on Twitter?

There are a myriad of ways for conversations to take place. Sometimes little snapshots like Twitter are ideal, if you’re pressed for time. But isn’t it nice to get away from the noise at times, and relax where you have time and space to say what you really want?

What’s your take?

photo credit: Shirin K. A. Winiger

Is Twitter Killing Blog Comments? originally appeared on Danny Brown - under a Creative Commons license.

Comments aren’t usually high up on the list of monitoring and watching what’s being said online.

Yet they should be, as a recent post by David Henderson and the subsequent conversation in the comments section show.

I won’t go too much into the actual blog post or the comments, as they’re both recommended reads and will give you a far clearer view of who may be in the right or wrong. What the post does highlight is that a blog comment can go even further than a blog post at painting an individual or company in a less than flattering light.

The gist of the post and resulting conversation is that David Henderson suggests that WordPress is an excellent medium for hosting your own online newsroom. Countering this is Steve Momorella of TEKgroup International, a company that develops and maintains online newsrooms.

What could have been a good discussion about both the validity of having your own online newsroom and how good WordPress is at running such a tool instead develops into a messy claim/counter-claim regarding the post and follow-up comments.

David seems to take umbrage with a comment made by Steve about the usefulness of WordPress and calls it a lack of understanding on Steve’s part. Steve is unhappy about David’s “disrespect” and so points out an error on David’s website.

This then results in other commenters joining in and by the end of everything, there’s a veritable “he said, she said” feel to everything.

While it makes for hugely entertaining reading, it also shows how a simple blog comment can taint someone’s view. I read David Henderson regularly. I respect him immensely and find him to be a great source of information and knowledge (although his constant putting down of PR does jade, after a while).

I didn”t know Steve Momorella prior to his comments on David’s blog post, but I do know of him now. Because of that blog post and its comments, I felt both David and Steve came out a little less positive than they otherwise might have.

While Steve’s comments have merit, they did come across as slightly leaned toward promoting his company which could be classed as comment spam. Whether that was the intent or not is down to Steve’s interpretation.

For David’s side, I felt he was being a little defensive and it maybe encouraged Steve to counter more than he would have.

From an outsider’s point of view, it could be seen as Steve is a promotional spammer and David doesn’t like comments that disagree with him. I know this isn’t the case with David and I’m guessing it’s not the case for Steve.

But see how easy a conversation in blog comments can sway a point of view?

Are you always thinking slightly about what you say and how it’s said when you comment on a blog? Or do you feel that it’s not something to worry about too much and just say what you feel regardless? Can comment conversations get away from you?

The comments are yours (no ironic pun intended).

photo credit: Andi♥

Blog Comments and Reputation Central originally appeared on Danny Brown - under a Creative Commons license.

As a (partial) result, the site received an official takedown notice from Twitter and I received some of the most heated and angry comments ever from a post.

That’s cool. People have opinions and sometimes these opinions are strong, and the comment section is where these opinions are allowed to be expressed.

It’s one of the reasons that I have an open comment policy. Some people emailed me asking why I was allowing the comments to stay when a lot were personal and derogatory. Simple – I believe in free speech and the right to air grievances. Of course my post wasn’t going to be popular with everyone and the comments bore that out.

But, as I say, that’s people’s prerogative and I won’t stifle that. Where I will (and did) draw the line is when you attack my readers and others leaving comments. If you have a gripe with me, fine, take that out on me – I’m big enough and ugly enough to take the heat.

But the community that are sharing their views? If you attack them with vitriol and over-the-top abuse, I will delete your comment. I think that’s fair.

Speaking of community, that’s one thing that was a positive result of the post, no matter what “side” you were on.

Although it led to some pretty personal comments against me, the response from the Tumblr community in particular was actually pretty cool to see. These are the friends of one of the guys who came up with the whole Fake-Twitter idea.

When it became clear that “one of their own” was involved, they quickly got together and started posting humorous parodies of me on Tumblr, along with their comments on the post itself.

While I may not be a fan of the personal attack over reasoned argument, it can’t be denied that the community spirit that I believe in and encourage was present. For that, I congratulate them.

We may not always agree on everything; we may not always agree on most things. But one thing we can agree on is that community and support is the way forward – isn’t it?

photo credit: nataliej

Community Spirit and Blog Comments Redux originally appeared on Danny Brown - under a Creative Commons license.

Many Twitter users are aghast at the thought of Google buying Twitter, and their handling of popular blog tool Feedburner has come under fire (including here on this blog).

Some of the criticism is justified, others less so. Yet is it any surprise that Google continues to come under fire when the company itself seems to go out of its way to upset the community it relies on for its userbase?

Here’s an example.

Yesterday I asked if Google bought Twitter, would they would be a benefit or a hindrance to the micro-blogging site. I cited Google’s handling of Feedburner, and the fact that their Gmail email service is still in beta after five years. I linked this to the official Gmail blog.

The link resulted in some new traffic that I may not have had, with the readers of the Gmail blog obviously curious about the Twitter angle and Google’s involvement.

Today, I noticed that the link had been removed from the Gmail blog. And not just my link – there was another one that asked how a company can keep a product on beta for five years (which is now back on the blog, bizarrely).

(As a test, I’m linking there again with screen capture at my side – let’s see if they’ll allow this link and if so, for how long).

So, does Google only link to stories that are positive about their company? Are they trying to paint a picture that all is well with their services, and that they’re still every web user’s friend?

Wouldn’t it have made more sense to allow the link and maybe respond to the post in question?

Open up discussion and have some healthy debate about what users would like to see and whether this is feasible or not, as well as address blogger issues at the same time?

It’s a shame. By removing the link to a non-congratulatory piece, Google have taken a step down the Internet censorship path that web users hate. Sure, it’s Google’s Gmail blog so they can do what they want – that’s their prerogative.

But the end result of this is that Google begins to look like the indie band that struck it lucky and hit superstardom, and then forgot all about the fans that put them there. Instead, they’d rather hang with the faux celebrities and hangers-on that only stroke their ego.

Of course, you could say Google’s so big they don’t need to worry about what the little guy like me says. Funny thing is, though, upset enough of the little guys and it soon becomes a big guy problem.

And with little guy alternatives to Google’s services becoming more widespread, where would that leave Google?

photo credit: Larsz

Internet Censorship, Google Style originally appeared on Danny Brown - under a Creative Commons license.

Like any view, there will be some that agree and disagree.

And, as I mentioned in the post itself, I’m far from an expert in any of the areas I was discussing – I was just starting the conversation.

Michelle Belaski disagreed with my view and instead of taking up too much space in David’s comments section, decided to write what she disagreed about on her blog. Fair enough. She was also kind enough to let me know about this post via Twitter. Great – I read it and had a few points I wished to clarify on the post.

But I can’t. Nor can you (if you wished to).

If you check Michelle’s blog, there isn’t a comments section. There’s a little voting section that allows you to say whether the article is “funny”, “interesting” or “cool”. But no comments area.

This is a shame. I can’t respond to Michelle’s views (some of which are incorrect from a factual point of view) so instead of offering a chance for some discussion, it’s simply Michelle’s point of view that’s on show. Which, fair enough, it’s Michelle’s blog and she can run it how she feels best.

But isn’t she missing an opportunity here? Don’t points of view benefit from the debate they can open up? What’s your take – do you prefer discussion or just one way streets?

photo credit: Incessant Flux

One Way Streets originally appeared on Danny Brown - under a Creative Commons license.