This conversation grew larger than the scope I originally intended, but I think it's a good discussion. Let me try and summarize everyone's points. For the sake of brevity, I'm only going to list each point once, even if multiple people agree with it:
rsl12 thinks "General Comments only: Polite, supportive, suggestions for improvement" needed to be more clearly written. I also suggested taking out the phrases to the left of the colons for concision.
Sam kindly provided the history of how those comment categories came to be.
ShiroKuro feels the core descriptors of the categories are to the left of the colons, and in particular that the second category should clearly indicate that polite comments are encouraged.
Sophia noted that politeness is something that should be expected in all categories of comments, and not something to be singled out for a particular category. Also, these commenting categories are just suggestions to recital participants, and they can easily make up their own commenting policy.
ShiroKuro responds to Sophia's second point that if technology allowed it, it would be better to prohibit user-made commenting policies, to reduce the chances of misunderstandings.
WieWaldi notes that there is functionally no difference between a suggestion for improvement and a criticism, and therefore one of the commenting categories can be removed.
Like Sophia, I'll be happy with whatever is decided, though I hope the "general comments" category is more carefully worded because I'm still not sure my interpretation of it is the same as everyone else's interpretation.
Regarding the point Wie Waldi brought up, I can see the value in both Wie Waldi and ShiroKuro's arguments. I agree that simpler is better, and whatever information is presented as a suggestion for improvement could be easily reworded as a criticism, and vice versa. But I agree with ShiroKuro that there is kind of a difference. In my opinion, the difference is that the recital participant will react differently depending on how the information is presented. In an ideal world, all commenters would know how to present their criticism in a palatable way, but in reality, I think some people might need the extra guidance of a "suggestions for improvement, but no criticism" category to guide their hand. The fact that so many participants pick that category is evidence that they would prefer their criticism presented in that way. On the whole, I lean towards four categories, but I would be fine with Wie Waldi's three.
So if I were to try and incorporate everyone's feedback, I would phrase it like this:
rsl12 You may use the template to specify the Comment Policy:
- No Comments Please!
- Please give me only positive comments, and no criticisms or suggestions for improvement.
- Positive comments and suggestions for improvement, but no direct criticism.
- All comments; anything goes!
And to help ensure that all commenters remember to be polite, Navindra adds the following text to the first post of each recital:
When commenting, remember that ALL comments must be polite, even when the performer has stated that any comments are allowed. If you need help making your criticisms polite, refer to <insert link to helpful document>. Thanks for helping to maintain a friendly environment!
