Comments dilemma update
Since revising our comments policy the feedback has been largely positive. Discussions now more clearly relate to the issue addressed in an article and the tone has improved. As Paul P noted, rather ironically, "My my ... this is disappointing! I hastily looked down to the comments section to see ... reasonableness?".
It's not quite 'job done' but we're getting there. There are, however, a few outstanding points that need addressing.
First, we're getting lots of (usually unrelated) questions through the comments facility. We've been largely blocking these, which is unfortunate given there's a Q&A facility.
It also seems rude to block a question without informing the member of the reason for it. However, the process for doing so is time-consuming and defeats one of the reasons for instituting the new approach - to allow more time for stock research.
This is already bearing fruit. In just over a couple of weeks since we introduced the new comments policy we've already had three articles in our Ideas Lab - not official recommendations but interesting areas where members might like to do their own research.
To ensure this continues, if you have a question please use the Q&A facility as we really would like to preserve the comments for, err, comments.
Other than that, the changes are working out as planned.
Thank you for your co-operation and wise and often incisive comments to our research. It really does add to the service.