Chris, it could be that Malta Today is starting to moderate the comments because of legal issues: some comments come very close to breaking the law.

Certain comments regarding the Sliema murders were libellous, for example, and sometimes anonymous posters also resort to threats.

Recently someone who calls himself Thor informed me that my days are numbered, which I already knew anyway because I have a calendar.

It seems that the prospect of having a “gvern tagħna” is bringing out the primordial marmalja instinct in several people and Malta Today has become their favourite stomping ground.

They put the finishing touches to the already biased reports that Malta Today, our home-grown red-top, specialises in.

So many things have been happening it’s hard to keep up to speed on the blog. I should add a post though on how I won a minor victory when Gaddafi’s gongs struck off.

15 – Love for Baxxter.

You could try keeping it up to date. That would help.

Il-mama nehhiet il-plastik minn fuq is-sufan ghall-okkazzjoni. Saviour Balzan ghandu jkun kburi li rcieva l-istess trattament li jircievi l-Kappillan fil-gurnata tat-tberik. Prosit, Salv.

Mine had less than 5000 since April. But if I multiply that by the reciprocal of the number of staff employed at Janes, it comes to around 50 million, so I’m chuffed to bits I am.

‘Qas jaf x’laqtu.

Those interviews are a great insight into Franco’s mind. He shows very nervous body language and keeps repeating the same things he has said so far.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc9omcA8KSI&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iTj0Tp-Io4&feature=player_embedded#!

However on the times and maltatoday which are supposed to be unbiased newspapers, why should it be left up to the a couple of people or one person to decide what goes on and what doesn’t.

What is the reason behind it? I don’t get it.

[Daphne – Internet sites, like all other media, are subject to the laws of the land, Chris, most particularly libel laws. And aside from that, people abuse of anonymity to rant in a way that just lowers the tone. Some things pass muster if said with sporting humour, but if said with spite and viciousness, then it just puts other readers off and makes things look shoddy. It seems that now even Malta Today have come to their senses and have begun to moderate comments before uploading them, instead of letting them go straight through. They had some really awful, slanderous ones in the aftermath of the New Year’s Day murders – truly hateful, about the dead and the grieving – and that might have been a turning-point.]

It should be simple – the user registers, validates his email (I would even remove the need to register).

If someone makes an abusive comment users can report as abusive and then the comment will be sent for moderation. Users can then be blocked or banned.

[Daphne – Abusive comments should not be allowed through for upload and the buck passed to readers to report because, aside from the fact that the ‘talked about’ person might not be aware of it and so it is left unreported, even if a slanderous/libellous comment is left up for 10 minutes, and a screen shot taken to prove it was published, the persons responsible for the site can be prosecuted or subjected to a civil suit for damages. The anonymous commenter blithely drops his libel bomb and buggers off, and the site’s owner/editor is left to carry the legal can.]

And for those who say there are legal requirements, as far as I know these can be covered in the terms and conditions of the website.

[Daphne – Then you know bollocks. A person cannot divest himself of his responsibilities at law by saying ‘I am not responsible’.]

If Malta Today wanted to increase their hits they have made the wrong move in my opinion.

[Daphne – No, they have made the right move. They will lose their wretched crowd, the sort that is not at all attractive to advertisers, for a start, and begin pulling in a better sort, the sort who are attractive to advertisers (and fellow readers).]