The way to take off 'candidate spam diary' is to allow 'unrecommend' other posters' diaries. Let's see a couple of Edwards' supporters push their spam diary to rec list, Obama and Clinton supporters can then 'unrecommend' that diary, and pull it off the list.

The rec list should not be for candidate spam.  Period.  

Better to give supporters an opportunity to respond to Stoller's analysis in a regular front-page thread or a diary.

If you're willing to go for the atomic bomb solution, it probably wouldn't be very difficult to filter "campaign diaries" into a completely different rec list from general diaries. Just add a second little box to the sidebar, and have recommended diaries with a "primaries" tag go into one box, and without the tag go into the other.

There would be problems with this-- for one thing, this early on it would probably encourage more campaign diaries, such that they'd be a steady stream rather than occasional bursts when something sets people off-- but as the primaries get closer and closer there may come a point where you wish you had this feature anyway...

This goes well beyond Matt's BB entry on Obama.  This is something that has been growing for months now.  

In 2005, MyDD kept me in politics - particularly Chris and Matt's posts about the progressive movement, and meta blogs about the growth of the netroots. That with some good poll analysis is why MyDD is my favorite blog.

That changed about 4 months ago as the candidate diaries began to overtake the recommended list.

I'm not sure what - if anything - there is to do about it.  It might just be the way things are for 1  year each cycle.  But just wanted to clarify that this is about way more than any one post by Matt, Jerome, or whoever.

Asking meta questions about the site in Breaking Blue does seem to be questionable.

Here is another question: what constitutes "spam"?

is for webmaster to take those obnoxious spam diaries off the list.

He is complaining those meaningless, obnoxious 'press release' style diaries by folks like you.

Of course they should be taken off the rec list. This is becoming an Edwards campaign site, which is absurd, considering he's paid nothing. There's no need to have another spot for 2008 election related dairies, period.

If there aren't enough people in this community to ensure that quality diaries end up on the rec list, then that's just how it's going to be as long as there's a rec list.

People often aren't recommending diaries based on improving the discourse or the legitimate breadth of knowledge to be gained from this site, they're just whoring their candidate.

The irony, of course, is that the more irrelevant they make the recommended list, the less point there is to keep spamming it.

I don't think this is a problem.

I hate meta. And this is the second meta comment I've posted on the Internets today. I'm in a foul mood.

At this point I haven't chosen a candidate to support in the Democratic party primary. I have stated on more than one occasion that I will support the Democratic Party nominee in the general election. They are all a damn sight better than any republican.

MyDD is one of my "go to" places every day, though with all of the candidate hyping or detracting detritus it is becoming less attractive to me. And less useful.

I find that I have to constantly remind myself as I wade through MyDD that individual candidates and campaigns are not responsible for, nor can they control their amateur fans. The operative word is "amateur".

You want me to be more inclined to support your candidate? Then write something that highlights what they believe in and simultaneously beats the crap out of republicans. I'll read it. On the other hand, if you do the work of the "Mighty Wurlitzer" by using their frames to describe any other Democratic party candidate and I'll down rate your frackin' amateur comments. And the worst sin among those is the use of "unelectable".

What concerns me is how we now we see so many stories that could have been copied directly from freerepublic, drudge, etc. and are nothing but right wing hit pieces against one of our Democratic candidates. Some at times do have factual information and merit but most are nothing but "I hate __ Naderite pieces. I think it hurts this site to see so many of them.

I would prefer a system that allowed us to rate whole diaries the same way we can rate comments. Sometimes we get hit with obvious troll diaries, and we just have to let them die off or to complain in the comments, rather than letting a group of people influence things by giving it a '1'.

There's going to come a time when sites like this are going to have to decide whether it's about Freedom of Speech or Freedom of the Press.  This is an issue I've gone through on a few Mets related sites, and I can tell you, when the owners of the site finally get the gumption to realize it's Freedom of the Press, and there is nothing wrong with making editorial decisions based on a clearly articulated philosophy of what this site stands for, then the place will be much better.

I'd love to see commenting enabled on BB.  In the spirit of keeping things short, limit comments to, say, 500 characters.  There have been several times when I've had a one-line answer to questions (like a replacement for technorati), but have no where appropriate to respond since I'm a mere plebe.

ps: "annonymous" is misspelled on http://mydd.com/aboutbb

Candidate spams usually get about a dozen recommendations to get on the recommended list. So to beat back the spam, MyDD needs about 20 self-designated "diary quality agents" (DIQUA). The DIQUAs would recommend any dairy that's close to front page quality. With coordinated voting the DIQUAs could outvote the dozen or so candidate partisans that hijack the diary recommendations.

The downside is that the DIQUAs have to be as passionate and focused on maintaining quality as the candidate partisans are in support of their candidates.

What we really need is subcategories of recommendation. I like Kuchich, so let me give an entry that boosts him, or boosts some idea I agree with, a "Right On!" recommendation. Or if I just think the entry is well researched, well written, or important, I could give it an "Significant" recommendation. If for some reason I think it should be read by many others, I could give it a "Recommended Read" recommendation. That would give people a sense of proportion. (Combinations should be possible, I would suggest.)

Of course, some self restraint amongst the MyDD community where people only recommend diaries that are actually something new and noteworthy rather than rehashed press releases or some dirt on one of the candidates would be the best solution.

If that doesn't happen, my recommendations would be either:

1 - Doing away with recommended list and just permitting diary postings.

2 - Having the webmaster exercise some editorial control and removing the spam-like diaries.

Neither are good solutions but if the community can't police itself, there may be no other choice.

Obama/Edwards/Clinton regulars agree not to recommend candidate diaries on weekdays until we are closer to the primaries (say Thanksgiving or Halloween).

Presidential diaries are for weekends only.

If you see a Presidential diary on the recommended list - read down the recent diary list and find something good to recommend to displace it.

Any thoughts?

The Obama/Edwards/Clinton thing has clearly gotten out of control.

Unfortunately, I don't really see a solution, short of administrator moderation. People are enthusiastic and want to boost their own candidates (I am guilty of this myself).

I think the best thing is probably to to wait until March and the primaries are over before things settle down. Will of the People and all that, right?

I wouldn't blame the site mods if they decide to initiate a crackdown, though.

This won't solve the whole problem, but will out some people at ease.

I suggest that Chris send the campaigns an open letter explaining what the blogs have meant for the Democratic Party.  And, asking them to contribute to not degrading the blogs by requesting that any campaign employee or counsultant identify themselves as a member of the campaign if they are advocating for a specific person.

The problem with any call for user-moderation is that 20-30 people can completely influence how thousands of others more casual (or less interested in the nuts and bolts of the site) people will interact with the place.  

And "Issues" section would be great, but probably runs into the same problem where people start talking about an issue but almost immediately devolve into "here's how MY candidate" deals with this issue and others don't, which requires the immediate counter-attack and within 3 or 4 posts turns into "but he voted for the war" and "but he's funded the war since he got into Congress" and so on.

The thing is that these conversations shouldn't be banned, or necessarily even discouraged.  I just wish that I could come to MyDD and avoid them if I wanted to.  Sometimes I'm interested in seeing how the most recent candidate wars are going, but lots of times I refuse to even do more than briefly skim the main page because I know it'll just be a huge morass.

We are a year away and poll diaries seem to be leading the discussions instead of the issues. Polls should be used as an interesting sideshow. It is an indicator of how candidates are perceived at the moment - nothing more. ANd even those polls dont choose Presidents. Otherwise Kerry wins 2004.

The rabid accumulation of poll diaries has made me look at mydd less frequently in recent weeks. I seriousl think there needs to be a separate poll diaries section.

If technically possible, their should exist TWO (yes - TWO) separate diary categories! "Election 2008/polls/candidate oriented diaries" and - "every other diary".

Let's sort this shit out now so MyDD can function as a) a progressive netroots nexus and b) a place of heated debate about the 2008 election.

I think most people want both.

As for whether people here are plants by the candidates, let me just say that the people that usually get accused of this are the "rah-rah" cheerleading types who do nothing but infuriate me and subtly push me away from their candidates.  I have a hard time believing well-oiled campaigns are letting people like that shill for them.

As for the people who obviously support one candidate, but who contribute smart, well-reasoned, and articulate explanations for why, I have no problem with them being here, even if they are working for a candidate.  If the ideas contribute, who cares where they come from?

I find the accusations that X, Y, or Z person is obviously working for a candidate to be far more annoying than the thought that some people who post here might very well be in the employ of a person that, a year from now, I'll be struggling my hardest to get elected.

I don't mind short pieces regarding news about a particular candidate. What annoys me more, is that each diary tuns into a flame war, which I think has exacerbated the recommending on "Why I like X" diaries that do not add to my information about each candidate.

I don't care that YOU don't like  HRC or Obama or Edwards or don't think s/he is electable. I don't care why YOU support them.

I would like candidate news- what the candidate is doing, speeches made (especially if audio/video is available) and new/clarification of positions announced.  

Maybe turning off the comments on the former and let comments flow on the latter might eventually slow the spam down.

2ndly, we all need to take a pledge to be more judicious in the rec list. I know longer reflexively recommend diaries on my candidate.

I get the feeling that the candidate spam diaries aren't the result of intentional diary pushers who are trying to maliciously take over MyDD, but rather the result of people wanting to say "me too!" in as strong a way as possible. I think the problem is that recommending the diary is viewed as a way to give props to the author and show approval for the message, not a way to suggest insightful or informative diaries that the community would enjoy. I like the idea of a slightly more in depth recommend system -- for example, a separate device to just give "kudos" or something of the sort. Or what if everyone on the site were limited to one diary recommendation per day, or even per week. It would make you think a lot harder about recommending something, and would (hopefully) help curtail accidental candidate spam.