Embedded below is an abridged version (10 minutes!) of my 2009 Northern Voice presentation on managing and engaging the community the develops around one’s blog. Specifically, one goals of this presentation was to pull in some of the thinking from the negotiation and conflict management space and see how it might apply to dealing with people who comment on your blog. Hopefully, people will find it interesting.
Finally, a key lesson that came to me while developing the presentation is that most blogs, social media projects, and online projects in general, really need a social contract – or as Skirky describes it, a bargain – that the organizer and the community agree to. Often such contracts (or bargains) are strongly implied, but I believe it is occasionally helpful to make them explicit – particularly on blogs or projects that deal with contentious (politics) or complicated (many open source projects) issues.
At 8:43 in the presentation I talk about what I believe is the implicit bargain on my site. I think about codifying it, especially as a I get more and more commentors. That said, the community that has developed around this blog – mostly of people I’ve never met – is fantastic, so there hasn’t been an overwhelming need.
Finally thank you to Bruce Sharpe for posting a video of the presentation.
So, I hope this brief presentation is helpful to some of you.
(Notice how many people are coughing! You can tell it was winter time!)
eaves.ca 
Of course you're not implying that WE are difficult.
Pingback: David Eaves on coping with difficult comments | Social Signal
I am wondering what part of commenting you find difficult? I guess handling spammers right!
What you're missing (which is fundamental to community, even virtual) is M. Scott Peck's model. Though his model is for the physical community-making but the rules apply to virtual communities as well (especially the platforms which are engaging and with loyal readership).BTW, you have excellent presentation on the topic.——–Based on his experience with community building workshops, Peck says that community building typically goes through four stages: * Pseudocommunity: This is a stage where the members pretend to have a bon homie with one another, and cover up their differences, by acting as if the differences do not exist. Pseudocommunity can never directly lead to community, and it is the job of the person guiding the community building process to shorten this period as much as possible. * Chaos: When pseudocommunity fails to work, the members start falling upon each other, giving vent to their mutual disagreements and differences. This is a period of chaos. It is a time when the people in the community realize that differences cannot simply be ignored. Chaos looks counterproductive but it is the first genuine step towards community building. * Emptiness: After chaos comes emptiness. At this stage, the people learn to empty themselves of those ego related factors that are preventing their entry into community. Emptiness is a tough step because it involves the death of a part of the individual. But, Scott Peck argues, this death paves the way for the birth of a new creature, the Community. * True community: Having worked through emptiness, the people in community are in complete empathy with one another. There is a great level of tacit understanding. People are able to relate to each other's feelings. Discussions, even when heated, never get sour, and motives are not questioned.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Scott_Peck
arif – thank you for this comment, great link. I'm going to reflect on how this fits into the models I've been using. This is exactly why having a blog is so great – exposure to cool stuff like this.Thank you again.