5 ms·

Shameless plug : As someone who was fed up with Disqus, I decided to build my own commenting platform ( https://hostedcomments.com/ https://hostedcomments.com/

Shameless plug : As someone who was fed up with Disqus, I decided to build my own commenting platform ( https://hostedcomments.com/ https://hostedcomments.com/ ) with a focus on privacy : no ads, no tracking scripts. Having come across numerous instances of people complaining about Disqus and some even willing to pay for an alternative, I realized that this could potentially be turned into a SaaS. You can see the commenting system in action here : https://www.ploggingdev.com/2017/08/building-a-disqus-alternative-part-1--research/ https://www.ploggingdev.com/2017/08/building-a-disqus-altern... Any feedback is welcome. Edit : If you're interested, you can register and add comments to your website. Currently there are no limitations on user accounts and there is no payment processing built in to the signup flow, so no CC required.

rambojazz 9y ago
Is this open source and can be self-hosted? If not, it's just another Disqus.
- gsich 9y ago
  >Just copy paste a little code snippet and we manage everything. It's another Disqus.
  - yuhong 9y ago
    This does not mean that ads are the only possible model, of course.
- ploggingdev 9y ago
  It's closed source. > it's just another Disqus. The main difference is the privacy aspect since I don't track users or serve ads. Disqus' business model depends on collecting user data and monetizing it, unlike mine where I directly charge website owners to embed comments.
  - tombrossman 9y ago
    Closed source means users unable to verify your marketing claims about tracking. Privacy conscious users like myself would prefer an open-source commenting platform, even one with tracking, since we could verify how it worked (and also take it a step further and circumvent tracking by examining the source). Also, what's to prevent a provider from double-dipping? If you can sell the product plus your users data you can presumably generate even more income. For example, mobile phone carriers sell monthly plans to users and some sell users location and usage data (usually "anonymised") to advertisers. I don't mean to imply that you are doing these things, or that you ever would, but without independent verification by a trusted third-party, all the users have to go on are your marketing claims. What's your plan for dealing with sceptical users?
    - ploggingdev 9y ago
      I guess I'll have to earn trust the long, hard way : * clear policies on how user data is handled * explicit commitment to never sell user data to third parties * transparency about any specific concerns users might have * no dark patterns to trick users or website owners * a track record of good decision making and staying true to the commitment to privacy And for people who find me through forums (including HN) or via my blog, I think my privacy + no bullsh*t leanings are pretty clear. Since I'm solo and bootstrapped, I don't know what options I have regarding independent verification of my claims, but if I get to a point where I can explore such options, I'm all for third party verification of my claims.
      - anon335dtzbvc 9y ago
        Could you tell why you choose to make it closed source?
        reitanqild 9y ago
        Not op, but here is an obvious and valid one: Because it is easier to monetize that way.
        9y ago
- franciscop 9y ago
  Following that logic any non-open-source comment platform would be another disqus.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    Yes, that's exactly what it means.
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      Still, I would say the problem isn't open source or not, it's the SaaS model. SaaS is the ultimate closed source, because you have no way (nor right) to tell what the service is doing with your data.
    - franciscop 9y ago
      Are facebook comments "just another disqus" then?
      - icebraining 9y ago
        In the sense that is under discussion, yes.
Moru 9y ago
Good idea! Two things: 1. Please make sure you support all languages (utf-8). 2. Some public forums want anonymous posts that they can check and allow manually but still need to know who it came from (newspapers in Sweden does this a lot). Usually requires entering an email adress every time and a checkbox "I preffer to be anonymous".
- ploggingdev 9y ago
  > 1. Please make sure you support all languages (utf-8). I'll need to cross check, but I think with the default settings, it's currently supported. > 2. Some public forums want anonymous posts that they can check and allow manually but still need to know who it came from (newspapers in Sweden does this a lot). Usually requires entering an email adress every time and a checkbox "I prefer to be anonymous". Good idea, I'll add support for anonymous posting with appropriate moderation policies to prevent spam/abuse. Thanks for the feedback.
  - le-mark 9y ago
    I almost did this, there are a couple around (remarkbox.com for example). What I contemplated, as a way to circumvent ad blocking, was to offer a "white label" service, so the user could configure "comments.mysite.com" with a CNAME to point to www.hostedcomments.com so the comments would appear to be hosted by the same domain. I guess that would fool most ad blockers, and users would have to blacklist the "comments.mysite.com" on an individual basis. Seems kind of shady to me. Have you considered this?
    - SomeStupidPoint 9y ago
      Two points: There's nothing wrong with using the CNAME if you're only serving comments off that domain. Also, I'm pretty sure you can regex adblocking DNS entries, so you could block on comments.. pretty easily with minimal casualties. You'd have to intentionally randomize it to bypass adblockers... Which will probably get your domain listed as a badhost by most peers. (Smarter adblockers would check for CNAMEs and IP blocks, but let's not ecalate the arms race for no reason.)
bigbugbag 9y ago
Will it survive sesta ?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

rambojazz 9y ago

Is this open source and can be self-hosted? If not, it's just another Disqus.

gsich 9y ago
>Just copy paste a little code snippet and we manage everything. It's another Disqus.
- yuhong 9y ago
  This does not mean that ads are the only possible model, of course.
ploggingdev 9y ago
It's closed source. > it's just another Disqus. The main difference is the privacy aspect since I don't track users or serve ads. Disqus' business model depends on collecting user data and monetizing it, unlike mine where I directly charge website owners to embed comments.
- tombrossman 9y ago
  Closed source means users unable to verify your marketing claims about tracking. Privacy conscious users like myself would prefer an open-source commenting platform, even one with tracking, since we could verify how it worked (and also take it a step further and circumvent tracking by examining the source). Also, what's to prevent a provider from double-dipping? If you can sell the product plus your users data you can presumably generate even more income. For example, mobile phone carriers sell monthly plans to users and some sell users location and usage data (usually "anonymised") to advertisers. I don't mean to imply that you are doing these things, or that you ever would, but without independent verification by a trusted third-party, all the users have to go on are your marketing claims. What's your plan for dealing with sceptical users?
  - ploggingdev 9y ago
    I guess I'll have to earn trust the long, hard way : * clear policies on how user data is handled * explicit commitment to never sell user data to third parties * transparency about any specific concerns users might have * no dark patterns to trick users or website owners * a track record of good decision making and staying true to the commitment to privacy And for people who find me through forums (including HN) or via my blog, I think my privacy + no bullsh*t leanings are pretty clear. Since I'm solo and bootstrapped, I don't know what options I have regarding independent verification of my claims, but if I get to a point where I can explore such options, I'm all for third party verification of my claims.
    - anon335dtzbvc 9y ago
      Could you tell why you choose to make it closed source?
      - reitanqild 9y ago
        Not op, but here is an obvious and valid one: Because it is easier to monetize that way.
      - 9y ago
franciscop 9y ago
Following that logic any non-open-source comment platform would be another disqus.
- icebraining 9y ago
  Yes, that's exactly what it means.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    Still, I would say the problem isn't open source or not, it's the SaaS model. SaaS is the ultimate closed source, because you have no way (nor right) to tell what the service is doing with your data.
  - franciscop 9y ago
    Are facebook comments "just another disqus" then?
    - icebraining 9y ago
      In the sense that is under discussion, yes.

Moru 9y ago

Good idea! Two things: 1. Please make sure you support all languages (utf-8). 2. Some public forums want anonymous posts that they can check and allow manually but still need to know who it came from (newspapers in Sweden does this a lot). Usually requires entering an email adress every time and a checkbox "I preffer to be anonymous".

ploggingdev 9y ago
> 1. Please make sure you support all languages (utf-8). I'll need to cross check, but I think with the default settings, it's currently supported. > 2. Some public forums want anonymous posts that they can check and allow manually but still need to know who it came from (newspapers in Sweden does this a lot). Usually requires entering an email adress every time and a checkbox "I prefer to be anonymous". Good idea, I'll add support for anonymous posting with appropriate moderation policies to prevent spam/abuse. Thanks for the feedback.
- le-mark 9y ago
  I almost did this, there are a couple around (remarkbox.com for example). What I contemplated, as a way to circumvent ad blocking, was to offer a "white label" service, so the user could configure "comments.mysite.com" with a CNAME to point to www.hostedcomments.com so the comments would appear to be hosted by the same domain. I guess that would fool most ad blockers, and users would have to blacklist the "comments.mysite.com" on an individual basis. Seems kind of shady to me. Have you considered this?
  - SomeStupidPoint 9y ago
    Two points: There's nothing wrong with using the CNAME if you're only serving comments off that domain. Also, I'm pretty sure you can regex adblocking DNS entries, so you could block on comments.. pretty easily with minimal casualties. You'd have to intentionally randomize it to bypass adblockers... Which will probably get your domain listed as a badhost by most peers. (Smarter adblockers would check for CNAMEs and IP blocks, but let's not ecalate the arms race for no reason.)

bigbugbag 9y ago

Will it survive sesta ?

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]