Best practice for professional communities

Came across this nice Slideshare on Community 2.0: The Business of Online Communities, and spotted HBO’s Standards page on slide 29 with these examples of acceptable and unacceptable comment:

  1. Be respectful and civil to other members, even if you disagree with them. Differences of opinion are OK; personal attacks are not. ACCEPTABLE POST: Member X, what you said is stupid and irrelevant. Why would you believe that? UNACCEPTABLE: Member X, you are a stupid idiot. Only a jackass would believe that.
  2. Any unacceptable content (posts, member names, or subject lines containing profanity, sexually graphic or offensive language, etc) will be deleted. ACCEPTABLE POST: Wow! The shit sure hit the fan on The Wire last night! UNACCEPTABLE: Member X, I can’t believe you didn’t like last night’s episode, what a dumb shit you are!

While we wouldn’t consider using examples like these, it got me thinking what would be good examples be for professional online communities?

Likewise we wouldn’t have a line which talks about “reserving the right to remove any material that does not (in our judgment) comply with these standards and to revoke posting privileges at our discretion and without warning or explanation” as per HBO’s. But what would be best practice on professional communities?

Budget coverage using CoveritLive to capture tweets

Dennis Howlett deployed CoveritLive to good effect on the ICAEW’s online communities today to cover the UK budget as it unfolded, as caught (via hash tags) by individual tweets. His reflections on the project here.

Budget day twitters

Transcript of the budget speech on Hansard online.

Go to say that in the circumstances that this extremely political budget was in one sense well played by Labour.

Be optimistic about growth, and push green tech and digital investment; up the tax on the rich as if anyone but the rich care (and the rich can get accountants to evade these hikes);  and push funding cuts till after the general election.