Some Rules For Comment Moderation 529


This is essentially a free speech forum. I enjoy much of the banter which goes on between commenters, particularly the dedicated band of people who post on a daily basis. There is an important distinction between my writing, and the comments section. The proportion of readers who leave comments is well under 1%. I cannot know what percentage of the readers read comments, but I suspect it is not terribly high.

In social media I find establishment hacks – particularly journalists and Labour Party functionaries – dismiss my thoughts by referring to the comments section. “Craig Murray – have you seen the tinfoil hats comments on his blog!” being a genuine and very typical example. Well, if people wish to damn me by association with the views of other people, that is sadly an example of the low intellectual standards of the British nomenklatura of our time. The only views on here which are mine are those which I write.

I cherish the diversity of the comment threads and am fond of our little community, most of whom I have never met. I do not value people by the standard of how close their views are to my own. I am sometimes saddened by the personal animosities which arise between people.

We state some rules from time to time. This is the current set, which I just made up:

No racism. Any comment which is racist will simple be deleted immediately. The biggest problem we face is anti-Jewish comment, which I will not tolerate. We are not in the business of stigmatising anti-Zionism as anti-Jewish, but there are quite frequently distinctly anti-Jewish comments. I deleted one just an hour ago.

Similarly, no holocaust denial. I do not believe it should be illegal (I am against thought crime) but I do not wish to have it on my blog as those associated with it often have very unpleasant sympathies. That is not to say the subject of the holocaust can never be mentioned – it will never be possible to ascertain the precise number who were killed, and it is important we remember not only the Jews but the Poles, gypsies, gays, freemasons and numerous others who suffered. But the basic facts are not in doubt. It is surprising how often people attempt to insinuate holocaust denial.

Sockpuppetry. It is in practice impossible to outlaw sockpuppetry without a formal registration system, which I do not want. But the adoption of multiple identities within the same thread is not to be allowed, nor the creation of identities of which the purpose is to ridicule, attack or insult another contributor.

Fair Play. Play the ball, not the man. Address arguments, not people. Do not impugn the motives of others, including me. No taunting.

Relevance

Attempts to keep people on topic are hopeless, but do try.

9/11

We don’t discuss 9/11. There are plenty of places on the web where you can do that. It tends to take over threads.

Contribute

Contributions which are primarily just a link to somewhere else will be deleted. You can post links, but give us the benefit of your thoughts upon them.

No explanation.

Enforcing these rules is necessarily arbitrary and needs judgement calls. Moderators are precluded from explaining decisions online. If you want to complain use the contact button.

Moderators

We have, and have had, excellent moderators over many years. But almost all have found it not only time consuming but also surprisingly emotionally draining. If you are interested in volunteering and are willing for me to know both your real and online identity, please get in tough using the contact button.


529 thoughts on “Some Rules For Comment Moderation

1 16 17 18
  • Clark

    Macky, that is most dishonest of you. Just recently I specifically referred to the use of Wahabbist forces as proxies, and that I said this has to stop – in fact, I think it was in the second part of the very comment you quote. You seem to have quoted selectively again, presumably in an attempt to discredit me.

    You could almost be a shill for the warmongers, chipping bits of the peace movement one person at a time.

  • Clark

    Macky, I do not have a “war on terror”. Please stop imputing; it is against the rules. It is unsurprising that some of your comments get deleted. Maybe you want it that way so you can cry “Bias” !

    I think that there may be so much resentment concentrated in ISIS that military force may be the only option remaining at this point. It is a tragedy. It was caused by grossly immoral foreign policy over the course of decades.

  • Clark

    Macky, that’s three ad hominen you’ve directed at me. You haven’t even tried to engage rationally, and you have been dishonest by quoting selectively. Please fuck off and die, shit for brains ! 🙂

  • glenn_uk

    Technicolour: Yes, it is indeed. Well spotted 🙂

    Clark, have you ever read it? It would do you good, particularly when dealing with dishonest, underhand misery merchants as are all too common around here.

  • Clark

    Glenn_uk, there’s a copy on my bookshelf. I’ve read it a few times, but neglected to apply it to blog comments.

  • Macky

    Complete shambles on the wha-wad-be-a-traitor-knave thread due to all the arbitrary & retro requested self deletions ! Total waste of time trying to follow any points, and very noticeable that Blog favorites’ lies remain but the answering responses don’t;

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/07/wha-wad-be-a-traitor-knave/comment-page-2/#comment-536912

    (Note the lying accusation of “It is not ‘Clark’s poll’, you disingenuous poster”)

    and my reply stating that it was indeed Clark who linked to this Poll, giving the link to his Post, was deleted !;

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/07/wha-wad-be-a-traitor-knave/#comment-536653

    Funny how the moderating arbitrariness always seems to favour the loyal Craig-bots ! 😀

  • glenn_uk

    “Funny how the moderating arbitrariness always seems to favour the loyal Craig-bots ! 😀

    Glad to see you pleasuring yourself as per usual, M. Macky.

    Seemed that a number of posts were deleted more or less at random to me. I could be wrong of course, so may I pleasure you by providing a few words that will have you squealing in delight in their (mis-)quotable potential (i.e. the first six of this sentence).

    Pip pip, old boy.

  • Macky

    Clark; “Well you’re unlikely to get favoured Macky ‘cos you’re such a lying abusive tosser.”

    You really are extraordinary thick, you just don’t get it do you !

    The last thing I would want is to be favoured here; Craig has many negative traits, of which intellectual cowardice & intellectual dishonesty are continuously confirmed both by his behaviour, & his blatantly bias moderating set-up.

    As for “lying abusive tosser”, you are only kidding yourself, as more & more people are realising, probably the majority now, that you are really are a vile dishonest creature, who tries to project all his vile behaviour onto others.

  • glenn_uk

    Just of of interest, Macky, do you have any other interests?

    Clark’s told all of us far more than we’d care to know about his personal life. Nobody could accuse him of holding back.

    I have declared an interest in motorcycling, running, martial arts, maintaining a relationship with a partner who also runs, and so on.

    Would you like to tell us something about yourself? Do you have any hobbies?

  • glenn_uk

    Just thought I’d explain – my last post might be misconstrued as fishing for some personally identifiable piece of information. I’m not. Your politics actually seem fairly sound to me, and I’d like to establish some other common interest.

    I find common ground often helps in discussions, particularly between those you’re not inclined to initially like. Surely you understand basic diplomacy – what common ground might we share?

    Cycling is something I only enjoy a great deal, for instance. Want to swap stories about getting gunk out of the gears, or stopping brake/gear cables stretching and causing problems? Let’s do it!

  • Macky

    Glenn_uk; “Your politics actually seem fairly sound to me, and I’d like to establish some other common interest.”

    Yes, unlike Craig, I do think shared political viewpoints do matter in the choice of who your friends are, or with whom you chose to associate with; a person’s politics is a manifestation of a person’s principles & moral compass. However equally important is a person’s character, so yes you may share a passion for running, or Left Wing politics, but if that person also has such negative personal traits, say as dishonesty, spitefulness, delusional paranoia, inconsistency, hysterical aggressiveness, authoritarian complex, etc, I personally give them a wide berth, keeping them at a safe a distance as possible; which is why I regret ever giving Clark an email address, which he has used both to betray confidentiality in an act of spite, and has also used to try & stalk me on the internet.

  • glenn_uk

    I agree. It would be impossible to have a close “friend” who happened to be a far right winger. How could one regard someone as a decent chap, but just has a bit of a thing for putting the boot into the poor, hates foreigners, despises non-natives, money-grubbing, moralising yet understands that people in position of power have to do each other favours… you get my drift, I’m sure.

    So what about outside interests – do you have any? It’s curious, I asked the same sort of question on a motorbike forum I’ve hung around for years, just the other day. We got back a surprisingly coinciding number of interests, including the environment, animal welfare, surfing and meditating.

1 16 17 18

Comments are closed.