Dear friends,
I woke up this morning to see 107 comments!! So, first and foremost, THANK YOU ALL!!
Second, I will have to sit down and read each comment carefully, making notes. But I want you to know that I did already read a lot of them and that this is already very helpful, at least for me. So, again, thank you!
Third, and I should have mentioned that yesterday, I invite all the moderators to join in a share their point of view (whether they identify themselves as moderators or not is their decision, either way is fine by me).
Lastly, let’s continue the discussion here, so as to not over-clutter the initial post, okay?
I have to leave my keyboard for a few hours, but I shall be back later in the afternoon and as soon as I have the time needed for this I shall dedicate a separate post in which I will try to react to as many ideas/suggestions you have made.
But, again, thank you all, this is very helpful to me!
Kind regards
Andrei
UPDATE: again, this is all very helpful for me, thank you!! I will wait a couple of days to give time to those who have not seen my rant+question yet, and then I will talk with the head of moderation, who is also our webmaster, and then let you know if we will implement any changes and, if yes, why and if not, why not. Please give us a couple of days, you have not been forgotten, and we will get back to you all. And, above all, thank you!!!
Saker, aren’t you bothered the US is about to deploy their 53rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team to the Ukraine?
What is your view on this escalation?
Expecting some hot action?
https://www.wfla.com/news/pinellas-county/53rd-infantry-brigade-combat-team-set-to-deploy-to-ukraine/
I’m buying popcorn to enjoy the carnage and extinguishing of the hubris. Seeing the 101st and 82nd for what they truly are now, at the Kabul airport, they already embrace their victimhood with narcotics and homosexuality….not to mention being so full of it that all toilets are backed up for a 5 mile radius.
@Dave
” 165 soldiers … of the 53rd Infantry Brigade … will help train and mentor the Ukrainian Armed Forces … to develop and implement systems to enhance combat training … to four Armed Forces Ukraine Brigades. ”
I post this off topic comment to illustrate how news titles can be misleading. When pull out essence of the news, suddenly, US brigade deployment looks like just another attempt to learn Ukies to shoot straight from US-made arsenal.
Please take this discussion to MFC. Any further off-topic comments will go to trash. Mod.
This may backfire on Biden – domestically.
totally offtopic
thank you NOT
Noble Dave,
Please remember the Debaltsevo Cauldron – That’s what will happen to the 53rd…
Cheers,
Tikhon. : – )
Saker, I rarely comment but I regularly read the articles and consider the comment section here very illuminating.
I suggest you do whatever it takes to keep the comment sections whole. I suspect great improvement will be made by removing Anonymous and installing a bot filter.
this blog should install full ID2020. problomo solved!
I kinda agree… It may be almost impossible to have only perfect, smart, cogent comments at all times on all subjects. Such is Internet… Not sure that it is worth agonizing too much over some mindless comments. The readership here typically can spot a dummy comment.
(Case in point – at Naked Cap, the proprietor tends to get really nasty with commenters she disagrees with (not all of which are dumb) – presumable, to keep everybody in line … but this has alienated many otherwise good commenters.)
Not sure I would change anything, Saker…
AI bot comments are increasingly infiltrating everywhere and I agree that it must be very difficult for non-English speakers to quickly see the disjointed sentences as being auto-generated. Apparently intelligent conversations are a threat.
Just rejoice that the ratio of trolls here is not anywhere as high as they are on Southfront with the likes of bot Jens constantly spouting pure garbage throughout… ;)
You are correct Sir. The Southfront comment section has gone waaay south. It’s almost as if they are writing their own spam to gain some advertising $. It’s just not worth reading at all.
@Andrei
After reading Part I and 100+ comments, I do not have much to say which had not been said.
I liked your blog as it was/is. By changing too much existing rules, you are risking breakage of intricate structure that succesful blog is made of. (Your occasional anger on idiots is important part of that).
You and moderators do wonderfull job, and I do not think that anything important should be changed – except anonymous comments, mainly because confusion of having too many Anons.
I don’t know whether this has been brought up before. One suggestion: Add some type of “thumb up”, “thumb down” (and maybe others) buttons to let the readers help moderate and rate the individual comment.
Great idea.
This what I also thought.
By using “like” and “dislike” buttons—combined with an automated way of hiding overwhelmingly down-voted comments—you will shift much of the moderation burden to the community. In fact, adding a third button, aptly named, e.g. “does not contribute”, might provide you better insight.
Besides improved logistics, it will also shift the quality evaluation to your community. This would further insulate you from accusation of unjust moderation, etc.
Note, that I do not mean that moderators should go away; but their work would be enhanced by such a crowd-sourcing evaluation of comment quality.
Besides, if this gets combined with a mandatory registration for posting comments, it would allow you to whittle down repeated offenders. Mind you, it will not stop determined people, but I suspect it will greatly reduce the amount of useless comments.
Isn’t there a danger that anon and bots could simply dislike and down-vote lots of good contributions?
Like they did at the gladiatorial games in Ancient Rome.
After reading the comments on page 1 so far today I think perhaps those types of inverted & disjointed comments should stay unless they are offensive, but your moderators rate them with stars (1-5 of them bad to excellent) and put a clown emoji tag on those that are silly. Or a question mark ?? tag.
As one other person has pointed out, there may be coded messages in these or be a signal of something upcoming. Is certainly evidence of the mindset of the writer.
I seldom post here while checking the blog every day.
I use a nickname of my choice buy it can be Anonymous as well. Because AFAIK there is not any king of registration for participants. And every post goes through moderation. Which puts a big load on the moderator.
Not familiar with the blog platform features but if there is some user registration constant participants can get a ‘reliable’ status and could post without obligatory moderation.
Again: The beautiful solution to the problem of ”the anonymous scourge” is to automatically lump all these anonymice together in a separate ’backwater’ of the site, no matter in which thread they were posted originally. This trashes completely and utterly their arrogant pleasure in swamping threads while hiding their own comment history. The anonymice that do have something sensible to share with the wider readership will quickly abandon the lazy habit of not signing their posts. It really is that simple.
Granted, the spambot submissions are more tricky but, essentially, the same idea applies here as well. We had two notorious spambot contributors littering the site in 2019 and 2020, and in such evident cases the submissions could similarly be lumped together in some separate garbage heap. People who come here to wreck or at least disturb the forum should be free to post their trash, but be denied the ugly satisfaction of seeing it where they thought it would appear. I call this idea ”Let the trolls feed the blog rather than the other way around”.
Dear Saker
Whatever approach you ultimately adopt, please keep in mind the KISS principle. While foul language and personal insults can be weeded out relatively easily by the moderators, weeding out obsessive rants and plain stupidity becomes much more subjective. Let the moderators weed out the worst of worst posts and let the readers vote down idiotic and nonsensical posts by using like/dislike button or thumbs up/thumbs down button. Relatively simple, very democratic, and lower effort on part of moderators. Most users will avoid heavily voted down posts – and that may be as good as sending those into the trash can.l
The moderators do a truly superb job. I’ve had a couple of complaints in the past, but on reflection they aren’t that important. On several occasions over the years I’ve posted something that was either regrettable or ill conceived and each time these comments have been blocked (by folk with wiser and cooler heads than mine). Thank you.
I must admit that I thought Anonymous was a just a couple of (highly erratic) individuals. An open name of this kind surely encourages people to be incautious and provocative? Personally, I don’t think a ‘thumbs up/thumbs down’ system is appropriate as it allows for majority mobbing (if folk genuinely approve or disapprove of commentary they should take the time to post their own views).
The anonymous handle is sometimes used by people fearing for their privacy and safety, although the secret police (called “intelligence” or “security” in the US) can easily trace these people. And many use anonymity to do things that they know are wrong (abuses, insults, etc.).
Yes, agree with you that the thumbs up/down approach can lead to “mobbing”, that is, shouting down of dissident voices. I had suggested this approach myself (like many others), but good of you to point out an unpleasant consequence of this approach.
There is no perfect solution, is there? As an aside, the website “unz.com” is fascinating and very free speech oriented and tolerant but posts there can be vicious, full of racial hatred, and rants from people with some ‘idee fixe’ or the other. However, because it requires a user handle, regular readers can simply skip over posts from undesirable people. Many readers have advised the Saker to require posters to have a user handle and perhaps he will consider it.
There might be another reason for using anonymity. Psychological. From my experience, it is easier to cope with the abuses that, almost invariably, a ‘dissident’ commenter is gratified. You take it lightly when ‘idiot’, ‘scum’ are not directed at your person.
The anonymous handle is used first and foremost by people who are lazy/arrogant and, most importantly, want to hide their comment history from the wider readership here. Forget about their excuses about fearing coercion from employers/authorities/whatever. If there were any substance to this claim (there isn’t), then the average quality of the anonymous postings would be much higher and, secondly, they would be much fewer in numbers. FYI: An empty handle is 100% futile as a means to fool any professional spies about your real identity. The reason most people, myself included, use a nick rather than the actual full name is privacy. My full name is all but unique and using it instead of Nussiminen would certainly entail abuse and slander arriving right at my very doorstep and not from employers or the authorities but violently insane people — from all walks of life.
Hajduk: “Personally, I don’t think a ‘thumbs up/thumbs down’ system is appropriate as it allows for majority mobbing…”
Agree. One site which I frequent has a ‘clique’ who immediately downvotes a comment into oblivion (it vanishes from immediate view). I open many of those, and the comment is often good – it simply disagreed with the ‘clique’ mindset in some manner. I would hate to see Saker comment sections subject to those pretensions…
Hajduk says: ” I don’t think a ‘thumbs up/thumbs down’ system is appropriate as it allows for majority mobbing”
I disagree. Are you suggesting that too many “thumb down” vote will intimate commenter who hold minority view? Is “thumb down” vote actually more scary than direct rebuttal comments from the majority? I seriously doubt that.
Hajduk says: “if folk genuinely approve or disapprove of commentary they should take the time to post their own views”
Your suggestion is exactly the opposite of the problem we are trying to solve here: which is to trim the useless trolls. Few people have the time nor interests to read idiotic comments, let alone trying to post a reply.
“Thumb up/down” buttons enable saving of time and improvement of reading experience for the majority of readers. There are good reasons most of the more sophisticated sites have this feature.
(Thumbs down)…’Nobody likes you’…(Thumbs up)…’Everyone loves you’…
How exactly is this approach ‘sophisticated’?
Hajduk says: “(Thumbs down)…’Nobody likes you’…(Thumbs up)…’Everyone loves you’…”
Not “nobody” or “everyone”. It only means that particular ONE individual likes or dislike you. You are jumping the gun by sweeping statement.
“Thumbs down/up” is another form of FREE speech, whether you call it “mob” or not. It allows readers to express their thought without too much time nor the need to type out bunch of letters. Some don’t have the English skills/confidence, others don’t have the time, yet more don’t have the interest in engaging with you, or simply prefer to keep low profile.
Furthermore, the feature give the readers/ moderators/ authors a good sense of the view of the “silent” majority for each comment. That itself is an important piece of info and increases the reading pleasure and efficiency of learning and communication bandwidth.
I could go on for more advantages, but I am sure neutral readers could themselves figure out a lot.
Who cares what the ‘silent majority’ think? Do you reference your own views to those of others, or do you make your own mind up?. In history the ‘silent majority’ have never been progressive in any way, and all the positive developments have been the work of tiny, often persecuted groups.
On a forum for dissident views a system that elevates ‘consensus point scoring’ seems truly out of place.
The poor English language argument also isn’t an issue because the moderators will happily Yandex translate your native tongue. For those that don’t have the time or inclination to post, or who prefer not to engage with other commentators, then the blatently obvious solution is for them to remain ‘silent’.
Years ago over at the Solari website CAF had a wonderful blog which I miss terribly.
Any chance we can all get together for lunch sometime really would love to meet face to face?
In the mean time have you seen this!!!!???
https://youtu.be/TvHsN5-YBLI
Cheers
Relax body. And, just let it be. If you really are what you want to show yourself to be, you would not have any “moderators” at all. Instead of “join(ing) in a share(ing) their point of view ” the “moderators” (like everybody else) should spend time with their friends and families . The truth is that the only “point of view” that passes here is your own. That’s the main reason you are still to make some real breakthroughs with your message.
Dear Saker
Whatever you do, please do not end your comments section. The comments I read here every day are the salt in the dish. Deleting them would turn your site into a series of lectures and would deny many of us a chance to have our say on the world as we see it.
Pearls and Irritations, an Australian site, removed its comments section, a feature that was interesting and informative. We were directed to send our comments to Facebook and Twitter, an insulting suggestion. The site is now boring.
Trust us, your readers, to be intelligent enough to spot nonsense when we read it. And keep up your so very valuable work.
Prezado sr. Hal.
Concordo fortemente com o seu pedido para a continuidade dos comentários aqui no blog.
Justamente são os comentários que tornam esse blog “único”.
Aprendo muito aqui !
Abraços aqui do Brasil.
Yandex translation. Mod:
Dear Mr. Hal.
I strongly agree with your request for continuity of comments here on the blog.
It is precisely the comments that make this blog “unique”.
I learn a lot here !
Hugs here from Brazil.
So, as a Saker mod, I’m going to anonymously offer my thoughts. This is longer than I intended but hopefully helpful.
tl;dr: I rant wildly about some things regarding the comments on the site.
First though, let me say, I have an enormous respect for the Saker. Everyday I’m happy I get to be a tiny part of making this site happen, and also, in getting to learn from someone as intelligent as he is, not to mention from those of you who comment and write here. So, to all of you, thank you for that.
Next, some context: you should have a sense of who I am. I’m not just a lowly robotic mod; I’m a real human being, dammit! In fact, over nearly 20 years, I’ve worked at a high level in the media and communications business. That means with companies all over the world, including some of the most recognizable.
This isn’t to toot my own horn (after all, my accomplishments are modest). However, I have a lot of experience with this stuff, and in those 20 years, I’ve seen and dealt with it all. (For you old timers, I remember when we did everything with clippings on a cutting room floor, and it was a big deal to figure out how to get things on the internet for the first time!) I’m also educated, older, and more informed than 99% of my peers (aka I’m not some dumb ass off the street). Hopefully, I can lend my professional insights and a bit of my personal experience for you today as I rant wildly.
So, anyway, Saker’s first post on moderation seemed to revolve around a few well-worn issues for online communication.
1) ***Trolling, which has come to mean almost anything.***
Unfortunately, the word’s meaning now can range from simple disagreements to more inflammatory, edgy comments. Once upon a time, we called something like this “playing devil’s advocate,” and it was an art in and of itself. Still, we can probably agree that we’re talking about malicious posters for this one.
Research has shown that being anonymous increases people’s bad behavior, ie trolling. So, typically banning anonymous comments works here. A few determined nutcases will keep coming back with new accounts, but it’s few and far between. Of note, other alternative media sites have occasionally banned anonymous posts with success, and I would probably support banning these on the Saker (even though, ironically, I’m posting anonymously myself today).
However, I don’t think this is the core of the issue we’re talking about. Banning anonymous accounts really just reduces the burden of moderating. Mods should be able to recognize and manage troll comments before they hit the wire.
2) ***Reducing the signal to noise ratio, aka dealing with stupid people on the internet.***
The answer to this one is less obvious. Each of us has only a limited amount of time, and there is so much to read and learn! Importantly though, I would point out that most people expect a certain noise level when reading comments. Blogs are like Twitter in this way (okay, maybe not as bad), but you get the idea. Often, short and rapid; sometimes, dumb. A worse example is the discourse on Reddit, which over time, has devolved into a predictable formula of derailed conversations due to someone who can’t help but post about a tangential personal experience they had or a stupid pun. Twitter might be toxic but Reddit is a site for idiots.
In contrast, I would ask you to consider how this site has a very high barrier to entry. Really, who’s seeking out a translation of Xi’s latest speeches plus analysis (thank you, Amarynth) or theology in early Christianity from an Orthodox perspective (thank you, Saker)? These are super niche topics, and I would contend that anyone who remains to comment on them isn’t your run-of-the-mill person. Point being, you’ve already reduced the pool of qualified applicants and put guards at the gate. So, the signal to noise is likely the lowest it can be or close to it.
Even so, I’d say there’s deeper issues going on here than dealing with stupid people. After all, the world is full of them, and as much as it pains me to say it, we have to get use to it, especially online. Instead, the real issue is that we’re not actually talking about intelligence but about something more subjective…expertise, purpose, and the rules of discourse. For example, the Saker’s experience running a media operation is different than mine, and with absolutely all due respect, I would say his rules need to be revisited to simplify them and make them more easier to remember and more objective (from an editorial perspective). Readers, if you can’t read between the lines, I’m trying to ever so tactful tell my boss that I think some of the editorial policy is st-st-st-st… stodgy. :)
Point being, he has his expertise and I have mine, just like everyone here. What appears stupid to me might just be stupid or there might be a reason it is the way it is. Maybe both! My own pet example is how much Ron Unz is embarrassing himself with his stupid Covid-19 bioweapons theory. It really annoys me! It looks intelligent until you do five minutes of research! In comparison, I’m sure the Saker would think many of my political thoughts are dumb! (More on this one in a moment). As a human and as professional, my job is to figure out where and if any of this matters. (Ron may have lost readers or gained some, I don’t know, but would he have been violating the rules of this blog with his ham-fisted assertions? It’s likely but I’d let them slide.).
Even so, I personally imagine that the Saker’s experience in the Orthodox Church has colored his crafting of the rules. That’s okay, if idiosyncratic, but are they still serving the purpose of the site? That’s all that matters, and that’s a conversation best had while reviewing the traffic analytics here and talking about the site’s purpose.
That brings us to our last point.
3) ***Creating a trusted community of intelligent people discussing hard topics in real-time.***
I think this is probably the real thing we’re getting at. For each of us, the purpose of the site is a little different. I don’t comment myself, for example, because I’m looking to get something else out of this space. To return to something I said earlier, however, I know that some of my political thoughts might seem stupid. However, as an intelligent person who sometimes says stupid things for any number of reasons, if I did comment, I would do so because I’m trying to learn from a master, the Saker. We should recognize that creating such a trusted community means putting up with each other like this. For example, as a Gen Xer, I will never cite a source for you. Never. This is the internet, look it up yourself, Boomer!
Probably my biggest observation here is that, as a mod, I’ll readily admit it can be just as difficult to moderate such an intelligent community where everyone has their expertise and are talking about difficult subjects. How can I tell when someone is being a wrong-headed idiot about what’s happening on the ground in a remote Afghanistan providence and can cite more obscure military documents vs a regular online commentator interested in Russia who remembers a thing they read somewhere at some place in time? I’m just a lowly mod, not an expert in…EVERYTHING! (For those of you paying attention, you can guess this is how some of those nonsensical hodge-podge comments got published to the site.)
However, in the alt-scene, blog comment sections have become a sort of de facto community forum for discussion which isn’t allowed by the ruling regime. Zerohedge is a wonderful example… I think by now no one reads much of the articles but scrolls right to the comments to find those handful with insight but also to get your thumb on the pulse. In the next few years, we’ll probably see these comment sections at alt-media sites transform into semi-closed forums or private chats. It’s probably non-controversial at this point that social media is dead, so personally, I view the Saker site as the vanguard to this media movement.
The moral of the story, however: the Saker should probably read less of the comments.
OK, so here’s me been out of the digs all day, reason don’t matter, but I’ll take up where I left off when I had to get the car out and running ASAP for VCO.
Mods. Can’t compliment them enough, they do an amazing job keeping this blog clean and rolling. ‘A mod to laud’ told it like it is, and God bless ’em, the lot of them, for keeping this querulous mob moving in roughly the correct direction.
Saker. Can’t thank him enough for this blog and all the work and heartache that goes in to making it what it is.
Commenters/Posters. Most are pretty damned good, there’s a lot of very intelligent posts and comments on this blog, I’d aver far more than most blogs, and Saker does a masterful ‘service’ to most of us by keeping blog up and running come hell or high water.
Now, post this and sit back and read what the really intelligent bloggers posted.
Auslander
@A Mod to Laud
“In the next few years, we’ll probably see these comment sections at alt-media sites transform into semi-closed forums or private chats. It’s probably non-controversial at this point that social media is dead, so personally, I view the Saker site as the vanguard to this media movement.”
I can only concur with this statement as one of those who abandoned, in disgust, social media platforms years ago.
Surprisingly, there was no informational vacuum afterward. Just the opposite. Highly recomend this practice.
I’d like first to thank Mr Raesky once again for his outstanding job and will go straight to the point: I believe it should there’s one rule that could be perfected, the one that reads about “Roman Catholic Church”. I’m personally agnostic but I work within a university where we usually discuss Brazilian society, institutions and politics and Christian religion, Protestant or Catholic, is ever present inside of it, being the people aware or not. In fact, I believe that the “questão religiosa” (religious question) is utmost important right now here. So, once the moderating staff reads my papers, please understand that I am a scholar that does not have anything to do with religion A, B or C but I can not avoid being aware that here in Brasil the Catholic Church has exerted an immense influence in our social formation, if anything during our 388 slavery system that was justified by the regime based on God’s will (we used to be a monarchy by that time). I understand that silly people may be touchy or get offended but I believe we are not discussing to make people “feel better” but for the good of enriching our semiotic field with deep thoughts. Thank you once again and cheers from Rio de Janeiro.
Saker, can I caution against using Disqus and or captcha.
Disqus is an Israeli product used to track contributors across the entire internet.
As someone said in the pt1 thread yesterday…. some of us try to have a lite footprint on the internet. I know I do, with no social media. I comment at your blog because it does not require registration.
You have commenters from across the world, from jurisdictions with even more surveillance than mine.
I would be concerned your readers and contributors who realise the intrusiveness of software like Discus would no longer post. (And I suspect some who might be affected are among your Tier1 contributors.)
Captcha is a google project which also tracks the poster from across the entire web.
Using either of these products… you are feeding your valuable and very independent blog right into the very belly of “the beast”.
Martyanov uses Disqus and paid advertising.
I fear for him.
He is building, by “word of mouth” and his own unique! humour and expertise, another small pocket of independent thought and comment.
He risks losing everything in a nanosecond if it’s decided to “cancel” him.
He’s safe ~ for now. But he’s building a base. And the western narrative cannot tolerate even a small “nobody” like Martyanov from effectively challenging with logic and facts.
Saker. You should surely be aware that your blog is “on the radar”. Surely you have had cyber attacks and hosting issues?
If you open your blog to Disqus, captcha and other software, you would be increasing the vulnerabilities of the security of the blog. Herb would probably know more about this.
People are suggesting like buttons and similar.
Please do NOT. Please keep your blog free and organic.
I think your long term readers know who to read and who to scroll. This has been said many times in Pt1 yesterday.
I suggest
1/ Rule 1- This is a moderated blog. You are offered the opportunity to submit a comment. We reserve the right to only publish comments assessed by the on duty moderator to be on topic, and that contribute to the discussion.
2/ Rule 2. See Rule 1. Use of obscenity, ad hominem and capital letters fails the standard set at Rule 1.
3/ Rule 3 Any comment designed to make me angry will make me angry and will be removed in anger.
Just engage Rule 3 for posts that make you angry.
Rules 4 Then lump your QAnon, covid and any new pet hates into another rule.
There were (I think) seven? rules when I arrived. There’s now 21? And you are still struggling with “rule evaders”.
Adding more rules is obviously not working. (What’s the definition of insanity?)
Instead. Rule 1. No one has an assumed “right” to have their comment published. That’s it. You own the blog. You publish comments at your discretion.
People then are free to
-/ go and post nasty comments about you at other blogs,
-/ start their own blog
-/ sit on their thumb and twist.
All of the above are not your problem!
And while a disgruntled poster is engaged in one or all of the above options, they are no longer here, irritating you.
Problem solved.
With love
WW.
(And love to all mods. Thanks. This is the best moderated blog on the entire internet)
(Which is why *some* people are not happy.)🤔
I agree! Love the simplified rules idea. As an english is my first (and only) language, I find it easy to spot the bots and just drive on by. I think anonymous should just get a free account with protonmail.com and their companion vpn . Come up with a catchy handle and he’ll be as anonymous as he likes. The only other comments I find annoying are the ones whose word count is greater than the original article. They could start their own blog and just link to it with a brief abstract/ summary. I think upvotes/ downvotes is a bad idea. A reader always has the option to hit reply and offer either encouragement or a rebuttal. I rarely comment but visit your blog daily. I think it’s great. Just remember, there’s an old joke in sales about the sales manager who figured the system was working too good so he changed it. Your system’s’ working just fine.
Yeah, I’ve pretty much stopped reading The American Conservative religiously (like I do this site and Moon of Alabama) at least a year ago, some months after they switched to Disqus in June 2019 and switched to a new format the following September.
Disqus has made it more difficult to keep up with new comments in a discussion – the older system was ‘stacked’ like in Moon of Alabama, and it even subdivided sections in pages not unlike with this current system and that of Moon of Alabama.
Using any search engine, one could look back at older threads based on particular keywords. I can hardly do this with Disqus. When TAC switched to Disqus, all those year-old conversations were deleted, only to be seen if they were archived in Wayback.
Me talking about this (what happened to TAC after it adopted Disqus) is like reminiscing of an old friend that died.
Saker, can I caution against using Disqus and or captcha.
No worries, I intensely dislike both.
Kind regards
Andrei
The Saker is on the radar simply for other serious reasons as well, like having Saeed Nasrallah material on The Saker.
Youtube, Google, and all the rest of social media happen to be controlled by ‘ our friends ‘.
Everybody communicates with their loved ones for the most part to and from the Middle East / West using ‘ Viber,
and all the rest of the ‘ Free ‘ channels of mass communication and these too are controlled right out of servers in
Tel Aviv. So, hundreds of millions are being watched, tens of millions are watched carefully, and millions are
right on the immediate radar.
Just get rid of the Anonymous posts. Most are trolls, but if two different posters use that tag it is hard to refer to the one you want. As a consumer of the Saker for 7 years, just dump the Anonymous posts.
Wrong. The best comments come from there. BTW if you know the internet even a hamster has an internet email address and you cannot do the damnest to verify it, unless you ask for phone number verification. Do that, and everyone here will drop out. You’ve been told.
Greetings,
I suggest you take into consideration the following points:
You and a sizeable minority – but you can imagine it as 50% of the community, without any loss of generality – of your readers are attached emotionally to Russia (which is both West and East), more than the West, and as a result, you: A – deeply dislike what is going in the West, B – value Russia, C – do not understand how the West treats Russia.
In contrast, those in the West who come here, the vast majority of those other 50%, share with you points A & B, but we do not have C – we know too well that ignorants and fools will follow socially sanctioned targets for hate, but distinguish between them and the West at large, since we also feel part of the West and yet we value Russia and other places run by mentally sane people.
Those who come here to attack the civilization-rebuilding agendas of present day Russian and Chinese leaders, just to name the most important, may just ignorants and fools – Hypothesis 1, or may do it as their job – Hypothesis 2. Who knows who in particular?
I would assume H2 – paid trolls -, by default, and do not think much about it.
Maybe, just maybe, you could the same tactics of leading official press in Russia. Do not censor some of the most lunatic phobic comments. Let them turn the community against them in disgust.
(Of course, don’t let them right articles. We already have trash enough.)
Cheers!
Sir,
You had me at Submarines In The Desert, so long ago.
I admit i gave up on the comments years ago. So promising at the outset – vast input from a truly disparate commentariat, which reinforced daily that I have so very much to learn, and that there is so much I will never be able to experience.
And then, as so often happens, people come to – for lack of a better expression – tailgate in your comments section. Over the years, I watched some “set up camp”, and play the strategies you identified in post #1.
I don’t know what the solution is, either. Have/would you consider comment holidays?
People who need their regular fix of control/shit-spreading and can’t get it, sometimes move on to greener pastures to, er, fertilize. Added benefit: you and mods get a few days to reconnect with life outside the blog.
Thank you and, Courage!
P
Some comments may be truely dispensable. They may have been composed in a state of excitement …and eventually got rightfully minced (or simply ignored) by more diligent thinkers on your blog. This experience of rejection may lead to a more humble expression of thought by the rejected – it may eventually change the person, realising he himself was very wrong on topic X and, in the best case, may reflect his path leading to his bullshit-comment, reflect on his influences and sources of knowledge etc. I may be romantizising here vividly, but I do believe these experiences happen via and on your blog. I respect any change you make to your blog, but I want to emphasize that there are things happening, good things, through your doing which are not visible, e.g. reducing the amount of BS in this world.
In my opinion your blog attracts students and profound teachers. The former may not know their status and their shortcomings (yet) and boast their Dunning-Kruger-issues to the world, the latter have to test their ability, their *serenity*, to cope with the students and serve as an example (by writing articles, commentaries, setting moderation policy..). They are students themselves actually. But there is a certain threshold (we are humans after all) the class is too big, for a finite number of teachers, and teaching looses its satisfaction.
I posted on the previous comments thread before noticing, in the update, that you asked readers to continue the discussion here. So I am re-posting here.
I wonder if a two-step procedure for commenting might weed out some of the most virulent pests. Step 1: the commenter submits their comment and it is automatically parked for a certain period of time (one hour, two, six? I don’t know). Step 2: after the parking period has expired, the commenter is free to go back and edit the comment and re-submit, at which point it goes to moderation in the normal way. Any comments that have not been edited (actually changed, even if just in the most minor way) and re-submitted at Step 2 automatically go to trash.
This might result in the following:
. no bots (on the assumption that they are drive-by shooters and don’t or can’t come back for Step 2);
. few, if any, real human drive-by shooters (on the assumption that they won’t come back for Step 2…too much work);
. fewer fights (on the assumption that after the parking period has expired, hot heads may have cooled and editing will serve the interests of mollification);
. those who have a low motivation to want to contribute sincerely to the blog might have an incentive to spare everyone else and just not bother commenting (on the assumption that Step 2 is too much work);
. those who wish to comment sincerely might take the opportunity at Step 2 to reflect on the first draft of their comment and edit it for greater clarity, thoughtfulness or succinctness, etc.; and
. there might be a reduced and simpler load for the moderators.
Perhaps those with a track-record of submitting excellent (or, at the very least, harmless) comments could be given a ‘gold pass’, in which case their comments would go straight to moderation at Step 1. Such ‘excellent’ commenters might even be tagged as such, as an incentive for them to keep up the good work and maintain their status, and as a guide to those new to the blog.
I am not technically competent in the fine art of blog management so I have no idea if any of this is possible or, even if possible, straightforward.
I never really figured out how to fly under the ‘anonymous’ flag of convenience, I’ve always entered my first name as an aid to the flow of a conversation,
maybe entering a name should be a required field?
on 4chan they used to use your IP to generate a national flag labelling your post, I found this useful for context if you were conversing with someone,
it also helped show up misleading behaviour, some people would try to pretend to be British but their language and syntax would reveal their true identity,
Andrei,
“So I turn to you, Saker community, what can you recommend? Is there anything we can do to finally free our comments section from this kind of mental garbage?”
No. We can’t. Sadly. And there is a reason why not. If we turn up the burner on the stove too high, the soup become charcoal. If we turn it down too low, it is raw. Either way, we starve.
“And if the above sounds to you like a frustrated cry for help, it’s because it is :-)”
I sincerely wish I could heed that cry, but the cry you hear in reply might not be the help you want to hear.
The internet today is just a cosmopolitan swirl of the real world as it has existed for time eternal. I’m sure there were trolls in Roman times, too.
After the 2020 election and the disastrous 1/6 demonstrations, I asked a simple question of my fellow liberals on Facebook. I still ‘identified as’ a liberal then. “What did we do wrong?” I asked. And, “How did we let down our conservative brethren? Aren’t we both on the same side, after all?” It was my attempt at self-examination.
In response from ‘my’ people I got a flood of condemnation about how bad the Orange man was, and how could I support him, “AHA! You said something then you said something else in the next post! You must be one of them,” I had spat in my face. “HOW DARE YOU!”
I think I was being cancelled! All because I asked if we did something wrong.
As much as I would like to take those types and rub their faces in their own…, rhetoric. I can’t. For a very simple reason: Then I would be like them.
You cannot suppress those types, lest you start to act like them. Every suppressor becomes an oppressor and the liberator of the oppressed sooner or later becomes the oppressor of the liberated. Ask Robespierre, Lenin, Mao. Did they really want what they got?
So. What can we do? We can admit that we are a part of the problem, I guess. What problem, you ask? The problem of speaking our own minds and letting whatever strings that are attached to them wag freely. Freely? I mean, our own prejudices and bigotry and lust for the truth and lust for our own vainglory. All of the stuff that makes us, us. We can’t be right about everything, right? We are just going to be ourselves, whether we like it or not. Whether anybody else likes it or not. Sometimes we have a point. Sometimes we are fucking assholes. Sometimes we are somewhere in between. So what are we going to do? Who decides where the light comes from and where there is darkness? Isn’t this the debate? Who decides. Who gets to talk and who just has to shut the F- up?
Just light a lamp. And if it goes out, light another. No matter what you do, trolls will be trolls.
Some comments here suggest thumbs-up/thumbs-down buttons.
I personally think that would just clutter up the blog, and the feature can be abused also.
It will just become an endless cycle of tactic-counter tactic- counter counter tactic…. and so on.
Well just let them post and we can all have a laugh and ignore them.
Variety is the spice of life.
disquss has registration etc. bot captcha key word flags lots of help on a site for comments . even rt now uses it.
How about this as a suggestion. Continue the comments section but set up a separate subsidiary waste bin section into which the moderators can direct all trolls/idiots/maddies/anonymice. The latter would not have a reply facility but would be there for whoever for whatever reason might want to read this stuff. The comments section would then remain for serious and intelligent discourse, and the trash kept in a separate appropriately designated bin. By not getting the attention they crave the idiots might then gradually give up and go away.
Greetings. Thank you, Saker, for this website. Two points:
1. As you can read, I don’t speak English … And this is not a deliberate joke. It is my way of writing in English. So sometimes you can read texts written by “non-English” people as a bot text.
Sometimes I read Russian texts translated by Google … and they seem strange to me. Maybe some “bot texts” are really “lost in translation”?
2. Likes and dislikes might be a good idea … but please introduce another icons: “I don’t agree, but I appreciate it” or something like that. I learn a lot from all of you, even texts I disagree… But they make me think, and this is enough at the moment.
If you reduce everything to “binary” tips, “I like-I don’t like”, it seems like a teenage, and sounds like censure.
Sorry for my bad English in this field,I´m better writing in relation to my own technical work, believe me!
My 2 cents. Agreed with The KISS so minimal rules. And if you introduce like and dislike icons then a “ don’t agree but like the comment” icon would be very useful.
At the end when I share The Saker blog articles I tell people to please read the comments they are of a very high level. That in itself is my way to compliment this site and it’s moderators.
even when I don’t read an article I still read the comments. It teaches me a lot
The moderators do a great job. no need to make more rules.
when I don’t read an article
As long as you don’t comment, that’s fine by me
But if you do comment, then at least please read the article
Thank you
Andrei
Well, of course, basically all “moderation” is just censorship. In MSM there is not just “moderation”, there is outright propaganda and deception, by definition. And in all Western countries as well as in Russia/China etc. the elites make sure that they are not openly critizised. So, say what you want, moderation is censorship.
But, there is also a troll army out there. In these pages the army attacks the opinion pages to cause chaos and confusion. They want to create an atmosphere of rubbish and low IQ comments to build a negative look on the pages. You can bet there are even some central intelligence agencies doing that, this is the hybrid war. Some agencies proudly have a trademark: “War by deception.” They do not deny it, arrogant as they are.
If you are nice enough and not attacking elites too hard (as these pages), you are not directly attacked meaning that your pages stay open. But if you actually name the name and talk the talk, your pages are under constant attack. And make no mistake, this is the elite attacking the free speech.
They are already so successful that here as well as everywhere we censor ourselves Soviet Union style. And we are ever so proud of it, aren’t we just so very civilized? Like Solzhenitsyn said: “If we had even tried to protect our homes, when the boots came to our doors at night..”. No, we do not, we behave.
But still, of course, I like these pages as well as I like all opposition to the Hell, we are forced to live in. But most I like people and pages, which are not afraid of the violent elites destroying our beautiful countries. And I would love to see a Leader, who would walk and talk with his head high and his voice loud and clear.
Not yet, but I can maybe already hear the drums of a change out there far away, but coming closer…
Good return to basics comment.
Why is it no one has clearly stated that before, fear that’s why, inhibition and apprehension.
Wanting only to be positive here, but the Duran has a good moderation policy of one paragraph that could be useful as an adaptive prototype. Go with what works and don’t try and fix what ain’t broken guys.
Well, of course, basically all “moderation” is just censorship. (…) So, say what you want, moderation is censorship.
Okay, fine, then just don’t bother posting anything in this den of censorship iniquity :-P
If you want to eliminate trolls, bots, and the unthinking, I like the idea of all commenters needing to be approved to comment by registering a verifiable identity and IP address.
It seems you want the blog to be a place for intelligent discussion of the issues, and it also seems you are challenged to refrain from attacking the idiots, which in my opinion is a faux pas that makes you look bad (you and others might disagree). The comment section for me has been equally attractive as the analyses offered by you and your guest contributors, which gives the blog a level of class not seen else where on the internet.
Mandatory registration for commenting privilege is my suggestion. I think that will immediately eliminate tons of idiots, trolls, and the casual surfer who doesn’t think about issues.
Patrick
Your blog – your rules. Whoever does not like it – too bad. Dmitry Orlov sometimes allows comments, sometimes not, yet everybody is happy, Parteon and all. Most of us like the blog the way it is. It beats not most but all ‘competition’. There are places that have better this or that, but nobody except you has better mix of everything, with higher level of commenters. Occasionally, everyone makes mistakes or gets emotional – commenters, moderators, blog authors, all of us. And so what? We are all humans.
All in all, the best place on the internet to visit. Never mind rules, decent and reasonable people do not need them, but the small minority does need them. No-one is happy with their government or police force, yet we need them. and we obey them, since there is no way of escaping it. Blog is different. Whoever doe not like it for whatever reason, at least they can go away and not be bothered by Andrei and that is to be appreciated. With governments and police we do not such freedom and luxury.
Heads up and keep on good work, millions of people read you and appreciate what you do, the way you do it. If you want to change the way you do it, to make life easier, so be it. Those millions will not change how they feel and respect the blog.
Molodetc.
people keep talking about the “idiots” on here who comment, strange, as there are commentators I don’t always see eye to eye with, others who may irritate a little, or with opinions or ideology that don’t resonate with mine, but, to say they were idiots because they’re not thinking like me, well, that seems a bit far fetched and immature, spoilt-child-like, considering the high level of commentary that makes this site distinctive. keep up the good work!
Sorry, but there are PLENTY of idiots out there, and if you don’t see it, I can’t convince you otherwise :-)
Everyone sees plenty of “idiots” out there, who needs convincing ? I think my comment was clear, We all have our moments dear Saker;)
If you find yourself nearing the end of your tolerance, go simple. Leave the rules as they are and delete all idiotic comments without comment. Block the worst of the commentators, silently. Follow the first rule of dealing with panhandlers and street loons – no conversation.
I’ll say it again, your site, your rules, do whatever you think is necessary – informed comments are an excellent source of information & opinion, but the crap needs to be trashed. I don’t see why the crud shouldn’t be just wiped off, I would, if it were my site I’d delete anything I didn’t like, if the mainstream media can dictate terms when they broadcast to the world, with no legitimacy whatsoever, than I would dictate terms on my site.
Anonymous comments are the bedrock of the Saker site.
There is no need to be controlling
Kings had always around them a ‘jester’, a ‘fool’ who was permitted to say the most outrageous things without being punished. Even the kings knew that under the flood of ‘idiocies’ proffered by the fool, there might be a most precious pearl of wisdom.
I’m not privy to the mechanics of this comment section layout, but I wonder if it’s practical to hide the bulk of any comment deemed questionable to the moderator but may be okay if not insightful. The reader can scan right past it to get to more interesting comments. Of course you may get accused of passive aggressive editorializing on a comment by hiding it but it’s probably not the worst thing to be accused of (I’ll bet you’ve seen everything. I can’t imagine).
I like the comment section much as it is, but as others have said, an anonymous comment is a turnoff to me. I feel I know regular commenters to some degree by the body of their work here. It’s a testament to the quality of the content here that such talented and interesting regulars are also a must–read to those of us who read regularly but rarely comment ourselves. And a testament to the moderators for keeping noise to a minimum.
The engaging nature of the comments here is so fragile I’m afraid a radical change could ruin it. But I’m not a moderator so I can’t possibly know what you endure. But where the decision is difficult perhaps my suggestion has merit, if practical.
Thanks for all you (collectively) do, But especially to our gracious host.
I agree with others that the “Anonymous” handle is due to (1) sheer laziness, (2) and AI bot, and/or (3) a desire to not leave behind a “Body of work” attributable to a likely single individual.
If it’s (1) or (2) then the comment itself will reflect a disjointed, often incoherent jumble of words that don’t add up to something worth perusing.t
If it’s (3) then the comment is likely to be more substantial content-wise but possibly leave a certain “whiff” of unclear intent.
These days there’s no way to guard against AI algorithms, some of which have gotten much better at mimicking a human. I don’t buy that “non English” sequitor as it is generally quite easy to tell, just from a simple engagement whether one is talking to a human or not. Whereas the lazy commenter will likely to not even reply, the AI bot may, but in kind. Either way, there’s no harm in keeping them as is, especially as a slice of humor or a little catnip. The serious commenters would avoid them anyways, so not much harm is done other than a pause in an otherwise interesting exchange 9remember, the lazy ones won’t be likely to return except as a one-liner that can be safely ignored).
If, OTOH, the handle is a misguided attempt to avoid a “body of work” then it can be more problematic for the Blog, as the “anonymous” can leave any number of “droppings” that will not add up over time to someone with consistent takes, and/or may even include comments that can give the moderators headaches.
In any case, I am all for eliminating the “anonymous” option as a screen name. It take 5 seconds to make up a name, and, in principle, I see no reason the lazy bums would take an interest in this kind of a blog where serious matters are discussed. Those who must protect their privacy can do so easily enough by having more than one user name or mixing their commentary up a bit, if they must. After all, chances are I am not the merlin of note, am I? neither do I claim great wisdom or anything of the sort. I just like the word itself.
Just to note that a comment addresses both the surveilling intelligence services and the “civilian” audience. Recognizing this fact, some comments are intended, presumably, to influence said intel fellas more than to add to the topic ad hoc. Other comments, obviously, are more naive and forthright, honest.
A fine mixture of hokum aimed at intel, and useful commentary, is an exercise in delicate rhetoric.
Old Bill said it…all the world’s a stage.
The way things are @ Saker? Fine with me. But I recognize that moderation is both necessary and is a lot of work, and I appreciate it. Thanks all!
Greetings to the intel fellas…must be a troubling job…my sympathies, fellas. Don’t call me. Your understandings are not correct. Easy on the donuts.
“Personally, nothing demotivates me more than taking the time to put some very real effort into a post, or posting a superb guest post, only to then see the idiots (sorry, no better word comes to my mind right now) derail it all by their idiocy. I just feel like throwing in the towel, give it all up and do something easy and fun (like hiking) instead of putting so much efforts into the blog.”
You drafted Rule 3 for a reason. I’m assuming that usually the mods can recognise a post which is going to piss you off. So what happened here? Did they miss some comments they should have removed? If so – remind them of what kind of stupidity angers you and the existence of rule 3. I am assuming of course that you don’t read the comments that they remove. If you are doing that, then that is low hanging fruit in my opinion. Don’t read the stupid comments. Life is too short. There will be plenty of worthwhile comments for you to look at.
I don’t like anonymous comments and often scroll past them. I would be fine with them being stopped. I am not keen on the thumbs up/down approach.
There are always going to be stupid comments but
Saker, a request about all your website articles here.
Could you make them available here also as PDF downloads.
That would be a great help in reading things as time permits.