Comment Moderation – this is why

Like a lot of blogs I get my fair share of people that don’t like what I write and sometimes leave comments that are inappropriate or are personal attacks. I don’t worry too much about these and don’t generally censor commenters. However sometimes I get some very odd first time comments, several of these have ended up being deleted (Like the one from some guy in India who thought my blog would be appreciated by the Chistians in his country and wanted me to translate my blog into Urdu.  massive WTF?). Some spend a little in the queue before I moderate them, mainly so I can find time to respond, or to see if the person is serious (I assume they would write back if they didn’t see their comment posted?).

By way of explanation; comment moderation is switched on on this blog such that the first time someone leaves a comment I have to moderate it, after that they can write pretty much what they want. I only do this to help stop spammers or people who are completely off topic. If you as  a reader leave your first comment and you have a blog or website, or put a link in the comment, I will check it. If the links are dead or irrelevant and your comment makes no sense or is overly abusive quite likely you will never be moderated. If any readers suspect this has happened to them they are welcome to leave another comment, which will also require moderation, questioning what happened to their previous comment and perhaps apologising if they think I didn’t moderate because of what had been written.  Why am I writing this? Well recently I received the following comment from a person called Jeffrey, which was left on the Bible Study of the Day post:

Wow, and I was just on another atheist blog commenting that I didn’t believe that all atheists were ignorant and uneducated. Now I have to go back and do an addendum that “While not all atheists are ignorant and uneducated, clearly some are profoundly so! For proof just go to”

Your ignorance is only exceeded by your arrogance.

I have left this un-moderated for a few of reasons:

  1. It is quite rude and a personal attack, especially for a first time comment.
  2. It was sort of off topic, and no explanation was left as to why they thought what I had written showed I was ignorant or uneducated. (I’m not overly sensitive, if you think I’m ignorant fel free to tell me, but at least have the courtesy to explain why you think that)
  3. The first sentence seems like it was written on the person’s own blog, or perhaps as a comment on some other christians blog. However, there is no link to the original comment and the person writing it didn’t leave a URL in the comment form.
  4. I wanted to find the time and inclination to respond to the comment.

I decided rather than just moderating this comment and responding in the Bible Study thread, I’d post it as  a new blog. I will not be moderating this comment, however, Jeffrey if you read this you are welcome to leave another comment (which will end up in the moderation queue) , this time hopefully you will be a bit more polite for a first time comment and perhaps stay on topic and explain why you think what you say, especially if it is abusive or a personal attack.

Interestingly enough, whilst writing this I have received another new comment, which I will be allowing through moderation, from someone trying to convince me the Bible is all true. Strangely he has left this on my latest post about the atheist bus campaign rather than the one about bible study. Feel free to explain to Chris why he might be wrong.

I’d also be interested to hear from other bloggers how they handle comment moderation, and perhaps you can tell us about some of your weirdest comments. I’d also like to know if you think I have been wrong in the way I’ve handled this, or how you would have done it?



Filed under abuse, blog, blogging, comment moderation

22 responses to “Comment Moderation – this is why

  1. seantheblogonaut

    I haven’t had to on the new blog yet

  2. Wow! I have no idea. It’s your blog, YOU handle it the way you want to! I’m sorry that you have to deal with such garbage. I delete comments if they are not nice. It doesn’t happen often. I’m sure I have some haters but I have more friends so that’s the only reason I’m still blogging. I might delete the comments I left on Fiery’s site today though. I’m not proud of those……
    It was nice hearing from you. I DO like the hug guy!!


  3. Rev. Reed Braden

    Gawd forbid the cunt ever go to my blog! If anyone out there is an insensitive prick, it’s… my co-authors.

  4. Rev. Reed Braden

    I use the feature where first-time commenters must have a comment accepted before they have free reign over the comment sections. This weeds out the loonies. I post anything that’s on-topic, even if it’s a ranting screed.

  5. Hell, I’m more of a reader of blogs than a writer of blogs. I don’t get much traffic anyway. 🙂

  6. arthurvandelay

    I have a comments policy, and transgressors face ritual disemvowelment (as your friend novparl is learning).

  7. I let most through. I have gone back and edited a few assholes though.

  8. Ok um wow…I spend so much time trying to convince you that not all Christians are ignorant, not-thinking morons and then another one pops up…wow

  9. I bust a gut every time some dipshit asserts some sort of god-given right (and it’s usually religionuts doing so) to post a comment on mgk. I get accused of ‘censorship’ frequently. Now, look in my left eye and see if I care.

    Censorship is something governments do i.e. suppression free speech in a public venue. When the SMH edits a submission for letters to the editor, it’s not censorship, it’s editorial control. The SMH actually can’t ‘censor’ per se and neither can the comments moderation department at mgk. If the SMH were not permitted to select letters to publish nor to edit submissions, the daily op-ed section would require delivery by forklift.

    mgk is not a public venue and neither is any other blog or newspaper. mgk is funded out of my pocket and I’ll publish what I want to- or not. I’m under no obligation whatsoever to give a platform to trolls, loons and nutbags, but I certainly will publish them, particularly if their own comment makes the writer look as stupid as they are, with little or no help from me, such as these from one Craig A. Betts

    Author : Mr so it is (IP: ,
    E-mail :
    URL : http://www.whereeveriputit
    Hey mate do you want you website to remain up?
    If you do you will not delete my comments back. Dont doubt me buddie other sites have been downed

    Author : Mr so it is (IP: ,
    E-mail :
    You have 2 options you take off your blasphemy about Jesus or your site comes down.
    From the Law and Order Christians.

    Author : weewee (IP: ,
    E-mail :
    URL :
    Whois :
    fuck u fool u dumb poofta and fuckin wogs curry munchers fucking fool fucking idiot you pooofta

    heh, you GO, grrrrl. 😉

  10. *phweet* Oz, check the moderation queue!

  11. novparl

    Mr van Daley

    Actually I’ve only been disemvowelled once, as far as I can see. But I agree foul-mouthed atheists must be protected from criticism. So upsetting. Not.

    Try Phyrangula.

    Darwin’s blessing on you all.

  12. “You have 2 options you take off your blasphemy about Jesus or your site comes down.
    From the Law and Order Christians.”

    That is hilarious! I hope someone writes a post just about the goofy crap people can come up with. Just don’t post mine.. :O

  13. arthurvandelay

    fuck u fool u dumb poofta and fuckin wogs curry munchers fucking fool fucking idiot you pooofta

    novparl gets around 😉

  14. novparl

    Not mine. More your kind of language. See any atheist blog.

  15. yeah, atheists are all the same.

    So fuck you, you fuckin’ fuck. 😆

  16. TinaFCD Says:

    That is hilarious!

    nah, what was really funny were the 25 other attempts Bettsy made to get published, as though I could be bullied or berated into compliance by some faerie-tale believing cockhead.

    Mark Twain once said ‘Never pick a fight with a man who buys his ink in barrels.’ Revise that for the 21st century- ‘Never pick a fight with admin.’

  17. I don’t do moderation, as I’d prefer to delete problematic comments individually and then ban the offender if needed. Still, I’d certainly moderate if it became a real problem. My only suggestion if you want to moderate is that you allow the really stupid Christian comments – their entertainment value is worth it.

  18. novparl

    Weez – thanks for confirming what I said.

  19. novparl

    Have just tried to visit Weez’s site to enjoy some more of his wit, but the library has banned it as pornography, profanity. Imho, only really porno sites shd be banned.

    Look, boys & girls – God almost certainly doesn’t exist. So stop being so angry & enjoy life.

  20. Meh. I don’t like it when people have blanket comment moderation enabled, it seems somehow intellectually dishonest to me and shows a lack of trust in fellow man. I much prefer to let anything that isn’t spam through and simply point out idiot commentator’s own stupidity to them.

  21. novparl Says:

    Weez – thanks for confirming what I said.

    You’re most fucking welcome.

    novparl Says:

    Have just tried to visit Weez’s site to enjoy some more of his wit, but the library has banned it as pornography, profanity. Imho, only really porno sites shd be banned.

    COOL! What library has me banned? Hot shit, something wicked to put as a banner tag line. “mgk: BANNED for teh filth that it is in liberries eberwhar!” Luv. N. It. 😆

    I don’t ming mgk being banned for adult language. If you’re not old enough to speak the way you want to and read sophistcated adult concepts, you wouldn’t understand me anyway.

    The only thing that would bother me is a ban on mgk for porn. There’s no porn anywhere on the site. There’s nudity in the form of two Bill Hewnson images, which both have been rated PG by ACMA.

    BTW, can’t you ask for an adult terminal/login at the liberry?

    Matt, most ppl don’t run 100% comment moderation. WordPress allows you to moderate all first comments then let the rest from a commenter with one approved comment go unmoderated, as a spam mitigation feature.

  22. Pingback: Eviscerating a fundie « Oz Atheist’s Weblog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s