Comment Policy and Guidelines
Comments are welcome and encouraged, but readers, both subscribers and visitors alike, are reminded of a certain axiom, one that far too many seem to have forgotten in the Age of the Internet; when a person visits and comments on another’s website or publication, that person does so as a guest. Those who do comment should conduct themselves accordingly: as guests in another’s domain.
Here follows a partial list of prohibited behavior or conduct in the comments section of this publication. This list is by no mean exhaustive, and the discretion to remove comments or suspend those making objectionable comments is expressly reserved. Those who do not like these rules or wish to violate them are directed to express their discontent elsewhere.
Consider the comments section like a letter to the editor section of a newspaper, but with a rebuttable presumption that they are fit for publication. Obnoxious, undesirable, or vitriolic behavior, among other things, rebuts that presumption, resulting in deletion of that comment, the suspension of that commentator, or both.
Dissident thought is encouraged; vulgarity and slurs are discouraged. Not every instance will get deleted, but is likely to. This like many other things is a judgement call.
Excusing, condoning, or diminishing animal cruelty to or gratuitous killing of animals is EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED and will not be tolerated. Gratuitous killing for the purposes of these rules expressly includes killing pets to eat them. While truly dire situations involving threat of starvation are not gratuitous, such discussions are not welcome here and need to be taken elsewhere. An exception to this rule would be extermination of vermin, e.g. catching and killing a mouse in a glue trap. A PARTICULAR POINT OF EMPHASIS pertains to CATS. Do not post comments that excuse, condone, or otherwise diminish the killing or harming of cats.
Excusing or condoning allied war crimes against the German populace in either world war but especially WWII, particularly in way of allied bombing raids or the wholesale rape and murder of German women and civilians by the Red Army in Prussia and Eastern Germany is also expressly prohibited. It is appreciated some more mainstream readers disagree on certain matters regarding the Second World War. This is fine. Comments as described above are not.
Get off the merry-go-round. After disagreement has been expressed, and I indicate that I have considered this suggestion and decline to adopt a given suggestion or argument, do not reiterate some variation of what has already been stated. This only serves to annoy me. Repeated arguments after a response has been provided are neither wanted nor welcome.
Expressing disagreement in a mature way is fine. Using comments as a vehicle or an outlet for unhinged vitriol and personal attacks against this author is not.
“Straw-man” arguments, comments that demonstrate a person either did not read an essay or did so with little care, as well as other obnoxious conduct that serves no purpose are subject to deletion, blocking, or both.
As stated, the usual sorts of things banned by Substack and other platforms (or that ought to be) are also prohibited: spam, pornography, illegal activity, etc. This content policy seems to be the closest to any guidance as to what is allowed on comments.
These rules and guidelines may require further elaboration soon, but for now this should suffice.
The vast majority of comments, even those expressing some disagreement, in no way invoke the need for a statement like this. At least a couple have, however, and this statement seeks to provide fair notice, so that an appropriate response to obnoxious and unwanted behavior will not invite accusations of arbitrary or capricious action.
-RICHARD PARKER of The Raven’s Call: A Reactionary Perspective.