Regarding the Comments Section [UPDATED]

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
July 29, 2015

We have had a new commenting system for a couple weeks now, and I just wanted to point a few things out.

Registering with Disqus

It’s very easy to register with Disqus. When you try to comment, it will automatically refer you to the process. Takes 90 seconds.

If you’re worried about privacy, you are not obligated to enter your real name (as far as I’m aware). If you’re super-worried about privacy, you should probably be using a proxy anyway.

Browsing Comments

By default, you will see comments with the best (highest voted) first. This is the default because it is best for the casual reader, who can be spared the crap comments. Regular readers, however, may wish to view all comments in chronological order.

You can easily change the settings by following these instructions:

It will remember your choice next time you visit.

First Post is Always Held

Shortly after starting the site, it was clear that it was necessary to hold first posts for approval, rather than letting people immediately comment. What happens when you allow immediate commenting is that haters come through and make dozens, or even hundreds of comments clogging up the comments section. Everyone gets angry about it.

Everyone also gets angry about having their post held for approval, but that only happens once.

Upvote/Downvote

When I’m reading the comments, I look at every post and decide whether I like, don’t like, or feel neutral towards it, then either upvote, downvote or do nothing.

I think everyone should be doing this, as it will contribute to a healthy, wholesome and helpful comments section. It is your civil duty as a citizen of the internet.

Advocating Violence

We have had to ban nearly ten people over the last couple of weeks for advocating violence in the comments section.

We have a disclaimer in the right sidebar which makes our policy on this issue very clear, and also makes clear that you will be banned if you violate this policy. What you are doing by violating the policy is not only insulting me, the site, and everything we are trying to do here, but also spitting on the ideology of the site.

It is extremely frustrating.

We have a very open free speech policy here, which no other site that I am aware of has. Though I will occasionally ban someone for posting dozens of nonsense comments and clogging everything up, I pretty much allow people to say whatever they want. There is only one rule, and that rule exists for a very clear reason, which I would hope even the low IQ element is capable of comprehending:

This is a news site. Our goal is to convey information. That is the prime directive.

Just as to ensure that there is no confusion, let me give examples of things you are not allowed to say.

• “We should rush the government and take it over.”
• “Someone should kill [this individual].”
• “It’s time to start thinking about violence as the inevitable solution to our problems.”
• “Where does [this individual] live? Someone needs to post the address so we can pay [this individual] a visit.”
• Also, it is against the rules to try and use Jewish legalism on me and say “well I didn’t technically say it.” For instance:
• “It would be very unfortunate if someone decided to sneak in [this individual’s] home and put two in their chest.”
• “[This individual] deserves to be _____ until they _____! (fill in the blanks)”
• “[This individual] deserves to be put on his knees and sprayed with silly string twice in the back of the head.”

These are all paraphrased versions of things people have actually been banned for.

What you will notice about all of these examples, besides that they all purposefully bring down heat on this site, is that they serve no purpose. There is absolutely no positive outcome that can come from threatening or advocating violence on an open internet forum. All potential outcomes are negative, even if it simply involves making the site look to the casual reader like it is frequented by crazies.

Obvious jokes which do not involve a specific individual or individuals are allowed, such as

• “Gas the kikes – race war now!”

It is also allowed to advocate legal punishment for criminals, such as

• “Jonathan Pollard is a terrorist and should have been hanged.”

It is not allowed to advocate vigalante justice against a criminal, for instance

• “Someone should hunt down Jonathan Pollard and shoot him.”

If you don’t know if what you are typing breaks the rules, do not post it.

Again, I don’t think I should have to explain this. If you want to plan to overthrow the government, you don’t do it in the comments section of a website, especially not a website that has the very simple and singular goal of creating awareness of issues which directly effect the continued existence of Western civilization.

There is really nothing more I can say on this issue. If you get banned, you probably know why you were banned – what’s more you probably knew you were going to get banned when you typed it. So please, do not bother emailing me and accusing me of working for the Mossad because I banned you for knowingly violating clear rules and purposefully harming the site and its agenda.

I don’t like banning people and hate to do it, every time. So I assure you, it is never anything personal. I understand that sometimes people get angry, or think they are making a joke and go to far, and I sympathize. I have myself had to often edit certain things out of my own articles in proofreading to make sure I don’t go overboard.

For the record, I do not ban IPs, and no, I cannot stop you from making a new account after you are banned. But if you post anything along the lines outlined above, you will not receive a warning, and your account will be permanently banned.

This is a collective operation. It is about the good of the many, not the ego of the individual. That goes for me to, and I do my best to stay as humble as possible. I think I do a pretty good job of it, overall.

Please, just respect the rule.

Strong Language

It has been suggested that racial slurs should be banned, because they make us look stupid or stereotypically “racist.”

I personally do not use racial slurs in articles, as a rule, unless I am vaguely mocking another race as well as stereotypes of “racists.” So, I maybe call a Black a “dumb ape,” occassionally, also occassionally call Jews “kikes.” I think it’s funny.

I have to admit that I myself often cringe when reading the comments section, as people say things I never would. I rarely use the word “nigger,” even in private conversation, given the (for better or worse) associations it has, as well as the way I was raised. I certainly never use some of the poop-related phrases some commenters use, such as “shitskin” or “latrino.”

And yes, of course the comments section would look better if it was not filled up with “niggerniggernigger.” However, I don’t think this is a very big deal, nor do I think that the slight benefit of having a less offensive comments section would make up for a huge violation of free speech.

“Chilling effect” and all that.

I ask only that people be conscious of what they write, and again, use the voting system. If you think a comment is overly nasty or crude, downvote it.

Old Comments

People are still asking about the old comments, so once again, I shall assure you they will be back eventually.

I tried to work on it yesterday, and will try again tomorrow. The database is going to have to be manually exported from WordPress and imported back into disqus.

Anyway, I had no idea there were so many people eager to go back and read old comments. Seriously – I get like thirty emails a day about this.