The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Announcements
Strong Traffic and Commenting Restrictions
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I’m very pleased to report that our small website has recently been attracting very strong traffic. Prior to March we’d never quite broken 3 million monthly pageviews, but July put us well above 3.5 million, and August seems likely to be nearly as strong.

I’ve also been extremely pleased with the success of my own recent article American Pravda: John McCain, Jeffrey Epstein, and Pizzagate, which has been more popular than almost anything else I’ve published over the last few years, while attracting 1.2K Facebook Likes and over 85,000 words of comments.

Meanwhile, for convenience sake, I’ve also added sidebar links to the full collection of both my American Pravda series and my major Race/Ethnicity articles, allowing individuals interested in those particular topics to conveniently explore them.

On a different matter, I recently added some commenting restrictions to the website, aimed at preventing threads from being overly monopolized by just a handful of particularly enthusiastic participants. The system now limits individuals to no more than 10 comments per hour, of which no more than 4 can be directed to a particular thread. Anonymous commenters (e.g. “Anonymous” or “Anon”) are limited to 4 total comments per hour, and a very small handful of particularly “spammish” commenters have been placed under tighter restrictions. These limits exclude “Opinions” (e.g. Agree/Disagree/etc), which remain at 1 per hour.

Offhand, these seem like rather generous limits that should hardly impact reasonable and well-behaved commenters, while preventing the accumulation of too much clutter. But those who feel otherwise should so indicate, as well as reporting any problems they have encountered with this new system.

Finally, I’ve tried to improve the readability of extremely popular articles, which naturally tend to attract large numbers of comments. The quantity of those comments often renders such articles slow to load and difficult to navigate, thereby preventing visitors from conveniently accessing them. Since the vast majority of such comments are usually produced in the first few weeks after an article’s release, by default I’ve now hidden the commenting portion of all articles that have more than 400 comments and were published more than a month in the past, though clicking any of the commenting-related links unhides the commenting section and allows additional replies.

 
Hide 208 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Tyrrell says:

    Not tiny duck! Leave tiny duck alone!

    • Replies: @JoannF
  2. Tom Verso says:

    As I have posted many times before … Thank you Ron Unz.

    In an age of an ever increasing oligarcical media desert, ‘The Unz Review’ is a thought oasis.

  3. Kiza says:

    Hello Ron, your new commenting limits match my suggestions from a while ago. If you cannot say it in three comments than it is probably not worth saying. Unfortunately, such limits cannot stop professional trolls (Israeli, Saudi, US and British government trolls) who are the biggest problem on all alternative media with their tactics of dilution. Those operate multiple sock puppets from multiple IP addresses and will easily circumvent the new limits. But the limits will slow down the hotheads and the quarrelsome. Your fresh approach and your constant experimentation in trying to make it better keep this site the leader of alternative media.

  4. Anonymous[425] • Disclaimer says:

    The system now limits individuals to no more than 10 comments per hour, of which no more than 3 can be directed to a particular thread.

    15 and 5 is more reasonable.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Forbes
    , @Achmed E. Newman
  5. Anonymous[470] • Disclaimer says:

    I’m very pleased to report that our small website has recently been attracting very strong traffic.

    .

    This hasn’t come unpaired with the toll that all what seeks to broaden its audience (be it publishing, “art”, … anything that operates within any market) pays.
    Some columnists are there now, and by consequence some commenters, which the site could very well do without.

  6. BCB232 says:

    Thank you for providing interesting content. I would love to see you archive the writings of Professor Dwight Murphey. They are currently at his website but I would love to see them more widely available.

  7. Anonymous[470] • Disclaimer says:

    A complaint I have is the lower threshold of 10 comments per month to be enabled to agree, disagree, etc.

    If you want uncluttered comments sections, why make people who want to use that feature have to post comments just to pass the threshold?
    Some wise individual may incline to reading comments, and maybe commenting on them (through that feature), while feeling no need to add comments on his own.

    • Replies: @JosephB
    , @SolontoCroesus
  8. Durruti says:

    And certain writers you refuse to publish.

  9. anarchyst says:

    Thank you, Ron Unz for one of the few truly “free thought” websites on the internet.

  10. New limits to comment frequency are actually helpful to me personally. Thanks for putting them in.

    As for increased traffic, it’s only what the site deserves.

    Counterinsurgency

  11. Poophead says:

    I don’t comment very often so it won’t affect me but that seems a very reasonable comment policy. Make ’em work for it.

  12. willem1 says:

    Greatly appreciate the content of this website, which I follow via RSS (to help avoid the censors!). The HTML books are also a big plus.

  13. You have a great site, Mr. Unz. God bless you and your efforts.

  14. @Tom Verso

    I watched a few shows on CSPAN yesterday–I had forgotten just how pathetic the Overton Window content is these days. As someone once said: “So sad”. 😉

    Keep up the good work here–we need you!

    • Agree: mark green
  15. I think the changes are broadly fine, I haven’t felt the effect of them.

    I would change the reaction limits in a more liberal direction. Currently it is one per hour. IMHO it should be at least twice that. In some comments chains there can be hundreds of comments and you run them through in an hour. If you do 2-3 reactions for hundreds of comments that is hardly a big deal. It might be a big deal if there’s, say, 15-20 comments only. So maybe put a limit on reactions which is less onerous in bigger threads, if that is possible, but in larger threads, more reactions should be allowed? And maybe add a higher global limit of, say, 2 or 3 reactions per hour. The 1 reaction per hour rule can stay in smaller threads.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
  16. JosephB says:
    @Anonymous

    I’d love to hit the “I agree” button for this post, but don’t post enough to be able to do so.

    I’m a regular reader, see comments that make me nod or shake my head. However, I don’t tend to step forward with comments of my own so cannot voice that feeling.

    • Replies: @JVC
    , @Laugh Track
  17. Please correct me if I am wrong , but it appears that most of your authors are white and your listed alternative websites are mainly run by white males . How about some more diversity? For example list the Black Agenda report under selected alternative media and publish some of their articles .

  18. Alfa158 says:

    It seems to be still possible to circumvent the restrictions by using multiple aliases. I understand that Unz allows the use of fictional email addresses so a commenter can use uses multiple aliases as long as the fictional addresses match up. “Tiny Duck” for example and “Mike Krauthammar” appear to be the same writer based on the writing style and wording. I’m not an IT expert so it seems it can be tough to enforce comment frequency on people who want to violate the rules unless there is an easy way to identify the originating IP address.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  19. DaveE says:

    As an infrequent comment contributor but a daily reader, I wish you the best of luck keeping the signal-to-noise-ratio in the intelligible range!

    It was getting a little “noisy” lately…… so I welcome your approach.

    Thanks once again for all your hard work and a great website with great writers (mostly) great research and great comments which add to the content, in spite of the noisy ones.

  20. Ron Unz says:
    @Alfa158

    It seems to be still possible to circumvent the restrictions by using multiple aliases. I understand that Unz allows the use of fictional email addresses so a commenter can use uses multiple aliases as long as the fictional addresses match up…so it seems it can be tough to enforce comment frequency on people who want to violate the rules unless there is an easy way to identify the originating IP address.

    Actually, the website system contains several different overlapping techniques of detecting and preventing such misbehavior. But these obviously aren’t at all foolproof, and if someone wants to go to sufficient trouble to circumvent them, they surely can do so. After all, this is merely an opinion webzine, not exactly the central secure server of the CIA or the NSA, and given all the deranged comments published on our website, a few extra ones probably won’t make much difference.

  21. On a different matter, I recently added some commenting restrictions to the website, aimed at preventing threads from being overly monopolized by just a handful of particularly enthusiastic participants. The system now limits individuals to no more than 10 comments per hour, of which no more than 3 can be directed to a particular thread. A very small handful of particularly “spammish” commenters have been placed under tighter restrictions.

    I strongly support this.

  22. donut says:

    That’s gonna hurt the Hasbara Trolls a lot .

  23. The sheep zombies who frequent this rag support crackdowns. Typical.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Wally
  24. Charlie says:

    Thanks for all your work Mr. Unz.

    One issue I have are all the indexed Anonymous[xxx] commenters. It’s difficult to keep them straight in a long comments section. Would it be possible to make the commenter’s name required, consider it the price of admission?

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    , @Anonymous
  25. Anon[152] • Disclaimer says:
    @obwandiyag

    The sheep zombies who frequent this rag support crackdowns. Typical.

    But the intent of the “crackdown” is to make you (and everybody else) frequent this rag less frequently, and hence to be less of a sheep zombie.

    It’s a strange measure but infinitely preferable to, say, shutting down comment boards, which would defeat the purpose of coming here at all. Most sites seem to do significantly more comment moderation than this one anyway.

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
  26. Elsewhere says:

    The overall thrust of this policy is reasonable, and probably helpful.

    I second the suggestions of liberalizing reactions. I also don’t comment prolifically enough to take advantage of them, though I understand the need for those leaving reactions to have a “comment trail” so to speak. Otherwise, who cares

    I heard that reaction count toward the limit of three comments. Is that true? I think they should count separately.

    Also, what happens when a limit is reached, so a commenter is temporarily throttled? Is there a warning? I have heard some say that their posts are just eaten. Is there a way to make this more transparent? Maybe a warning after a new comment is posted, something like, “Due to high commenting traffic from you, no more comments from you will be accepted until ??:??.”

    Thanks for all you do.

  27. muen says:
    @9/11 Inside job

    there’s always someone like you who screams for chocolate in the vanilla store. how about asking blackagenda to publish many more white writers, ever think of that? Oh, there was a mexican, but he might have been of light complexion. probably kept his black and brown bean intake unusually low for a mexican. anyway, good luck with that.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  28. JoannF says:
    @Tyrrell

    Interesting. I find the commenting rules at this site bizarre insofar as I can comment, but simply upvoting an article is left to prolific commenters.

    • Replies: @Jett Rucker
  29. @Kiza

    It is mostly hasbaras. They are also on 4chan etc.

    They want to especially deflect attention from the JQ plus Israeli leverage on U.S. foreign policy.

    • Replies: @Richard S
  30. Wally says:
    @9/11 Inside job

    – So tell us what topics this site avoids that we can find articles about at the ‘Black Agenda Report’.

    – Tell us what & why you think anything written by a ‘white male’ here is wrong.

    – And just how much “diversity” can we expect from anything called the “Black Agenda Report”?

  31. Wally says:
    @obwandiyag

    Except that no one is more frequent here than you. LOL

    • Replies: @anon
  32. Forbes says:
    @Anonymous

    I don’t know that comments numbering as high as 15 per hour is necessary–a comment every four minutes probably means you’re commenting more than reading.

    On the other hand, a limit of three on a particular thread is constraining. I often read an article that already has 50-100 comments and back-and-forth conversations have started that delve deeper into the issue or question.

    If the limit is 10 per hour, it shouldn’t matter in what thread they appear. I haven’t noticed any abuses that these limit serve to address. Actual trolling is usually ignored, or if it’s Tiny Duck–ridiculed.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  33. Forbes says:
    @9/11 Inside job

    I don’t understand. My page is white and the printed words are in black–isn’t that diversity sufficient?

  34. Excellent website Mr Unz. I agree with your rationale for limiting comments. Anything that cuts down on the number and length of comments is a good thing. Far too may commenters on this and other sites who make comments that aren’t even related to the subject of the article, or make comments that take way too long to get their point across, or make trivial comments, or make a comment that is almost identical to a comment that has previously been made by someone else (that they could simply agree with, although it might be necessary to loosen the rules for upvoting), etc. Then combine that with the comments from the trolls and bots who are simply trying to stir up controversy and confusion. Actually I think your comment restrictions could be even more restrictive. Force the commenters to think a little bit instead of just rambling on about the first thing that pops into their heads.

    • Agree: Nodwink
    • Replies: @anon
  35. DB Cooper says:

    Excellent website. This site talks a lot about Russia, China and Israel, but not India. Why not? I would say India is one of the most misunderstood countries in this world. A lot of today’s trouble plaguing the West (US included) can be traced back to this country and the MSM is totally oblivious of it. I hope Ron Unz will have some one knowledgeable about this country write about it. One person who comes to my mind is Barbara Crossette.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
  36. Patricus says:

    Congratulations Ron Unz for one of the best web zines. I particularly appreciate openness to all points of view even if some commenters are crackpots. Readers can sort these well enough. Let’s hope readers double or triple in numbers.

  37. @Ron Unz

    Ron – I’m concerned the real story of Jeff Epstein has been misunderstood by the alternative and mainstream press. Can you address this in a future column? Also – I’d like to see more thoughtful contributors instead of the usual goons who appeal to the good side of the readers to get them to participate in evil.

  38. Wally says:

    It’s been said frequently that for awareness of the fake and impossible “holocaust” to become more prevalent it would require a Jew to lead the way.
    Such is the unfortunate nature of the gatekeepers.

    Given the fact that Revisionist Jews like Ron Unz have not done the heavy lifting / research, while Revisionist scholars like Germar Rudolf, Jurgen Graf, Carl Mattogno, Robert Faurisson, etc. have; I cannot help but praise Ron Unz for adding to the massive body of work and for allowing free speech on the subject to flower at this website. His courage is impressive.

    Thanks, Ron, for doing your part and putting your ass on the line. You will be remembered.

  39. @Ron Unz

    …this is merely an opinion webzine, not exactly the central secure server of the CIA or the NSA…

    …in Tel Aviv.

    Ron, an example of your genius & your sense of fair play is the fact that Kevin MacDonald & Amy Goodman can both be found here.

    I calmly recommend your site when a conversation rolls around to a relevant subject.

  40. @DB Cooper

    “A lot of today’s trouble plaguing the West (US included) can be traced back to this country [India] and the MSM is totally oblivious of it.”

    Many commenters, including myself, have discussed the anti-white bias of the children of Indian immigrants who have received the benefits of this country and now infest tech, politics, academia, and the media. Based on their statements gleaned from the poison pit of Twitter, they think of themselves as the new ruling class ready to take power after whitey becomes extinct.

  41. @Ron Unz

    … and given all the deranged comments published on our website …

    A useful intelligence cache — and all freely and eagerly proffered.

  42. JackOH says:

    Ron, hat’s off, buddy.

    I’m delighted there’s at least one other commenter here from my immediate area, judging by the geographic references he mentions in a few of his comments. I “sold” UR to a few local folks some time back on the strength of “Our American Pravda” (the essay, not the series) and one of Anatoly’s “futurist” articles. I’d like to think there’s been a bit of a payoff for my effort.

  43. I wonder what’ll happen if John Engelman ever finds this website…

  44. @Ron Unz

    What constitutes ‘deranged comments’? According to the White Supremacist males who dominate UR, that would be anyone who does not buy into the Politics of Hate. While I support freedom of speech etc, UR does peddle the Turner Diaries world view a bit too enthusiastically, thus undermining the credibility of an otherwise intelligent, informative site.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  45. turtle says:

    I have been curious for some time as to how the comments on this site are “moderated,” if that is the correct term.
    Are authors responsible for “policing” responses to their own articles, or is there a dedicated staff which performs this function?
    Along the same line, are there objective criteria which will get a (prospective) post a one way ticket to the bit bucket? If so, are these rules posted somewhere on this site?
    Or is the decision “to allow or not to allow” up to the discretion of the “moderators?”

  46. @Charlie

    +1. I just used my Agree button, but it would be nice for continuity to make everyone choose a name.

    2) One thing that is different now is that after replying to a comment, I am taken to the top of the page instead of the comment I replied to. This used to work.

  47. I also would like to see the anonymous option eliminated. Too many of them. As others have said, everyone can come up with a name. And it would make it less irritating for the rest of us.

    • Replies: @anon
  48. anon[354] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wally

    Except that no one is more frequent here than you. LOL

    Says the race obsessed white sack of shit with over 7,700 comments. LOL

  49. Wally says: • Website

    I do find it cowardly of this site’s Anatoly Karlin when he censors and bans those who disagree with him on the fake & easily debunked “holocaust” narrative which he religiously believes in and promotes in many of his articles.

    That is not free speech.

    Only lies require censorship.

    http://www.codoh.com

    • Agree: tac, Saggy
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  50. Ron Unz says:
    @TheJewishQuestion

    What constitutes ‘deranged comments’?

    Ha, ha, ha…

    Obviously, the commenters on this website follow a vast array of conflicting beliefs on almost every topic. But I think the one thing that absolutely 100% of them would agree upon is that a large fraction of all the comments here are “totally deranged.”

    However, they do sharply disagree about which ones…

    • Agree: Colin Wright
    • LOL: Iris, Dan Hayes
  51. anon[251] • Disclaimer says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    I also would like to see the anonymous option eliminated. Too many of them.

    I would like to see the white supremacist option eliminated. Too many of you window lickers infesting this site.

    And it would make it less irritating for the rest of us.

    The more irritating it would make it for white supremacists the better it is for the rest of us.

    • Replies: @AnalogMan
  52. There is cooking, and there is chemistry. Keep cooking Ron.

    How diverting to see that the old (analog, newspaper) tactics still work. Definitely they gather momentum, Ron dips into the mean of the matter, the mean of the audience. Harry Potter II. Keep up the narrative, and please your sponsors.

    Commenters indeed are a nuisance when they can influence the narrative, a problem here at unz.com. Some dumbstruck articles, are taken over by commenters scooping up real attention. Some ideas and suggestions gained momentum against the set out narrative of irrelevant overload. Unheard of.

    As far it seems that censorship does not come to the mind of the audience. Structure is asked for and gotten. Cementing an electorate sub-group. What sponsors desire. Success. The mean audience could be taken for a ride to anywhere, at any time appropriate. No pathways to civil disobedience and violence are to be feared. A cluster of old tactics, same strategy of media, a time-honed tradition of brewing consent and idolatry. An expression of human nature, base psychology. As they say, “Thanks Ron´´.

    • Troll: Pat Kittle
  53. Thanks, Ron! It’s not the content but the frequency and attitude that galls me. I wonder if this change has anything to do with the climate alarmist who recently spammed one of the blogs with a large number of anonymous and personally insulting/abusive posts. I don’t think he won anybody over to his side.

  54. Anonymous[173] • Disclaimer says:
    @Kiza

    If you cannot say it in three comments than it is probably not worth saying.

    But it prevents flame wars which are the most fun. David Pinsen vs Twinkie was hilarious on Sailer blog.

  55. On a different matter, I recently added some commenting restrictions to the website, aimed at preventing threads from being overly monopolized by just a handful of particularly enthusiastic participants.

    the comment moderation is already a stalinist joke. that’s why i hardly come here anymore.

    if you don’t give ron a massage you can’t comment./

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  56. tac says:

    Ron, it’s your website and the more restrictions you implement (including your power happy “moderators”) will drive the more intelligent amongst us away! Numbers not withstanding, your website has seen a drop off from intelligent commentators; why is that?

    But pay no attention to my advice, your site, and do with it what you will….

    When a site becomes devoid of its most intelligent and insightful commentators is when its demise is all but assured, but feel free to think otherwise.

    • LOL: Ron Unz
    • Replies: @PetrOldSack
  57. @9/11 Inside job

    ‘For example list the Black Agenda report under selected alternative media and publish some of their articles .’

    Should more than a few blacks ever become capable of intelligent comment, that would be a fine idea.

  58. @Hari Vaginathan

    ‘…if you don’t give ron a massage you can’t comment./.’

    To be fair to Ron, I don’t think that’s true, and I speak from experience.

  59. For buttons, I’d like some choices besides ‘troll;’ ‘Zionist’ and ‘idiot’ would be nice.

    And yeah — being able to ‘agree’ etc more than once an hour would be nice. What is the rationale for such a drastic restriction?

  60. @Anon

    Freedom is freedom. Of course you’re against it, whatever you are. Your ilk always are.

    This is the land of repression. Can’t expect this rag to go against the flow or nothin’. It was good for 5 minutes when it let anybody say anything any time. Now, success having as it always does spoiled it, it starts repressing. When you start repressing, the best go down first, and are censored censoriously. The worst, of course, stick around. Be advised, the comments the Leader thinks “crazy” are statistically proven to be likely to be the best. And so what you consider making things better is making things worse. It is always thus. With your ilk.

    Same thing happened to truthdig. 15 years ago or so, it was a thing of beauty. A simple, almost DOS-like comment thread. Complete freedom. Take-no-prisoners flame wars like nobody alive today’s business. It was paradise. Now you can’t say “boo.” If they haven’t booted you already for saying “the.”

    You wouldn’t understand the beauty of Conflagration Flame Wars. Such aesthetics is only for the cognoscenti. You probably like Queen, tasteless loser.

    • Replies: @Anon
  61. Anonymous[425] • Disclaimer says:
    @Forbes

    I don’t know that comments numbering as high as 15 per hour is necessary–a comment every four minutes probably means you’re commenting more than reading.

    You’re right when it comes to commenting on the article itself. But contentious threads sometimes appear among the commenters, and the debate can become lively and heated. Many such comments are short and run almost like conversations.

  62. @tac

    Ron, his sponsors, care about numbers. Comments sometimes managed to steer away from the road to nowhere, the apathic, the irrelevant, the repeats. That is just heretic to any sponsoring that stays in the dark. Linear, binary, simple ideas that can be grasped by all, are the tool to drive election results.

  63. Renoman says:

    Congratulations Ron, best site on the web!

  64. @Thulean Friend

    Yes, it’s interesting this article says comments are being limited to 10 per hour, as I was also under the impression there was a 1 per hour limit.

    Steve Sailer’s policy of not approving my comments until long after I’ve written them is as effective as anything at reducing commenting frequency.

    I’m sorry to see some of the back and forth go away. Some stupid replies were in good fun.

  65. Anonymous[837] • Disclaimer says:
    @Charlie

    Anonymous comments are good for traffic and free speech. Maybe there’s something wrong with your browser if you can’t keep them “straight” – whatever that means.

  66. system now limits individuals to no more than 10 comments per hour

    That’s like one every six minutes. I can’t type that fast.

  67. @Anonymous

    Anonymous sponsors are the problem maybe? Anonymous authors´ ethnics (muffling any reference to their being Jewish(all sorts)).

  68. @Anonymous

    Anonymous sponsors are the real problem – solution paradigm.

  69. JackOH says:
    @Ron Unz

    Ron, the comments beneath my local newspaper’s articles are almost exclusively rhetorical slap-boxing and word-whipping. The last substantive comment I read was in 2016, a reference to a Pennsylvania court decision that overturned a murder conviction obtained on flimsy grounds. I printed the decision from the link given. It was a shocker. The suspect had merely been convenient. The convict was freed.

    That’s it. One comment in three years.

    Unz Review does better. The good, persuasive comments here show expertise, insider knowledge, useful links, personal testimony, and the like.

  70. I have been trying hard to refrain from making any “ad hominem” attacks , but judging from some of the unintelligent responses to my reference to the Black Agenda report it appears that racism and close-mindedness is alive and well on this site . Such comments should be welcomed and never censored , we also need to have an open and vigorous debate on which group or groups are behind the attacks on white supremacy and white nationalism (The Kalergi Plan?) . The strength of The Unz Review is the diversity of authors and the diversity of opinions expressed in the comments , but it appears that these diverse opinions and articles are predominantly coming from white males “not that there is anything wrong with that ” ! But more diversity would be appreciated .

  71. SafeNow says:

    Regarding “deranged” comments, it is worth remembering that Western literature contains an esteemed tradition of observant, insightful, charming, deranged protagonists, descended, my old lit. professors would say, from Don Quijote and Hamlet.

    • Agree: Iris
    • Replies: @Rurik
  72. @Anonymous

    Yes, and an [AGREE] or [LOL] counts as one of the 3 (not sure about one of the 10). Mr. Unz – I wasn’t too pleased with this, especially, as with no notice, I’d thought this was a bug. (I got the notice from Mr. Epigone.)

    a) Did you mean to make those AGREE’s and such part of the count(s)? If not, could you change that easily?

    b) Contrary to what Mr. Forbes wrote, I can read pretty fast, and easily comment on 5 or so posts an hour, without it being just arguments with other commenters*. If you can read 14 books in an afternoon in support of your articles, I can damn sure read 5 or even 10 Sailer, A.E., Buchanan, Paul, or Derbyshire posts and have something to say about them.

    I know you want the page views and amount of commenting words to represent real thought and not just spam** and arguments, but keep this a fun place to hang out, Ron.

    .

    * which, admittedly, I’ve got to slow down on doing.

    ** Your SPAM avoidance is just plain excellent. Trolls, like the Duck, are not the same are real spammers with unreadable viagra ads.

  73. Rurik says:
    @Ron Unz

    given all the deranged comments

    You say that like it’s a bad thing.

  74. Rurik says:
    @SafeNow

    deranged protagonists, descended, my old lit. professors would say, from Don Quijote and Hamlet.

    shucks, you beat me to it.

  75. @muen

    AGREE!

    (See what I mean? That’s it for me now … don’t hold it in those tears, folks … ;-})

    Oh, no, wait, that WASN’T it – “9/11 Inside Job” is a douche. Oh, and there’s a black commenter named “Truth” who says I could beat him in basketball, so I’m not sure how black he really is. Yeah, and I keep trying to say goodbye to that beaner, but his “Adios, Muchachos” post stays linked-to on the main page.

    There ya’ go, 3 and done.

    • Replies: @9/11 Inside job
  76. Commadante Unz

    It really be a whole lot of fun if you repost on Unz Review the commentary by the commentary stars over at COUNTERPUNCH. I would start with Jeffrey St Claire. It would fun to beat them into submission in the comments. And this brings me to my next point:it would so much fun for all of the Unz Review Readers and Commenters, that in just this one situation, all commenting restrictions be lifted in the case of any Jeffrey St Claire essay reposted on Unz Review.

    One last point…I believe it that is absolutely urgent to have more commentary on Charlottesville on Unz Review. There has been a massive miscarriage of Justice in Charlottesville. Young White Working Class Men are rotting in jail because of this…others will be paying $$$$ to ANTIFA enablers for the rest of their life. I believe Unz Review can contribute in a very powerful way in protecting these Working Class White Men from Mega-Law Firm-lawfare violence and Police State violence of the state of Virginia.

  77. @9/11 Inside job

    I think the Unz review doesn’t need to emulate the rest. Indeed the suggestion is anathema to the site. It isn’t some lefty circle jerk.

  78. Anonymous[392] • Disclaimer says:

    It would be interesting to have someone take the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale test at Open Psychometrics.org when they first start reading the Unz Review and one year after consistently reading the Unz Review (especially RU’s American Pravda) to see how much of a shift has taken place. I sometimes wonder about the shift in belief that takes place in the Deep State internet einsatzgruppen when it is their task to read/monitor UR articles and commenters.

    Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale
    https://openpsychometrics.org/tests/GCBS/

    https://openpsychometrics.org/

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  79. @War for Blair Mountain

    One last point:

    If the Lawfare suit of the vicious negro thug D’Andre Harris is sucessfull…these Young Working Class White Males who defended themselves against Charlottesville ANTIFA violence and De’Andre Harris violence….will effectively spend the rest of their lives on Black Slave Owner D’Andre Harris’s Plantation….The Democratic Party is normalizing this with Lawfare law suits…..It is effectively Chattel Slavery for Native Born White American Working Class White Males…It is now very real….in real time….

    • Agree: AnalogMan
  80. Nodwink says:
    @Ron Unz

    For all the wackos here, I don’t see many folks saying, “the government is my friend,” “Israel/Saudi are our loyal allies,” or yapping on about threats to the “liberal international order,” and similar bunkum.

  81. Anonymous[227] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Sorry, don’t know why that html link didn’t work. Fortunately I included the link on bottom.

  82. Anonymous[837] • Disclaimer says:
    @9/11 Inside job

    What a beautiful thought. I’m so glad someone here is woke enough to start this important conversation so that we can all join hands – or other extremities – and be on the right side of history.

    Speaking of extremities: we need more disabled voices on the website. The world is a rich tapestry of countless disabilities and yet I’ve never heard a bearded lady or a hunchback tranny provide their unique perspectives on the Holohoax or North Korea. Fred Reed is almost certainly disabled in some way since he can’t get laid in the first world but that’s hardly enough. You know what needs to be done, Ron.

  83. Anonymous[388] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Deranged comment.

    AK:

    Just making sure. While people who abstain from both video games and TV can be respected, boomers who virtue signal against games while watching TV are subhuman scum who need to be exterminated in death camps.

    http://www.unz.com/comments/all/?commenterfilter=Anatoly+Karlin

    🤣

    • LOL: utu
  84. Anon[152] • Disclaimer says:
    @obwandiyag

    Freedom is freedom. Of course you’re against it, whatever you are. Your ilk always are.

    Freedom to use some other guy’s fringe website to spampost 130 comments at once? Uh, OK, I guess “my ilk” (thanks for calling me a chief : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_that_Ilk ) doesn’t give much of a damn about that one way or the other, no. Also I don’t think you actually read my comment as you seem to be responding to the supposed mental tendencies of its author rather than to its content.

    You probably like Queen

    She wasn’t bad when she was younger:

    tasteless loser

    I think the Queen has pretty good taste.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  85. Anonymous[837] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    She looks very Jewish. Do we even know who was trimming the hedges in those palaces few generations ago?

  86. The commenting limit is a problem for Anatoly Karlin’s blog.

    He doesn’t pre-moderate comments and is also in the habit of posting open threads. This results in free flowing discussion between a group of regular, committed commenters. The new restrictions interrupt and restrict the pace of discussion we’ve grown accustomed to.

    There have already been several complaints on his blog about the new commenting limit.

    • Agree: German_reader
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  87. @Wally

    AK doesn’t care that much about the Holocaust. His blog focuses on Russian issues.

    I don’t approve of censorship, but people find you annoying and tiresome.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @anon
  88. Rurik says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    His blog focuses on Russian issues.

    he once censored my comments for mocking the Red Army rapists.

    He apparently was nostalgic over their vigor and restraint, whereas I figured they deserved to be shot – to the last mangy dog among them.

    And just for that measured and amazingly moderate opinion of mine, he refused to publish it.

    Go figure..

  89. Anonymous[388] • Disclaimer says:

    he once censored my comments for mocking the Red Army rapists.

    I’m dubious about this. I once believed that rape was rampant among U.S. soldiers in Vietnam and WWII only to find out this is fiction. I recently talked with an 94-year old guy who was a U.S. Army soldier in France, Belgium and later Germany (from Omaha Beach on) and had a lot of interaction with the Russian soldiers in Germany. He talked a lot about the bad actions of Russian soldiers in Germany but never mentioned rape or mistreatment of German women.

  90. If what you say about comments, how does Zero Hedge manage? Fine, accept only links and not actual videos.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  91. @Anonymous

    A complaint I have is the lower threshold of 10 comments per month to be enabled to agree, disagree, etc.

    Re-read what Ron wrote:

    @ Ron Unz:

    “The system now limits individuals to no more than 10 comments per hour, of which no more than 3 can be directed to a particular thread.”

    Spot the difference.

    • Replies: @anon
  92. @Ron Unz

    But I think the one thing that absolutely 100% of them would agree upon is that a large fraction of all the comments here are “totally deranged.”

    Maybe that’s the case for the comments under your posts or the articles of the Commies you publish. As for Sailer, Derb, Buchanan, Dr. Paul, even Fredricko, I would put deranged comments at less than 5%. A “large fraction”, to me, means GT 1/2, but that’s not really the definition. What’s the number off the top of your head, for, say, a Steve Sailer post?

    Again, though, it’s pretty obvious that all the Commies and some of the Socialists are pretty deranged just to believe in proven failures of ideology, so I’d include those. My way is to just permanently ignore writers and large groups of commenters that are so deranged that I one can’t even argue with them other than “there are books on history out there” and “have you not talked to anyone over 30 y/o who’s been there?”

    However, they do sharply disagree about which ones…

    Haha! True dat.

  93. @Anonymous

    What the heck is so hard about just picking a handle out of your ass? How does writing “Anon” or “Anonymouse” make you more anonymous? I just don’t get that, so maybe you could explain it. Now, about a year ago or so, Mr. Unz, started attaching the 3-digit number to these comments to help those reading. Even, then, I’ve seen arguments that must be the same person, but they have different numbers.

    I remember the woman #257 who takes the women’s view with Rosie against any comment that possibly criticizes women. That works, sort of, but a name, such as “Rosie” is a lot easier to remember than Anon-257. In fact, coincidentally, I just realized I wrote to you already, but I mis-spelled your “name” as “387”! (I’ve got a dyslexic heart.) See what I mean? If you’re gonna argue or agree, it helps to know who is who, even just for one thread, right?

    • Replies: @anonymous
  94. It would be helpful if comments could be structured as replies to more than one previous comments.

    Not infrequently one wishes to piss all over Sean and other Organs of The State while agreeing with Blair Mountain and other sane voices.

    I’m sure technically it’s possible (use of the comment numbering which then auto complete the interlocutor?) and equally sure that it would be a pain to program.

    • Replies: @Dissident
  95. Ron Unz says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    The commenting limit is a problem for Anatoly Karlin’s blog.

    He doesn’t pre-moderate comments and is also in the habit of posting open threads. This results in free flowing discussion between a group of regular, committed commenters. The new restrictions interrupt and restrict the pace of discussion we’ve grown accustomed to.

    There have already been several complaints on his blog about the new commenting limit.

    That’s a reasonable point about comment-limits being less appropriate for AK’s posts, which don’t generally use moderation.

    Therefore, I’ve now excluded all his comments from the 10/3 per hour limit, though people are still allowed only one Agree/Disagree/etc per hour.

  96. anonymous[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Are deranged persons attracted to this site?
    or
    Do more-or-less normal people innocently become aware of Unz, become habituated, then develop tendencies toward derangement?
    that is,
    Does Unz.com cause derangement?
    or
    Is Unz.com merely a Derangement Enabler site?

    US government aka media is increasingly concerned with issues (mislabeled) as mental health.

    I think a few Unzers should apply for a grant to explore the above questions.
    Who knows, Unz Derangement Syndrome may become an opportunity; a diagnosis; an avenue for new pharmaceutical research (Unz pills would, of course, be red.)
    I smell revenue.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  97. Anon[382] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Therefore, I’ve now excluded all his comments from the 10/3 per hour limit, though people are still allowed only one Agree/Disagree/etc per hour.

    Preferential treatment to the autists. Smh.

    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
  98. @Ron Unz

    Thanks!

    Our fearless overlord shows his wisdom again.

  99. @Achmed E. Newman

    Just learned that not only I am a white male but I am also a douche . As the anniversary of 9/11 is fast approaching can we at least agree that 9/11 was an inside job ?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  100. @9/11 Inside job

    The latter thing is not what I have an argument with you about. Why do you feel every single facet of life in America has to be DIVERSE? That’s in your sense of the word. I think, ideology-wise, Unz.com is about the most diverse commentary site I’ve ever seen, running the gamut from flat-out Mao-sack-hanging Commies to the hard-truthful alt-right of Paul Kersey and the Libertarianism of Dr. Ron Paul’s columns.

    You don’t need to come on here and tell us that we need to find more black, hispanic, or Chinese commenters. What’s it to you?! They can comment as much as they want, right today! As a matter of fact, it’s just possible that Achmed E. Newman is a disabled black transgendered lesbian with Lyksdexia. Yeah, don’t be a douche.

  101. @Tom Verso

    I enjoy reading the comments and the articles. When combined, a lot is gained.

    Thank you, likewise.

  102. anonymous[422] • Disclaimer says:
    @9/11 Inside job

    Great replies stand out regardless of the poster’s phenotype. The majority of the ones who feel the need to indicate who they are tend to be of the worst quality. Commenters like Tiny Duck or obwandiyag certainly are. I’m sure there are credible female and minority commenters who remain hidden or mostly cloaked but let the quality of their commentary speak for themselves.

  103. Hi Ron- I’d like to repeat the compliments of the previous commenters while offering a suggestion.

    This site features long essays and is targeted towards an educated audience. It makes sense to think about the site’s appearance with that in mind. One useful heuristic for whether you’ve hit the target is whether a normal white-collar person would be comfortable opening the site’s homepage on a laptop at Starbucks. You may have mentioned that yourself at one point.

    I do think that the site currently fails that test- not because of the controversial opinions contained in the posts or comments, but because of the lurid headlines and images that are often featured on the front page nowadays. (I.e. the most prominent headline right now is “House Niggers Mutiny”.) I suspect that readers would be more likely to link to the site and share it with the target audience if that were toned down.

    Note that I’m not suggesting that the contents of any article or comment be censored in ANY WAY- only that the “optics” of the front page be changed a bit.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @Rurik
    , @Biff
    , @Republic
  104. @9/11 Inside job

    Oh, I see you wrote about diversity of the WRITERS. Sorry that I didn’t get that part. I still don’t think that helps anyone a bit. If you’ve got diversity of opinion why does it matter what the colors of the writers are? Hey, as a Libertarian, I’d like to have seen Thomas Sowell’s columns on here, but I remember reading that he retired from writing a couple of years back.

  105. Ron Unz says:
    @Pseudonymic

    This site features long essays and is targeted towards an educated audience. It makes sense to think about the site’s appearance with that in mind. One useful heuristic for whether you’ve hit the target is whether a normal white-collar person would be comfortable opening the site’s homepage on a laptop at Starbucks. You may have mentioned that yourself at one point.

    I do think that the site currently fails that test- not because of the controversial opinions contained in the posts or comments, but because of the lurid headlines and images that are often featured on the front page nowadays. (I.e. the most prominent headline right now is “House Niggers Mutiny”.)

    That’s not an unreasonable suggestion, though I’m always very loath to interfere with a contributor’s selected title or images.

    However, I think you’re pointing to a rather unusual example. The home page currently displays the titles of something like 70-80 different articles and posts. Aside from Israel Shamir’s feature, which other ones would you regard as so inflammatory that they’d scare people away?

    By contrast, I’d suspect a larger percentage of articles on e.g. the Breitbart home page might plausibly fall into that category…

    • Replies: @Pseudonymic
    , @Poupon Marx
  106. @Ron Unz

    I agree that most of them are milder, but that one would be more noticeable since it’s in a larger font and at the top of the screen. Just an example.

  107. I’m curious as to what is considered “spammish” .

    Are we talking commercial spam or political advocacy? Or are we talking about crap-flooding the comments in an obnoxious way?

    I have been posting some Andrew Yang videos lately. Like this one:

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  108. alexander says:

    Dear Mr, Unz,

    Thank you for an extraordinary website. One of the finest in the country , if not the world.

    May your traffic continue to grow and grow …..and “grow”.

    Everybody, and their uncle, (and their nephew) should be reading Unz Review, on a daily basis.

    Those who are not, are sorely missing out, on top drawer , “first in class” articles ,….. as well as “cut to the chase”, “no nonsense” analyses on WTF is going on in the world (forgive my French).

    On the issue of ” comment limits per hour” I have to say I am on the fence, only because I have witnessed, numerous times, multiple dialogues between commentators ( within the hour time frame), which have produced an authentic “dialectic” on the subject in question.

    In the quest for “knowledge”, not just facts, these are important occasions which should not be dismissed lightly.

    Even though I agree there are malicious trolls out there, whose sole purpose is to inundate the comment section with worthless junk, I would (still) opt for a “higher” limits per hour threshold , so the comment section can retain its power to ignite discussion, enthusiasm, and a genuine quest for learning.

  109. @Kiza

    The sheep can’t understand the problem. They believe every word the government agents tell them on social media. Why would a zombie buy into the nonsense a retired CIA agent writes and then draw the conclusion someone from the Government is interfering with that propaganda fix? Training. Lots of training starting with obedience school.

  110. @Anonymous

    And I’ve yet to see Unz publish anything, anything at all by a blind mute digitally challenged illiterate.

    He’s stunningly noninclusive.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  111. Rurik says:
    @Pseudonymic

    “House Niggers Mutiny”.) I suspect that readers would be more likely to link to the site and share it with the target audience if that were toned down.

    You mean the insufferably insipid Starbucks patrons?

    Why do you think Unz Review is so wildly popular today?

    Because it traffics in the banal and politically correct [redundant]?

    Or because it bursts opens the leavened rusted gates of free thought and open discourse, so crushed under the throngs of Starbucks ‘hurt feelings’ snowflakes. And welcomes the kind of verboten speech and crimethought that is so sanctimoniously hissed at by the Starbucks ‘hall-monitors’ of free-expression. See Google and Facebook and Twitter, et al.

    Should UR be yet another tepid, feeble, ultra-sensitive. crybaby outlet for our burgeoning society of entitled mediocrities?

    No!

    Revel in the use of words like ‘nigger’ and ‘Palestine’. Mock the censors and ‘Starbucks crossing guards’ of crimethink.

    Your tender sensibilities are what are damning this society to the trite, the platitudinous, and the stagnant.

    What do you think is going to get people’s attention and interest more, ‘House Niggers Mutiny’? Or ‘Trump Stoking Racism’?

    The former at least provokes curiosity, (in this Orwellian dystopia we’re all intellectually choking in), whereas the latter is just more of the same vapid girly hysteria that’s intellectually mortifying our moribund society of meritocratic morass.

  112. Obviously, this can be taken in more than one way, but I’m already finding the three posts on any one thread in an hour limit burdensome — specifically, on the ‘Poland’ thread. Since I’m failing to toe the revisionist line, there are many, many responses to respond to.

    …but I can’t fight the good fight. I’m only permitted three posts. I can appreciate the need for some kind of limit, but how about five?

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  113. @Rurik

    ‘What do you think is going to get people’s attention and interest more, ‘House Niggers Mutiny’? Or ‘Trump Stoking Racism’?’

    Agree. There are plenty of venues for sedate, measured, and conventional responses that treat the pieties of the age with due reverence. I don’t come here because I’m looking for more of that.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  114. @Rurik

    ‘…that’s intellectually mortifying our moribund society of meritocratic morass.’

    If you move on to ‘n’ in your next post, suspicions will be aroused.

  115. AnalogMan says:
    @anon

    My goodness, you are an unhappy person, aren’t you? Are you bitter that you can’t be White, too?

  116. gsjackson says:

    While the restrictions seem reasonable enough, I’m afraid the baby got thrown out with the bath water, i.e., Jacques Sheete. He took offense at being singled out and left, preferring as he said to “take a hike” rather than “take a break” per the new software’s instructions.

    I’m sure I wouldn’t have trouble rounding up many dozens of posters here who would count his posts among the most valuable. Beyond that, this site has the same problem the U.S. Congress and many other American institutions have: far too few people with the perspective of what war is really all about. As a Vietnam vet, he provided a gravitas that grows increasingly rarer and more valuable.

    • Replies: @Miro23
    , @Iris
    , @MAOWASAYALI
  117. JackOH says:

    Ron, looking for a suggestion?

    Some more public engagement, consistent with your own judgment and experience as a working politician.

    You’d mentioned focus groups. I and probably others have suggested a few things. (Mainstreaming that Navarro (?) article, e. g.).

    The up side is better credibility and increased readership.

  118. Miro23 says:
    @gsjackson

    While the restrictions seem reasonable enough, I’m afraid the baby got thrown out with the bath water, i.e., Jacques Sheete. He took offense at being singled out and left, preferring as he said to “take a hike” rather than “take a break” per the new software’s instructions.

    What he does is up to him. It’s not UR’s fault that he’s “taking a hike”. Hopefully he can turn it into “taking a break”.

    • Agree: Rurik
  119. Ron Unz says:
    @Colin Wright

    Obviously, this can be taken in more than one way, but I’m already finding the three posts on any one thread in an hour limit burdensome…I’m only permitted three posts. I can appreciate the need for some kind of limit, but how about five?

    Okay, I suppose I can raise the per thread limit to 4, and have now done so.

    But do keep in mind that 4/hour means 12 comments during a three hour period from a single commenter, which really seems like quite a lot.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  120. renfro says:

    Good.

    Maybe this will cut down on troll comments that offer no information and are just seeking to get people to respond and derail the discussions …and the commenters who respond to them.
    Often its like digging thru horse sh*t to find a pony.

  121. anon[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    You have misunderstood. There’s a requirement that commenters post a minimum [of 10 comments per month?] to be allowed to use the AGREE buttons AT ALL.

    I.E. someone who hasn’t already commented [enough] cannot use AGREE.

    This policy gives preference to the established troll over the thoughtful, but usually quiet, reader.

    • Replies: @JosephB
  122. anon[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @David Erickson

    And there’s the rub. These new rules don’t address any of that.

    There used to be a guy here, I forget his name, who wrote about HBD and such. Not my thing, but he ran a really tight ship. I respect that.

  123. Biff says:
    @Pseudonymic

    One useful heuristic for whether you’ve hit the target is whether a normal white-collar person would be comfortable opening the site’s homepage on a laptop at Starbucks.

    A new reason(among the thousands) of why to never go to Starbucks. Even so, I would post the homepage on the JumboTron at a football game if I could.

  124. Thank You Ron, and, ‘helpers’.
    Especially your moderators.

    Well done.
    Serious ‘reflection’ i.e. thinking-before-speaking, is a hallmark in Mankind’s Development.

    By limiting superfluous drivel and ‘wasting space’, which can be considered highly inconsiderate by mature Adults I might add, is a necessity in this *information overload age*.
    Consolidating one’s thoughts and, summarizing/using synopsis while providing relevant links is what I try to do.

    The modern social-media landscape unfortunately with it’s *dopamine addiction* surely is responsible for some of the Pavlovian Behavior exhibited by some individuals.
    And not to forget, the bots/trolls/AI generated ‘responses’; i.e. cass sunstein & company.

    Then of course, let us not forget the egocentric young adults.
    This isn’t a new phenomenon:

    “The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.”
    ― Socrates

    I consider it honor to be able to participate here.
    Thank You for making this site an even better inter-active place in cyberspace.
    Cheers X- in Sweden

    links:
    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=cass+sunstein&t=ffcm&ia=web
    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=socrates+today%27s+youth&t=ffcm&ia=web
    https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/63219-the-children-now-love-luxury-they-have-bad-manners-contempt

  125. @Rurik

    Rurik,

    Depends which Starbucks and where. In downtown Kuala Lumpur you can enjoy a hard copy of Mein Kampf or The International Jew with your latte and get no dirty looks from the locals. Any foreign tourists who spot you, well what are they going to do? Not spill a coffee over you? Is the West so backward when it comes to little small freedoms like what you may wish to read in a coffee shop? Rhetorical question – no need to answer.

  126. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    What’s next? A copyright office to prevent confusingly similar aliases? This seems a pretty lame reason to eliminate anonymity.

    I posted something in a long thread under Mr. Unz’s March 29, 2018, announcement of the policy that now numbers those of us who prefer anonymity:

    “One of the downsides of “real handles,” and which is still concerning under this new regime where I am now henceforth #340,* is the inevitable falloff in quality. Those with little of value to say, but who love seeing their “name” in print or feel compelled to share their view or repeat their obsession, are more likely to clog up a thread. They also are enabled to revive and prolong feuds that started elsewhere, and to call out and abuse each other. Have a peek at Taki’s or ZeroHedge to see where this can lead.”

    Right about then, Taki’s scrapped its commenting system.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  127. Richard S says:
    @Amerimutt Golems

    Well those liars have their work cut out for them on this website. This ain’t the Guardian! 🤣

  128. @anonymous

    This seems a pretty lame reason to eliminate anonymity.

    You didn’t explain this to me, yet. You know my name is not Achmed E. Newman, right? Are you saying that you don’t want to use a handle on multiple blogs or multiple threads due to a decrease in anonymity? Is that from people reading everything and figuring you out via “detective work”?

    On your 2nd part, I think Taki’s comments were getting annoying, as you say, due to commenters arguing minute details of history and that. However, when you have all “anonymous” people, you can’t have any intelligent conversation, only comments on the article itself, without much rebuttal. If that’s what you want, OK, I guess. ZH still has commenting, but it’s more hidden. I’m guessing that’s because “Tyler Durden” didn’t like the fact that most readers (such as myself) were coming to the site to read the great humorous commenters of 5 years back vs. his articles themselves. There are still a few good ones, but it was a damn good scene back in ’11-12 or so. (Oh, and cusswords are replaced with asterisks which is ******* stupid!)

  129. @Ron Unz

    Thanks. How about keep the [AGREE]s, etc. separate from those 4, or is it part of the same calculation and not easily changed? That’s my final offer, and it’s non-negotiable (cause I’ve got nothing to negotiate with).

  130. @Si1ver1ock

    Forward Soviet!

    Ya’ gotta like this guy … if your name is Godfree Roberts.

  131. @Commentator Mike

    Isn’t that simply because they can’t read English so quickly?

    That’s not to argue that the West now is so completely un-free, especially in the realm of speech.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  132. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    My first point seems pretty clear, but I’ll try again. It seems that numbering commenters – either permanently as is done here, or within each thread as is reportedly done elsewhere – shouldn’t cause problems. Wouldn’t me going henceforth as “Ahcmed E. Newman” be more likely to confuse?

    Your reply resurrects the argument I heard last time around about people hiding from their history, so as not to be called out on inconsistencies. Do you really find that important in the context of comments? Again, it shows that some commenters are more concerned with winning quarrels than with discussion of the article.

    To add another example, check out Jim Kunstler’s Monday/Friday essays: “real handles” are the rule, and the same handfuls of people assemble faithfully in the same pews for their resumed fighting with each other, the essay serving as little more than a steeple bell. Some write well, but it’s growing stale.

    It appears that you already have your own website, which Mr. Unz graciously allows you to plug. What are your comment policies? How have they worked out?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  133. Thank you so much for providing the most fearless and intelligent discourse on our current dystopia.

  134. @Achmed E. Newman

    Achmed,

    The ones who work and drink at Starbucks would know. Actually there are many what they call “sensitive” issues that are not open to free debate, including religious and some local political themes, but condemning Jews and most aspects of the globohomo agenda is fine.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  135. @anonymous

    How can you be arguing with me while agreeing at the same time? (This is under the assumption that you are the same anonymous, which IS THE PROBLEM! Yes, I see your #340, but I’ve seen the numbers change for the same commenter, at least according to the conversation.)

    You just got done saying that you didn’t like the numbering system (it’s not just done within each thread – #357, or is it #257, is well-known to me). Do you pick that number? I was under the impression it was assigned by the software. Your going by a name that doesn’t match another one* is the least confusing way to have a conversation. Do you address your friends by their PO boxes? You could, but …

    On your 2nd paragraph, that was not at all what I was saying. I thought you wanted to avoid a handle across ALL threads (or more understandably across all sites you comment on, since you may reveal more info. on yourself in order to discuss certain things on certain sites). If I keep this name here, does that make me more vulnerable to doxxing? I suppose that’s your point, but I didn’t know.

    On Peak Stupidity, I don’t have enough commenters to have a policy yet ;-} (I do get plenty of page-views and “visits”, but just 10 or so people that comment occasionally.) I did one very easy thing to avoid SPAM from Russian IP #s that was getting out-of-hand – I mean a threat to the database. Yes, it is very gracious of Mr. Unz to allow me to plug my site here.

    .

    * I don’t know if the software blocks EXACT duplicates of handles. I think so, as there are people occasionally trying to imitate another commenter by putting a dot after an initial or what-have-you.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @anonymous
  136. Republic says:
    @Pseudonymic

    whether a normal white-collar person would be comfortable opening the site’s homepage on a laptop at Starbucks

    Depends on the Starbucks, might not be a good idea in a crowded Starbucks in down town Seattle.

    In Canada it might get one hauled before a hate speech tribunal

  137. Republic says:
    @Commentator Mike

    In downtown Kuala Lumpur you can enjoy a hard copy of Mein Kampf or The International Jew with your latte and get no dirty looks from the locals.

    Those books are ok, but it not advisable to show that Danish Prophet Mohammed cartoon. You might get arrested.

    Also having a copy of the Bible in Arabic/English on your laptop in a Cairo coffee shop is not a good idea.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  138. Republic says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Zero Hedge used to have brilliant comments, but some got in trouble by naming the tribe,then got banned.

    The ZH comment section is now of very low quality.

    Very interesting back story regarding its owner from Bulgaria

  139. Rurik says:
    @Colin Wright

    the pieties of the age with due reverence.

    By controlling the words we’re allowed to use, they insidiously attempt to control our thoughts, in an Orwellian-like agenda of controlling our minds and behavior.

    Germans aren’t allowed to say many things, or even to make certain gestures. Crime-thought and even crime-gesture. The idea is to criminalize any pride in being German or resistance to the blood libels heaped upon them for generations now. While here in the good ol’ ZUS of A, the word ‘pride’ has been co-opted as a fist-in-your-face ‘celebration’ of sodomy. I remember even my very non-confrontational mother lamenting the loss of the word ‘gay’ – which is just more perverting of the language to suit the pro-homo/300+ genders/six year olds told they’re transgender- insanity that is blanketing our civilization.

    Twitter rejected four Center for Immigration Studies tweets for use in the Center’s Twitter Ads campaign, alleging hateful content. (Several others were approved.) All four tweets use the statutory phrases “illegal alien” or “criminal alien,”

    With their tyrannical, Orwellian, thuggery over which words we’re allowed to use, they intend to exert control over our speech, and power over our minds. In a word, domination. Just as the Germans today are utterly dominated, so too they’d like to crush any rebellion, everywhere in the Western world, against their petty demands that we all goose-step to their (pro-homo/pro-Negro/pro-immigrant/pro-POC/anti-white/anti-straight/anti-reason) eternal agenda of the eternally butt-hurt.

    If you went into a Starbucks around here with a MAGA hat on, I suspect there’d be mass-aneurisms and you could help yourself to anything in the store, since the staff and patrons would all be twitching on the floor, gasping and convulsing. Just step over them and grab your latte.

    I don’t come here because I’m looking for more of that.

    God no!

    It’s everywhere now. The American Cuckservative bans Dr. Giraldi for telling the simple and obvious truth. The pall of acceptable discourse is like a Soviet thought-pogrom crushing free thought and free-expression in the West today.

    If a nigger is walking down the street, with his britches hanging around his thighs, grabbing his crotch, and leering at everyone with menace in his eyes, why not call it what it is? A nigger. Blacks don’t self-censor their words, and would say ‘check out that monkey-ass nigger’.

    No one that I’m aware of would call Obama or Justice Thomas or Thomas Sowell a ‘nigger’, because they obviously aren’t. They’re simply Americans who also happen to be Negros, (or mulatto in the case of Obama).

    But I suspect even the word ‘Negro’ is hurtful to some Starbucks types. Any word or thought that conforms to the ‘Gods of the Copybook Headings’, causes chills to run the wrong way up their legs.

    They live in a rainbow-land of unicorns and equality. Words that are brutally honest, upset their purple unicorn harmony, and cause dissonance in their pretty little psychic bubbles.

    The more Unz Review realtalk explodes those pretty, little bubbles, the more popular I suspect it will become. There is a huge vacuum in our collective conscious for simple honesty, in our time of ubiquitous self-imposed self-censorship and Orwellian thought-control.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  140. Rurik says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Is the West so backward when it comes to little small freedoms like what you may wish to read in a coffee shop? Rhetorical question – no need to answer.

    says it all

  141. anon[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    “SPAM from Russian IP #s.”

    LOL. Were they posting puppies?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  142. @anon

    Nah, unreadable viagra ads, as far as I could tell. I said Russian IP #s – that doesn’t necessarily mean Russian people, but Mr. Unz here would know a whole lot more about spoofing and that sort of thing than me. I didn’t want to use “Captcha” because it really annoys me as a commenter, but it was gonna crash the site if I didn’t change something.

    • Replies: @anon
  143. anon[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    unreadable …

    Are you saying the ads were in Russian language?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  144. I do recommend unz.com quite often. Even more often, I’m astonished/ glad/delighted with/about the information, I can find here. So thanks a lot, thanks again.
    The comments section flourishes, too. For me personally, unz.com is by far the most insightful platform on the internet.

  145. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    This exchange started with your challenging another commenter’s desire for anonymity with the argument that — even under the # compromise of last year —it’s confusing as to who is saying what. That argument seemed makeweight, and seems even more so now with the new nonsense about there being two 340’s discussing this with you.

    My comments have on a few occasions shown under a different #, but in all but one or two instances when I’ve posted from other than Starship 340. So I now don’t comment remotely, and have even canceled a comment when I saw in edit mode that it bore a different #.

    I have continued to comment under the current policy, but believe that going any farther will lead to the degradation of the comment threads a la Taki, Zerohedge, Kunstler, and … this conversation.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  146. Given how much harder the Net Lords have been working to silence those on their enemies lists for Campaign 2020, a 20% increase in traffic sounds counter-intuitive. Any thoughts on how the increase came about?

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  147. druid55 says:

    Ron, Please let us up-vote a comment without having to make comments ourselves.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  148. @anon

    No. The IP numbers from the server log file, upon being looked up, were from Russia (the look-up site I used to use is pretty good at the 200 mile range, I’d say – often there’d be conflicts, but usually in the same region of a country)

    Here, I found an old one still on an old post:

    ApokoalonekWednesday – October 25th 2017 5:05AM MST
    acheter du viagra en france cialis levitra
    bactrim injectable prix
    kamagra en france
    acheter du viagra aux usa
    cialis 20mg prix troubles de l érection
    pour acheter du sildenafil
    forum viagra achat
    forum du ou acheter alli
    sildenafil win prix maroc
    pantoprazole 20mg prix
    prix clomid au maroc
    acai bouteille acheter
    sur quel site acheter du levitra

    Some French there, but even when they were in English, the words were cluttered and unreadable – they (whoever) are not sending their best bots!

    • LOL: Dieter Kief
  149. Nice site. Great comment section. Most people can spot the trolls and bots. I especially like that we can comment without facebook, discus, twitter, etc.

  150. @Republic

    Indeed. We have to know the rules wherever we travel, and keep up to date on any changes. Could be even in the same city going from one area to another, I suppose. Or maybe you should just not go to certain areas.

  151. Ron Unz says:
    @Nicholas Stix

    Given how much harder the Net Lords have been working to silence those on their enemies lists for Campaign 2020, a 20% increase in traffic sounds counter-intuitive. Any thoughts on how the increase came about?

    Yes, the recent traffic results really are surprisingly encouraging.

    We’ve certainly suffered serious “harassment” by Twitter and Facebook. Twitter seems to regularly “shadow-ban” Tweets promoting many of our popular articles, and I think a large fraction of the most energetic Tweeters from a couple of years ago have been deplatformed. Meanwhile, Facebook often “disappears” the Likes to popular articles presumably to prevent them from trending, though it usually restores them after a couple of days. And one or two people have claimed that they’ve actually been punished by a Facebook suspension merely for posting one of our articles. Given all of this, I’m certainly pleased with the rise in traffic.

    Even more encouraging is the apparent quality. Various rather “high-end” and fully mainstream people have told me they’re quite impressed with some of the material we publish.

  152. Ron Unz says:
    @druid55

    Ron, Please let us up-vote a comment without having to make comments ourselves.

    No, I think that would be an absolutely terrible idea…

    If you look at various other websites, you seem dozens of upvotes and downvotes for many comments, which seems absolutely worthless to me. At best it’s the result of ideological gang-warfare and at worst it’s produced by shill bot-farms. I challenge anyone to explain the value in that sort of thing.

    By contrast, when you see an Agree/Disagree/etc here, it catches your eye and makes an impression, which is exactly the intent. Personally, I think it’s better to avoid inflating your currency to the point at which you need to weigh it by the pound to buy a sandwich.

    To a lesser extent, the same applies to the one-per-hour limit. Such rationing forces commenters to allocate their opinions more carefully than just endlessly clicking the Agree/Disagree/etc buttons.

  153. Iris says:
    @gsjackson

    I’m sure I wouldn’t have trouble rounding up many dozens of posters here who would count his posts among the most valuable

    Count me in. Jacques Sheete is graced with the ability to turn an anonymous internet thread into a community of virtual “friends”. It gives another dimension to any discussion, as he often acts as a catalyst of thoughts by the careful attention he gives to each commenter.

    I am very grateful being able to read the excellent articles and first-class comments posted on this website. As we live in fascist dictatorships, moderating is necessary and has a cost, and not moderating costs even more. The new restrictions are sensible and reasonable; singling out specific commenters however seems less objective and less understandable.

    NB: You insulted me once and I’ve decided to ignore you. I am talking to you JUST because I adore Jacques Sheete. Don’t think I’ll make a habit of it.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  154. JosephB says:
    @anon

    I agree.

    Hey, if I post that enough times I’ll be considered a serious enough reader to agree/disagree with people for real.

    Or, perhaps charge an annual fee for the privilege? A way to weed out nonsense and maybe raise funding for the site. I’d rather pay $25 than make 10 silly posts per month.

  155. @Ron Unz

    Your “Intelligent Design” (pun) website is the best I have ever seen. Everything about it is first rate.
    It is relevant, non-pretentious, and a REAL forum for free speech. You are Mister First Amendment, hands down, bar none.

    Now, if only some other websites adopted your general policies. The Occidental Observer could attract a lot more traffic and involvement if it flushed its silly, callow, and shallow moderator. The same with Darkmoon. The commentariat has declined over the past two years.

    Even some “deranged” comments many times contain elements of truth, veracity, or wisdom.

    Anyway, you ARE the man, Ron.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  156. @anonymous

    OK, now I’m still curious (I just did AGREE to put the kibosh on this back-and-forth). If you are making every effort to stay #340, then what difference would it be if you made yourself “Starship 340”? Is it that people looking to cause you trouble – let’s say they think they might know who you are and look for every little bit of evidence – will remember “Starship 340” better than Anon #340?

    From your last paragraph, I think you are not worried about the anonymity, though, just the too-long worthless arguments. OK, so I’ll try to remember who you are, but I can’t promise I’ll remember who Anon #340 is 2 weeks from now. If you use the appellation “Starship XXX” I’ll say “hey”. Otherwise, we could likely start up the same argument as this one, as I may figure here’s another guy that doesn’t understand ;-}

  157. anon[231] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    people find you annoying and tiresome.

    Ad hominem attacks are more annoying and tiresome.

    http://www.unz.com/avltchek/what-i-am-fighting-for/#comment-3368882

  158. gsjackson says:
    @Iris

    Oh, you mean the insult in response to your indirect (but perfectly obvious) accusation that I am some sort of establishment troll charged with distracting truth seekers from righteous issues by bringing up patently absurd matters? After I had expended well over a thousand words setting out many substantive points (none of which you responded to) trying to clarify one side of a matter that is currently engaging the attention of many intelligent people. And after I had defended you twice against FB’s ugliness.

    Ironic that you should come on here talking about friendship. I haven’t read anything by you since then either, until this.

    • LOL: Iris
  159. Biff says:

    Various rather “high-end” and fully mainstream people

    I wouldn’t want one of those living in my neighborhood.

  160. @Poupon Marx

    Darkmoon has to contend with some crazy The Real Original Joe sending in reams of writing daily with mostly insults, curses, swearing, and total nonsense. I wonder how UR would contend with such a pest. Probably there are some who would like to post here, and try, but just get cut off immediately. Even longer term posters get kicked off DM for what seem like petty offences and others leave acrimoniously with a huff and a puff after being prominent on the site for a long time. Seems like a lot of them take things personal when after all it’s just a discussion. What’s annoying with OO and some other sites is that they close their comments section after a while so it never builds up any meaningful debate.

    • Replies: @Poupon Marx
  161. @gsjackson

    Jacques Sheete will be missed.

    When I first started commenting at this site about 6 months ago, some of my very first comments on a Paul Kersey article were censored. I argued that Jewish perfidy was responsible for Black-on-White murder and mayhem in America.

    At the time, I didn’t know Paul Kersey is a perfidious Jew using a goy alias and so I made a final comment to express my bewilderment which fortunately got published and JS responded to it and told me to hang in there.

    JS informed me that the authors moderate their own articles and that I shouldn’t blame Ron Unz.

    Sad that JS got singled out and even sadder that he couldn’t take his own advice and hang in there.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  162. gsjackson says:

    @ Iris You’ve really got a social tin ear, don’t you? Maybe it’s a problem working in your second or third language. Nah, it’s probably a character issue. In any case, if you’re going to try to communicate in English it’s best you do go online looking for friends, since in real life the arrogance might result in some unfortunate consequences. And I, by the way, will NB exactly what I think is worth N’ing B, and it won’t be anything by you.

  163. Thank you Mr. Unz. I think you are running THE BEST wide topic site on the Internet. I am very grateful

  164. Ron Unz says:
    @MAOWASAYALI

    Jacques Sheete will be missed…JS informed me that the authors moderate their own articles and that I shouldn’t blame Ron Unz. Sad that JS got singled out and even sadder that he couldn’t take his own advice and hang in there.

    I think this illustrates how some of the silly commenters on my website talk themselves into believing all sorts of crazy “conspiracy theories” that have no basis in reality.

    Apparently, some of the participants in this thread have convinced themselves that commenter Jacques Sheete was “singled out” for unfair treatment and had his comments trashed. This is total nonsense.

    As far as I know, all that happened was that he simply ran afoul of the new limit of 3 comments/thread/hour (now raised to 4). I suppose it’s possible that he encountered some temporary bug in the system, but no one else seems to have noticed it.

    • Disagree: tac
    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @MAOWASAYALI
    , @tac
  165. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Isn’t it true that:

    1. Some authors (e.g., Steve Sailer) moderate comments, while others (e.g., Linh Dinh) do not?

    2. Moderators can see the email addresses of commenters?

    This should be clarified, and disclosed in each article as is already done at the end of Mr. Sailer’s.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  166. @Commentator Mike

    Your analysis is perspicacious. The Occ. Observer and Darkmoon are only hurting themselves because of inconsistent applied standards, IOW, too subjective and personal. Compounded, DM has “favorites”, “old posters”, and idiosyncratic criteria. The Old Joe character is allowed to post and call the two women the most vile insults, and they laugh it off as just a crazy guy. Many of the posters are predictable, banal, unoriginal and use a lot of emoticons. It’s a chatroom, essentially. Stale and pale.

    The Occ. Observer has a cretin for a moderator, makes very immature comments and mangles syntax and grammar. He is super sensitive that noting very negative be said about Whites, i.e., Indo-Europeans, or Christianity. Ironic, since Prof Kevin McDonald wrote he is an atheist. Many really good commenters, with advanced degrees, never ad hominem or profane, have complained that he snips out some part of comments, or simply doesn’t publish them. What a disservice!! I have written the editors a few times on this, but nothing changed and I received no reply. He snidely puts in comments by noting “Mod:………. They are nothing short of pedestrian and barely post pubescent.

    Over at Counter-Currents, I find some interesting [read USEFUL regarding our plight as IE, but the focus is on “Aryan” everything and Hitler worship. Johnson, the creator, is a history Ph.D, so as expected, most content is the past extrapolated to the present. It has the uncomfortable ambience of a cult.

    Amen is useful, J. Taylor is gifted and visionary. Don’t get too colloquial or mention Jews in a negative light. And put some cream in your strong coffee comments, and you will get posted.

    IrishSavant is fearless and highly intelligent. He exudes the breadth of a polymath, yet writes straightforwardly and clearly. Always relevant, with action components. He must be personally and financially untouchable.

    Unz is the gorilla, the heavyweight, for which all other such sights fall short. You have to be out of control and a maniac with nothing useful to be cut here. Generally, other commenters will push a dunce, troll, or liar right off the board. I like that. Nothing wrong with some rough and tumble.

    Honorable mention: The Gates of Vienna. Not overly Zionist, but afraid of candor and saying the obvious about ZOG NWO {my inclusive phrase}.

    Most of these sites only get single or double digits or comments, which is a good indicator of amount of readers or visitors.

    • Agree: MAOWASAYALI
  167. @Rev. Spooner

    Apparently, ZH “manages” by allowing spam and by simply banning people who displease the clickfarm’s owners. ZH isn’t a shining light for emulation. If you like so-called articles that consist of text ripped off from mainstream media and cobbled together under a Tyler Durden byline, then the inane commentary shouldn’t be much of a bother.

  168. @Achmed E. Newman

    ” I’m guessing that’s because “Tyler Durden” didn’t like the fact that most readers (such as myself) were coming to the site to read the great humorous commenters of 5 years back vs. his articles themselves. ”

    True, but five years ago there was a different group of Tylers. back then, it really was kind of like Fight Club, with plenty of sardonic humor and even a mini-flame war or two every week.

    The clickfarm has been sold several times since then, but the worst bunch was the ones who bought it in late ’16 or thereabouts and dropped the ban hammer on a few hundred people within a day or so. I was told that there were three of them in that particular group of owners.

    • Replies: @Republic
  169. Republic says:
    @Twodees Partain

    So that Bulgarian guy, Daniel Ivandjiski, who was the founder of Zero Hedge is no longer running it?

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  170. @Republic

    I don’t know any of the names involved. There were a few former participants who had been banned and who posted on another site. They told the story of the different Tylers buying the site, or buying in. I was banned there in Dec. of ’16. It all sounded like it was probably pretty close to the truth, given the way the site went through changes the last two years I was participating there.

  171. @Ron Unz

    I stand humbly corrected. My apology. A thousand thanks for this great website.

  172. tac says:
    @Ron Unz

    What Jacques Sheete was not experienced in, as I was with ‘your’ moderators, was this site’s ability to not publish the thoughts, ideas, or links notwithstanding the political views of some of the ‘moderators’ of this site.

    LOL, Ron, as much as you want, but serious intellectuals should be cognizant of this and your “MODERATORS’” ability to filter content (should your ‘moderators’ publish such content and have it scrutinized and rightfully so).

    A so-called ‘free-speech’ site such as yours should portray your site to be willing without filtering the comments–unless you’re protecting an allegiance to what you believe to be higher than yourself …

    Look forward to your response and not just an LOL. Have at it.

    • Replies: @anon
  173. anon[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @tac

    Perhaps Ron can decode this mumbo-jumbo.

    Funny how all UR commenters assume themelves to be serious intellectuals (most of whom have better things to do).

    • Replies: @tac
  174. @Poupon Marx

    I used to like Morgoth’s essays but since he switched to posting podcasts I’m losing interest in Morgoth’s Review. He does seem to have a lively commentariat though and doesn’t seem to have lost followers since switching mostly to the spoken word.

    Aryan Skynet could have more potential but I doubt many read it. There are occasionally some interesting articles there about more obscure topics you don’t get elsewhere but most are not so interesting. It seems like a low key, less frequented, and far less sophisticated version of UR. Aryan Skynet’s own Hipster Racist compared the commentary on Counter Currents with that on Unz Review in one of the threads there and concluded that Unz review commenters were superior in intellect and quality of the debate. It’s a pity I can’t now find that comment of his in which he heaps praise on UR’s commentariat as I would post it as a response to those who disparage UR’s commentary like anon at #179. If someone could dig it up it would be nice to read it again. I tried to search for it using keywords on google but couldn’t find it and there’s no search function on their website.

    Affirmative right and alt-right don’t get much traffic and well … no comment. The old altright.com by Richard Spencer was one of the better sites with a lot of potential but it would seem it has died a silent death quite a while back. AA’s DS is good for laughs and for catching up on some news not found in the msm, but not much else. You covered most of the rest.

    • Agree: MAOWASAYALI
  175. MEH 0910 says:

    Ron Unz, thank you for The Unz Review.

  176. NYMOM says:

    Slightly off topic: I would like to see an interesting column focusing on what is going on in South Africa right now…as opposed to just random articles.

    Thanks.

  177. Jett Rucker says: • Website
    @JoannF

    I, too, find the strictures on AGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. peculiar and frustrating. In fact, rather than post this Reply, I would, on a “normal” Web site, merely have agreed with, or “liked” the comment I’m replying to. As it is, I occasionally fall back on Replying just to upvote a particular comment. PITA.

  178. Greg Bacon says: • Website

    Sounds more than reasonable to me. I’d take it a step further, by limiting the number of videos per comment to one. The feedback should come from that person’s mind and not what some Youtube personality said.

    I’m all for freedom of speech, but when others are monopolizing your blog postings with endless comments and way too many videos, they’re taking free speech away from someone who wants to leave a comment but can’t get past the verbiage of others.

    Keep up the excellent work and always keep that AV software up to date, as I’m sure some are really PO that there are still sites on the ‘Net that encourage free speech.

  179. Biff says:

    For the record I’m on board with the three comments per hour(though Ron caved and greased a squeaky wheel up to four – still tolerable). The agree/disagree/troll button works perfect in keeping the Willy Nilly likers and dislikers of Facebook/Yahoo fashion sidelined.

    The best part of this website is consistency – nothing abruptly changes; sticking to small pragmatic tweaks.

    I also like the fact that Wendy’s, BurgerKing, and Subway commercials are kept to a minimum.

  180. @Bill Jones

    ‘And I’ve yet to see Unz publish anything, anything at all by a blind mute digitally challenged illiterate.’

    There are several contributors I’ve learned to bypass.

  181. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous

    I have asked these questions before, but they have been ignored.

    Why?

  182. Dissident says:
    @Bill Jones

    It would be helpful if comments could be structured as replies to more than one previous comments.

    Yes, that would indeed be a most useful feature, especially now with the new limits in-place. That said, I have no idea what would be involved in implementing such a change.

    Of course, I realize that it has always been possible to include responses to multiple comments in a single post but doing that has considerable limitations. To illustrate, consider this very comment of mine that I am typing at the moment. Since I will be posting it as a direct reply to the earlier comment in this thread made by Bill Jones, the one that is numbered #96, said Bill Jones should receive email notification of my reply if he had selected that option when making his post. Additionally, as soon as my reply appears live, a hyper-link to it should appear in the body of Bill Jones’ comment that mine was posted as a reply to.

    But suppose I were to include, within this same comment of mine, one or more replies to one or more additional comments from this thread? The author of any additional comment that I had replied-to would only know of my reply if he were to return to this thread and read through my comment carefully enough to notice that it included a reply to his. The same would be true for anyone who would read any of the other comments that I had responded-to at any point after I had posted my reply.
    ~ ~ ~
    Another suggestion I have is that once a thread has reached a certain number of comments, that by default only the newest 50 or so be displayed. (Older comments would, of course, still be readily available to view.) This would considerably reduce load on the servers while at the same time offering a considerably improved experience for reader and commenter alike. If nothing else, this should at least be done for returning visitors to a thread; having to reload all of the old comments on a page each and every time one wishes merely to view the new ones seems terribly inefficient, wasteful of resources and unwieldy.

    Thank you for your efforts and for allowing us such leeway in commenting.

  183. Ragno says:

    Whatever Ron Unz decides for this website, I wholeheartedly support.

    I’m imagining an Internet – an America – without the Unzsite in it; and it scares me half to death. The wicked witches of the Left, and their hordes of flying monkeys, must not prevail in this instance.

    • Replies: @Not a nazi
  184. @Ragno

    “The wicked witches of the Left, and their hordes of flying monkeys, must not prevail in this instance.” We are coming for you, my pretty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    This website is interesting. When you interact with normal people all day, it’s hard to believe that all of the vapid jews=bad, blacks=bad, whites=good shit is written by actual people rather than some bot. But no, we really do have a bunch of racist losers in this country.

    • Troll: Colin Wright
  185. Clyde says:

    People here use the agree-disagree button honestly and do not mount campaigns. Thus 5 per hour should be allowed while the present one per hour is absurd. Posters like to see feedback even if is button pushing feedback.
    Just look at how successful the UK Daily Mail comment section is. It is 90% based on like/dislike button pushing.

    • Replies: @Miro23
  186. Miro23 says:
    @Clyde

    Just look at how successful the UK Daily Mail comment section is. It is 90% based on like/dislike button pushing.

    It’s heavily moderated (censored) but there’s a sort of art to it. For example, they’re continuously after Meghan Markle, they’re digging on the Epstein story, and they have plenty of articles on London’s Black crime wave, but all articles and comments have to follow SJW rules (no mention of Blacks, Jews, Gays etc.)

    The Black crime articles don’t say that the perpetrators are Black and the comments are not allowed to point it out, but the articles are still there, with masses of photos showing the (Black) criminals. They’re communicating the reality while still complying with the SJW rule book.

    IMO this is why the Daily Mail is crushing its competitors.

  187. You can not stop the Truth Train.
    It has already left the station. You have a choice to get off by selling your soul to the Devil.
    Tel LIE vised 911 evangeLIED, Santa Claus worshipping crusader’s and their Bible thumping
    wall street cronies will be gathered within greater izrahell for their destruction by their own hands.

  188. Logan says:
    @9/11 Inside job

    I am curious how you can be sure most commenters are white males. Do they express ideas you assume only white males hold? Isn’t that a stereotype? And, as we know, all stereotypes are by definition untrue.

    How do you know most commenters aren’t really dogs?

    https://www.art.com/products/p15063499994-sa-i6847752/peter-steiner-on-the-internet-nobody-knows-you-re-a-dog-new-yorker-cartoon.htm

  189. tac says:
    @anon

    Funny how all UR commenters assume themelves[sic] to be serious intellectuals (most of whom have better things to do).

    Think what you want…Ron Unz, although intellectual per se, has not fortitude to relinquish his position as a rebellion leader–much less so is that he is Jewish. (((infiltration)))

    • Replies: @Irish Savant
  190. roo_ster says:

    I support those limits. Thanks for unz.com.

    Were news & political sites inclined to allow commenting, they could not do better than to contact you and implement your system.

  191. One of the best blogs out there Ron. Glad to read of your success and hope you go from strength to strength. I can understand the cost of your bravery to you personally. Your revised procedures will lead to an even better blog.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  192. @Poupon Marx

    Thank you Poupon Marx….I’m blushing as I write this!

    Yes, I’m at an age and financial position whereby there’s not much they can do to me. And this is why I complimented Ron Unz earlier because I can just imagine the odium and opposition he must attract. I’m sure ‘they’ are just waiting for any kind of chance to get him.

  193. @tac

    What are you trying to say?

  194. @JosephB

    I’d love to hit the “I agree” button for this post, but don’t post enough to be able to do so.

    I’m a regular reader, see comments that make me nod or shake my head. However, I don’t tend to step forward with comments of my own so cannot voice that feeling.

    I comment periodically, but not often enough to reach the 10 in a month threshhold to be able to simply agree/disagree/LOL. I don’t see the harm in providing brief feedback to a commenter (i.e. agree/disagree/LOL) instead of bogging a thread down with a longer separate post to just do the same.

    I have yet to see an explanation of what is gained by this policy.

    All that aside, I greatly appreciate the Unz site as an oasis of free speech and controversy.

  195. Ron Unz says:
    @Irish Savant

    Glad to read of your success and hope you go from strength to strength. I can understand the cost of your bravery to you personally.

    Well, I haven’t really noticed anything yet. For about a year I’ve been trying to lure the ADL and its friends into attacking me, but as far as I can tell, they’re just too scared to do so. And if they’re too scared, who else would dare take the lead?

    http://www.unz.com/announcement/has-the-adl-gone-into-hiding/

    After I repeatedly baited and insulted them, the ADL did finally publish a short and rather milquetoast anonymous blog post criticizing me, which gave me a nice opportunity to respond:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-adl-in-american-society/

    As a result, they immediately went back into hiding, and I haven’t heard anything from them since then. Perhaps it’s a little like those Harry Potter movies, and the ADL regards me as “He Whose Name Must Not Be Spoken,” an individual whose very syllables might cause their immediate destruction.

    Meanwhile, I’ve been getting lots of friendly notes and such from all sorts of reasonably prominent journalists and academic scholars, which is quite gratifying. And the Alexa traffic rankings of our small webzine are now well above those of The New Republic and The Nation, America’s two oldest and most prestigious opinion magazines, which is also quite nice.

    • LOL: Achmed E. Newman
  196. @Ron Unz

    Well you certainly baited them but you’re a serious adversary and they’re bullies. I was referring more to your personal bravery in that I know from first hand experience (a close friend of mine) the opprobrium that a Jewish person who speaks honestly about Jewish issues draws down. David Cole is an example, beaten up and even had to change his name. May you stay safe and prosper.

  197. Anonymous[278] • Disclaimer says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Actually it sounds like Turkey. Translations of Mein Kampf or The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are unexceptional there. Publish and distribute a book saying the Turks committed genocide against the Armenians in WW1 and watch what happens next…

  198. Saggy says: • Website

    It has been my impression that the c omments are not moderated, but I see that that is not entirely true and some authors moderate comments to their articles, correct?

    That said, I think that what moderation is taking place should be explicitly stated, and if an author moderates that should be noted at the head of the comment section.

    Also, if over-moderation is a perceived problem, I think there is only one honest way to proceed, and that is to have ‘trash bin’ where deleted comments are tossed that is available to be read by anyone, it could be one bin for the entire site. That way anyone could see what moderation was happening.

    All that said, I think the comment section here is great, I’ve learned a lot. And I haven’t been banned, which is always a plus.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  199. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Saggy

    I have repeatedly asked that these questions be answered, including above in this thread.

    Aren’t we to know who is moderating, and thereby being provided with our email addresses?

  200. fcd says:

    Announcements and simple instructions on how future comments would be handled generates more than 200 comments. This explains everything.

    Mr. Unz, I really enjoy your website and the articles. You have scholarly contributors.

    With God’s blessings !

    • Replies: @Saggy
  201. Saggy says: • Website
    @fcd

    Announcements and simple instructions on how future comments would be handled generates more than 200 comments. This explains everything.

    What does it explain?

    It doesn’t explain why we cannot get answers to even the simplest questions (AFAIK). These are –
    * Who is moderating ?
    * What are they moderating ?

  202. @Ron Unz

    Actually, if I were the ADL I would view Unz Review more as an asset than a threat. Ron Unz’s articles in particular prove that controversial Jewish issues can be addressed in an intellectually honest, exhaustive and self-critical spirit, without censorship, and in a way that demonstrates Jewish strengths.

    For most reasonable people, the vicious anti-Semitism that surfaces in some of the comments is self-destructive and self-defeating — those commenters discredit themselves.

    All influential groups on the world stage, whether ethnic, religious, national, economic or bureaucratic, should be subject to fair and objective criticism. One tends to be most favorably impressed by those groups that are most proactive and forthright in investigating and repairing their own problems. They command respect.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ron Unz Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?