The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 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
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / On "Comments"
 All Comments / On "Comments"
    Many of the commeters here at Unz.com have complained about my heavy-handed treatment of commenters. Well, to those people, I say too bad. They key problem is that many critical commenters don't realize how ignorant about matter at hand they are. Realize that the whole reason you're reading me is because I know things that...
  • […] Commenters, please be aware of my comment policy. […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Polynices
    A brilliant comment policy like this is why you and Razib are two of my favorite bloggers (I'd say he has a very similar attitude towards dumb comments). Anyone griping about your comment policy is certainly someone that shouldn't be commenting anyway.

    Keep up the good work!

    you and Razib are two of my favorite bloggers (I’d say he has a very similar attitude towards dumb comments).

    Razib has good stuff and makes great points. However, he is prone to being a bit of a smug, ungracious, even rude arse (ass to you colonial types).

    He is also a crap writer – his prose is tortured, clunky and unnecessarily impenetrable. He would do well to fully take to heart and imbibe Steven Pinker’s ‘A Sense of Style: The Thinking Person’s Guide to Writing in the 21st Century’, and maybe brush-up on Dale Carnegie.

    These are not charges I feel even vaguely applicable to JayMan.

    Oh whilst I’m at it – yes – Steve Sailer takes sarcasm to stratospheric levels, but with Steve it’s an endearing part his persona and essential aspect of his shtick.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Max Payne
    Can I ask where you acquired your PhD from?

    Are you not updating your blog anymore? Regardless of what people think I went to your wordpress and here and can’t find new posts. Did you move it somewhere?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Max Payne
    Can I ask where you acquired your PhD from?

    There is a difference between qualifications and credentials. Forgetting that distinction is one of the things killing our society.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    So, all of the favorable comments to your articles are only because you delete the negative ones.
     
    I hope this answers that point.

    There's a difference between negative and stupid.

    There’s a difference between negative and stupid.

    And we know who gets to make this decision.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @HBD Guy
    I would like to know what your thoughts are about this topic?

    http://kotaku.com/5457590/us-navy-video-games-improve-brains-fluid-intelligence

    Well, my thoughts are that that is hooey. They are pursuing a false course by comparing long-time gamers to non-gamers because the two groups could (and do) have pre-existing differences. For what it’s worth, a 2013 meta-analysis of brain training game trials found no lasting effects:

    Is Working Memory Training Effective? A Meta-Analytic Review

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I would like to know what your thoughts are about this topic?

    http://kotaku.com/5457590/us-navy-video-games-improve-brains-fluid-intelligence

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    Well, my thoughts are that that is hooey. They are pursuing a false course by comparing long-time gamers to non-gamers because the two groups could (and do) have pre-existing differences. For what it's worth, a 2013 meta-analysis of brain training game trials found no lasting effects:

    Is Working Memory Training Effective? A Meta-Analytic Review

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @boogerbently
    So, all of the favorable comments to your articles are only because you delete the negative ones.
    Only Unz.com should have the ability to remove comments. How about if only GMO food producers were allowed to determine which studies on GMO food got published?

    So, all of the favorable comments to your articles are only because you delete the negative ones.

    I hope this answers that point.

    There’s a difference between negative and stupid.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    There’s a difference between negative and stupid.

    And we know who gets to make this decision.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • So, all of the favorable comments to your articles are only because you delete the negative ones.
    Only Unz.com should have the ability to remove comments. How about if only GMO food producers were allowed to determine which studies on GMO food got published?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    So, all of the favorable comments to your articles are only because you delete the negative ones.
     
    I hope this answers that point.

    There's a difference between negative and stupid.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @BubbaJoe
    JayMan,
    I've read a good bit of your work. I find you interesting and knowledgeable (yes, more so than me). But ever since you've arrived at UNZ you've been abnormally rankled by the comments section. You're letting it get to you, and whining about it too much. "More quality, less whining" is solid advice, please do take it into account. Lots of good contributors here get sh*te comments. You seem aggravated by each and every one. If they bother you so much, just delete/ignore them. But please stop making it the focus of your posts. You have better things to be writing about. There's a comic that comes to mind... https://xkcd.com/386/

    The only thing that’s wrong with the media is that people get away with lying, and teach other people to lie, and teach everyone to be ignorant, and teach the ignorant to be loud. I’ve tussled with Razib and Jayman and respect them more for it. We need heavy foots to be put down.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “Realize that the whole reason you’re reading me is because I know things that you don’t know.”

    I will never read you again, so it appears that you’ve rapidly run out of things I didn’t know.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • JayMan,

    I think that the JayMan-Signal is shining in the sky over at the comments sections for Sailer’s post on Putin and Erdogan. Some kid at Macquarie University is trying to start a white student union and somehow made some comment that – horror or horrors – there might be genetic differences among the various racial and ethnic groups.

    Apparently, a professor is challenging him. I suspect that the professor has framed his rebuttal in a way that makes in impossible to disprove, i.e. a debate trick; however, I thought that since you’ve dealt with these argument more than anyone, you might be able to help.

    Anyway, he’s the 7th comment on that blog post.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • All this means is that there is a need for experts in stats/pop gen to talk amongst themselves – albeit publically – and another need for experts to communicate with interested non-experts – i.e. repeating the same stuff over and over again and in different ways until the penny drops. Perhaps Ron has a solution?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @greeneyes
    Generally good to moderate comments too increase the productivity of the discussion.
    But , two things.

    1) Sometimes someone might make a useful error, they might not understand something in your work, but if you feel its a reasonable mis understanding, maybe you can restate your thesis clearer. As long as someone is engaging you in a civil manner, even mis understandings can be useful. Especially 'common misunderstandings' that pop up a lot, because those are highlight areas for extra communication.
    Though- I understand not wanting to hash over the same stuff all the time. Its also nice to get feedback about where people are generally not understanding your point.

    2) A certain percent, granted not most , but a subset of the criticism u reject, will in the long run turn out to be valid criticism.

    So, I mean, its not like an erroneous comment, phrased in a civil manner is really that disruptive.

    Not disruptive if you’re reading.

    Huge waste of time if you get hundreds of these each month.

    I’ve seen countless instances where JayMan goes to the trouble of replying with a link that the ill-informed commenter should read before commenting. Then being accused of being terse. (Yeah? And?)

    That right there is way more effort than I’d go to, particularly when the link/issue/data is in the text upon which they’re commenting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Easterner
    Why don't you and Razib Khan team up to have a dialogue about common interests? Develop some joint protocol and then expound on topics for the benefit of readers. It may take a lot of restraint by two strong-willed, knowledgeable people, but the results should be edifying.

    We need more informed, comprehensive, coherent, articulate voices, not fewer.

    Thermonuclear kudos to JayMan for this policy.

    I’m personally not sure what constitutes “white supremacy,” since, for instance, I was accused of that in my 20s for liking Tannhauser and Parsifal (the operas), and for taking about my family’s roots in Norway, Sweden, and Finland.

    But as a guest, I’m ever sensitive to the fact that while being a guest confers privileges (such as learning about megatons of stuff without having to dig it, refine it, smelt it, cast it all by myself), it’s still the host’s shindig.

    Fortunately there are now plenty of places to vent about population genetics issues on the internet. By contrast there are precious few where hard, rational, transformative thoughtwork is getting done.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Pat Hannagan
    You want me to take the discussion that you started elsewhere? How bizarre.

    You ought to have a word with your genes as they are making you behave petulantly not to mention illogically.

    You want me to take the discussion that you started elsewhere?

    Look, you went off on this nonsense tangent. I am shutting down that track.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    Further reading: Darwinian Fairytales: Selfish Genes, Errors of Heredity and Other Fables of Evolution
     
    How about no?

    This is all fluffy nonsense. Take that discussion elsewhere.

    You want me to take the discussion that you started elsewhere? How bizarre.

    You ought to have a word with your genes as they are making you behave petulantly not to mention illogically.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    You want me to take the discussion that you started elsewhere?
     
    Look, you went off on this nonsense tangent. I am shutting down that track.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Pat Hannagan
    Yes, I saw that you were employing Dawkins' penchant for anthropomorphising genes.

    Here's a short essay which discusses the subject: So You Think You Are a Darwinian?

    Specifically:

    1. The truth is, the total prostitution of all animal life, including Man and all his airs and graces, to the blind purposiveness of these minute virus-like substances, genes.

    This is a thumbnail-sketch, and an accurate one, of the contents of The Selfish Gene (1976) by Richard Dawkins. It was not written by Dawkins, but he quoted it with manifest enthusiasm in a defence of The Selfish Gene which he wrote in this journal in 1981. Dawkins status, as a widely admired spokesman for ultra-Darwinism, is too well-known to need evidence of it adduced here. His admirers even include some philosophers who have carried their airs and graces to the length of writing good books on such rarefied subjects as universals, or induction, or the mind. Dawkins can scarcely have gratified these admirers by telling them that, even when engaged in writing those books, they were totally prostituted to the blind purposiveness of their genes Still, you have to hand it to genes which can write, even if only through their slaves, a good book on subjects like universals or induction. Those genes must have brains all right, as well as purposes. At least, they must , if genes can have brains and purposes. But in fact, of course, DNA molecules no more have such things than H20 molecules do.

    Further reading: Darwinian Fairytales: Selfish Genes, Errors of Heredity and Other Fables of Evolution

    Further reading: Darwinian Fairytales: Selfish Genes, Errors of Heredity and Other Fables of Evolution

    How about no?

    This is all fluffy nonsense. Take that discussion elsewhere.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    You want me to take the discussion that you started elsewhere? How bizarre.

    You ought to have a word with your genes as they are making you behave petulantly not to mention illogically.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    Yes, I saw that you were employing Dawkins’ penchant for anthropomorphising genes.

    Here’s a short essay which discusses the subject: So You Think You Are a Darwinian?

    Specifically:

    1. The truth is, the total prostitution of all animal life, including Man and all his airs and graces, to the blind purposiveness of these minute virus-like substances, genes.

    This is a thumbnail-sketch, and an accurate one, of the contents of The Selfish Gene (1976) by Richard Dawkins. It was not written by Dawkins, but he quoted it with manifest enthusiasm in a defence of The Selfish Gene which he wrote in this journal in 1981. Dawkins status, as a widely admired spokesman for ultra-Darwinism, is too well-known to need evidence of it adduced here. His admirers even include some philosophers who have carried their airs and graces to the length of writing good books on such rarefied subjects as universals, or induction, or the mind. Dawkins can scarcely have gratified these admirers by telling them that, even when engaged in writing those books, they were totally prostituted to the blind purposiveness of their genes Still, you have to hand it to genes which can write, even if only through their slaves, a good book on subjects like universals or induction. Those genes must have brains all right, as well as purposes. At least, they must , if genes can have brains and purposes. But in fact, of course, DNA molecules no more have such things than H20 molecules do.

    Further reading: Darwinian Fairytales: Selfish Genes, Errors of Heredity and Other Fables of Evolution

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Further reading: Darwinian Fairytales: Selfish Genes, Errors of Heredity and Other Fables of Evolution
     
    How about no?

    This is all fluffy nonsense. Take that discussion elsewhere.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    Yes, but what are your comments like when someone points out that your sources do not support your conclusions?
     
    As according to the accuracy of their analysis of the situation.

    More importantly, why do you respond to racists with the assumption that most of your readers will share you humor.
     
    See John Rebel's comment above.

    That goes for everyone else, by the way.


    If you are an elect defender of the HBD faith, why do you not point out why HBD cannot be used as support for racism?
     

     HBD is a set of empirical facts. By themselves, like all facts about the world, they are value neutral. Values come from the person. In other words, people will find a way to justify whatever they want to believe regardless of the facts.

    Can empirical facts support racism?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Pat Hannagan
    No. It's not.
    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    Yes, I saw that you were employing Dawkins' penchant for anthropomorphising genes.

    Here's a short essay which discusses the subject: So You Think You Are a Darwinian?

    Specifically:

    1. The truth is, the total prostitution of all animal life, including Man and all his airs and graces, to the blind purposiveness of these minute virus-like substances, genes.

    This is a thumbnail-sketch, and an accurate one, of the contents of The Selfish Gene (1976) by Richard Dawkins. It was not written by Dawkins, but he quoted it with manifest enthusiasm in a defence of The Selfish Gene which he wrote in this journal in 1981. Dawkins status, as a widely admired spokesman for ultra-Darwinism, is too well-known to need evidence of it adduced here. His admirers even include some philosophers who have carried their airs and graces to the length of writing good books on such rarefied subjects as universals, or induction, or the mind. Dawkins can scarcely have gratified these admirers by telling them that, even when engaged in writing those books, they were totally prostituted to the blind purposiveness of their genes Still, you have to hand it to genes which can write, even if only through their slaves, a good book on subjects like universals or induction. Those genes must have brains all right, as well as purposes. At least, they must , if genes can have brains and purposes. But in fact, of course, DNA molecules no more have such things than H20 molecules do.

    Further reading: Darwinian Fairytales: Selfish Genes, Errors of Heredity and Other Fables of Evolution

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @iffen
    Yes, but what are your comments like when someone points out that your sources do not support your conclusions?

    More importantly, why do you respond to racists with the assumption that most of your readers will share you humor. If you are an elect defender of the HBD faith, why do you not point out why HBD cannot be used as support for racism?

    Yes, but what are your comments like when someone points out that your sources do not support your conclusions?

    As according to the accuracy of their analysis of the situation.

    More importantly, why do you respond to racists with the assumption that most of your readers will share you humor.

    See John Rebel’s comment above.

    That goes for everyone else, by the way.

    If you are an elect defender of the HBD faith, why do you not point out why HBD cannot be used as support for racism?

    HBD is a set of empirical facts. By themselves, like all facts about the world, they are value neutral. Values come from the person. In other words, people will find a way to justify whatever they want to believe regardless of the facts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Can empirical facts support racism?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Yes, but what are your comments like when someone points out that your sources do not support your conclusions?

    More importantly, why do you respond to racists with the assumption that most of your readers will share you humor. If you are an elect defender of the HBD faith, why do you not point out why HBD cannot be used as support for racism?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Yes, but what are your comments like when someone points out that your sources do not support your conclusions?
     
    As according to the accuracy of their analysis of the situation.

    More importantly, why do you respond to racists with the assumption that most of your readers will share you humor.
     
    See John Rebel's comment above.

    That goes for everyone else, by the way.


    If you are an elect defender of the HBD faith, why do you not point out why HBD cannot be used as support for racism?
     

     HBD is a set of empirical facts. By themselves, like all facts about the world, they are value neutral. Values come from the person. In other words, people will find a way to justify whatever they want to believe regardless of the facts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    Perhaps your arguments would be improved, and thus resistant to criticism, if they were to desist from anthropomorphising genes.
     
    Hopefully, that's a joke.

    No. It’s not.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @iffen
    The problem is your style of writing, it is not your content (which had lots of good information).

    Essentially the implications of your writing are: I've already read the relevant materials and interpreted them for you so you don't need to read anything other than what I have written and I've already thought everything through so you don't even need to bother with the thinking part.

    I doubt that you can change your writing style.

    I have a lifetime of experience with fundamentalist, evangelical preachers and I am certain that should you lose you day job untold success would await you in that field.

    The problem is your style of writing, it is not your content (which had lots of good information).

    Essentially the implications of your writing are: I’ve already read the relevant materials and interpreted them for you so you don’t need to read anything other than what I have written and I’ve already thought everything through so you don’t even need to bother with the thinking part.

    You might have had a point if I didn’t link back to my sources. Alas, I do.

    The problem may be your style of thinking.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The problem is your style of writing, it is not your content (which had lots of good information).

    Essentially the implications of your writing are: I’ve already read the relevant materials and interpreted them for you so you don’t need to read anything other than what I have written and I’ve already thought everything through so you don’t even need to bother with the thinking part.

    I doubt that you can change your writing style.

    I have a lifetime of experience with fundamentalist, evangelical preachers and I am certain that should you lose you day job untold success would await you in that field.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    The problem is your style of writing, it is not your content (which had lots of good information).

    Essentially the implications of your writing are: I’ve already read the relevant materials and interpreted them for you so you don’t need to read anything other than what I have written and I’ve already thought everything through so you don’t even need to bother with the thinking part.
     

    You might have had a point if I didn't link back to my sources. Alas, I do.

    The problem may be your style of thinking.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Stephen R. Diamond
    What else should someone comment on when you post on your moderating style? Don't you think it is useful for readers to understand that what permit depends partly on your desire for "fun"?

    And just when we get to the core equivocation of your post! My last comment was not fundamentally about your style, but rather it was about the contradiction between your claims that you are ultimately aiming for objectivity as opposed to personal discretion. This (in your penultimate comment to me) implied that you limited your use of personal discretion to serving truth. You just resolved this equivocation, hopefully if you deign to publish, for everyone's benefit. In moderating comments, personal discretion is for you, even when it conflicts with truthfinding, an essential incentive.

    This establishes two points:
    1. On your blog, you aren't single-mindedly struggling for truth. You require extraneous "fun." I think this moderating style makes your blog unsuitable for honest people who really want to struggle for truth. Excessive or misdirected ego can be as big an enemy of truth as ideological stubbornness. If you include worthless comments because its fun, why not ban good comments because they, like mine, might cause you more grief than fun?

    2. You quickly close discussion when your argument is undermined. This might not be recognizable to many in areas where you have expertise and they (like me) don't. So it is best established on a common-sense issue like your moderating style. You lack the expectation of being able to learn from discussion. (Even on a topic where you're more informed, you can extract a lesson of logic or common sense.)

    This will be my last comment to your blog, which is no venue for any honest inquirer. Because you're not an honest inquirer (rather one who justifies biased moderating) I can't trust what you say. I can't participate in discussions that you engineer to convince yourself how smart you are. [That uninformed individuals might reach a better conclusion (maybe because of superior reasoning or comprehension powers) appears to be intolerable to you. [I allow myself some rude truthfulness here only because your response comment was rude as well as wrongheaded.)])

    I hope you will have the courage to publish this. Otherwise, I'll conclude you are not only a biased inquirer but also as a coward.

    On your blog, you aren’t single-mindedly struggling for truth. You require extraneous “fun.” I think this moderating style makes your blog unsuitable for honest people who really want to struggle for truth

    If you include worthless comments because its fun, why not ban good comments because they, like mine, might cause you more grief than fun?

    This will be my last comment to your blog, which is no venue for any honest inquirer. Because you’re not an honest inquirer (rather one who justifies biased moderating) I can’t trust what you say.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Hey people who are whining about the comments policy, no one has a constitutional right to have their comment approved. It’s Jaymans blog. He can run it however he wants. If you don’t like it, start your own blog or read someone else’s blog. Why is that so hard to get through your head?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I like it alot when authors interact with commenters. especially when it is to correct bad comments.

    please destroy any commentator at your discretion but allow all comments to go through.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    If I can make the point in overstated form: journal editors don’t publish laughable work because it makes them LOL. I’t just plain self-indulgent.
     
    It sure is. What's the point if I can't have fun with it?

    I think I've had enough comments about my commenting moderation style.

    What else should someone comment on when you post on your moderating style? Don’t you think it is useful for readers to understand that what permit depends partly on your desire for “fun”?

    And just when we get to the core equivocation of your post! My last comment was not fundamentally about your style, but rather it was about the contradiction between your claims that you are ultimately aiming for objectivity as opposed to personal discretion. This (in your penultimate comment to me) implied that you limited your use of personal discretion to serving truth. You just resolved this equivocation, hopefully if you deign to publish, for everyone’s benefit. In moderating comments, personal discretion is for you, even when it conflicts with truthfinding, an essential incentive.

    This establishes two points:
    1. On your blog, you aren’t single-mindedly struggling for truth. You require extraneous “fun.” I think this moderating style makes your blog unsuitable for honest people who really want to struggle for truth. Excessive or misdirected ego can be as big an enemy of truth as ideological stubbornness. If you include worthless comments because its fun, why not ban good comments because they, like mine, might cause you more grief than fun?

    2. You quickly close discussion when your argument is undermined. This might not be recognizable to many in areas where you have expertise and they (like me) don’t. So it is best established on a common-sense issue like your moderating style. You lack the expectation of being able to learn from discussion. (Even on a topic where you’re more informed, you can extract a lesson of logic or common sense.)

    This will be my last comment to your blog, which is no venue for any honest inquirer. Because you’re not an honest inquirer (rather one who justifies biased moderating) I can’t trust what you say. I can’t participate in discussions that you engineer to convince yourself how smart you are. [That uninformed individuals might reach a better conclusion (maybe because of superior reasoning or comprehension powers) appears to be intolerable to you. [I allow myself some rude truthfulness here only because your response comment was rude as well as wrongheaded.)])

    I hope you will have the courage to publish this. Otherwise, I’ll conclude you are not only a biased inquirer but also as a coward.

    Read More
    • Agree: iffen
    • Replies: @JayMan

    On your blog, you aren’t single-mindedly struggling for truth. You require extraneous “fun.” I think this moderating style makes your blog unsuitable for honest people who really want to struggle for truth
     

    If you include worthless comments because its fun, why not ban good comments because they, like mine, might cause you more grief than fun?
     

    This will be my last comment to your blog, which is no venue for any honest inquirer. Because you’re not an honest inquirer (rather one who justifies biased moderating) I can’t trust what you say.
     
    https://youtu.be/cRBFEYVioBI
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    This may not please you. But I like it. I want a savagely moderated comments section. There are too many idiots and/or ignorants who all think they’ve got something to contribute when they don’t.
     
    Right on, brother.

    Like I said, it’s very simple:

    1. Post your politely- and succinctly-worded comment policy “up front”.
    2. Delete any comments you don’t like, summarily and without regret.
    3. Don’t explain.

    On a blog, the blogger controls the narrative. That is the entire purpose of a blog.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Leonard

    an attempt to control the discourse
     
    Of course it's an attempt to control the discourse. The whole idea is to remove the worthless or low-value discourse so as to focus attention on the good stuff.

    This may not please you. But I like it. I want a savagely moderated comments section. There are too many idiots and/or ignorants who all think they've got something to contribute when they don't.

    This may not please you. But I like it. I want a savagely moderated comments section. There are too many idiots and/or ignorants who all think they’ve got something to contribute when they don’t.

    Right on, brother.

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith
    Like I said, it's very simple:

    1. Post your politely- and succinctly-worded comment policy “up front”.
    2. Delete any comments you don’t like, summarily and without regret.
    3. Don’t explain.

    On a blog, the blogger controls the narrative. That is the entire purpose of a blog.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    You look like someone of poor disposition who can't take criticism when you call people idiots and other names for calmly stating their disagreements with you. This is something you've done in many posts now.

    Many of the things you tell people to read are you own interpretations at your own blog with varying amounts of footnotes. No, they are not incontrovertible no matter how much to tell people to go read them.

    Being overly restrictive in your comments policy with opposing opinions invariable looks like an attempt to control the discourse. It's easy to not to address valid criticism when you can just broadly cast aside anything as "stupid" you don't agree with.

    an attempt to control the discourse

    Of course it’s an attempt to control the discourse. The whole idea is to remove the worthless or low-value discourse so as to focus attention on the good stuff.

    This may not please you. But I like it. I want a savagely moderated comments section. There are too many idiots and/or ignorants who all think they’ve got something to contribute when they don’t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    This may not please you. But I like it. I want a savagely moderated comments section. There are too many idiots and/or ignorants who all think they’ve got something to contribute when they don’t.
     
    Right on, brother.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Stephen R. Diamond
    A period of transition I understand. But not allowing comments warranting this response: "This comment approved solely for the entertainment value. It literally made me LOL."

    If I can make the point in overstated form: journal editors don't publish laughable work because it makes them LOL. I't just plain self-indulgent.

    I think that to moderate for quality effectively, you must apply consistent standards. Otherwise, there's the appearance of bias. Allowing the LOLed racist comment through while deleting milder forms of ignorance begins, then, to look like you're cherry-picking your opponents for certifiable insanity.

    If I can make the point in overstated form: journal editors don’t publish laughable work because it makes them LOL. I’t just plain self-indulgent.

    It sure is. What’s the point if I can’t have fun with it?

    I think I’ve had enough comments about my commenting moderation style.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond
    What else should someone comment on when you post on your moderating style? Don't you think it is useful for readers to understand that what permit depends partly on your desire for "fun"?

    And just when we get to the core equivocation of your post! My last comment was not fundamentally about your style, but rather it was about the contradiction between your claims that you are ultimately aiming for objectivity as opposed to personal discretion. This (in your penultimate comment to me) implied that you limited your use of personal discretion to serving truth. You just resolved this equivocation, hopefully if you deign to publish, for everyone's benefit. In moderating comments, personal discretion is for you, even when it conflicts with truthfinding, an essential incentive.

    This establishes two points:
    1. On your blog, you aren't single-mindedly struggling for truth. You require extraneous "fun." I think this moderating style makes your blog unsuitable for honest people who really want to struggle for truth. Excessive or misdirected ego can be as big an enemy of truth as ideological stubbornness. If you include worthless comments because its fun, why not ban good comments because they, like mine, might cause you more grief than fun?

    2. You quickly close discussion when your argument is undermined. This might not be recognizable to many in areas where you have expertise and they (like me) don't. So it is best established on a common-sense issue like your moderating style. You lack the expectation of being able to learn from discussion. (Even on a topic where you're more informed, you can extract a lesson of logic or common sense.)

    This will be my last comment to your blog, which is no venue for any honest inquirer. Because you're not an honest inquirer (rather one who justifies biased moderating) I can't trust what you say. I can't participate in discussions that you engineer to convince yourself how smart you are. [That uninformed individuals might reach a better conclusion (maybe because of superior reasoning or comprehension powers) appears to be intolerable to you. [I allow myself some rude truthfulness here only because your response comment was rude as well as wrongheaded.)])

    I hope you will have the courage to publish this. Otherwise, I'll conclude you are not only a biased inquirer but also as a coward.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “Uninformed comment” or a case of “Self-denial”!

    In 2012, the anti-Sharia crusader, Frank Gaffney, called the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) ‘anti-Semitic’ and equated it with the former Ku Klax Klan White Supremacist group. Gaffney is founder and president of Ziocon think tank ‘Center for Security Policy‘ and a columnist at the Ziocons’ Washington Times. Gaffney along with other 25 pro-Israel neocons (mostly Jewish) authored the notorious document, ‘Project for a New American Century (PNAC)‘, also known as Israel Project. It was a blue-print for using America to fight Israel’s proxy wars in the Muslim world.

    Am I supposed to believe that the so-called ‘expert on Sharia’ knows that by criticizing the SPLC or KKK for that matter, he has proved himself to be an anti-Semitism? SPLC is prominent Jewish civil liberties group with Zionist Jew Richard Cohen as its President. It was founded in 1971 by two Zionist Jews by the names Morris S. Dee and Joe Levin.

    Does Gaffney knows that Jewish inventor of ‘Sea-Monkeys’, Harold von Braunhut, was a good friend of KKK founder Richard Girnt Butler? The US Attorney, Thomas M. Bauer, told the Washington Post that in a 1985 weapons case against a member of the Ku Klux Klan, Grand Dragon Dale R. Reusch, von Braunhut was prepared to testify that he had lent Reusch about $12,000 so he could buy 83 firearms. Bauer told the reporter that Harold von Braunhut was “very pleasant and cooperative” and “brought some of his little toys along,” including Sea-Monkeys. Read full story at THE AWL, June 28, 2011.

    http://rehmat1.com/2012/08/22/frank-gaffney-splc-kkk/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Easterner
    Why don't you and Razib Khan team up to have a dialogue about common interests? Develop some joint protocol and then expound on topics for the benefit of readers. It may take a lot of restraint by two strong-willed, knowledgeable people, but the results should be edifying.

    Why don’t you and Razib Khan team up to have a dialogue about common interests?

    Because a dialogue between JayMan and Razib would collapse into something like this…

    Read More
    • Agree: Richard S
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    My advice: lose the sense of “discretion,” and make yourself an impartial arbiter of adequate quality.
     
    That's the target...

    A period of transition I understand. But not allowing comments warranting this response: “This comment approved solely for the entertainment value. It literally made me LOL.”

    If I can make the point in overstated form: journal editors don’t publish laughable work because it makes them LOL. I’t just plain self-indulgent.

    I think that to moderate for quality effectively, you must apply consistent standards. Otherwise, there’s the appearance of bias. Allowing the LOLed racist comment through while deleting milder forms of ignorance begins, then, to look like you’re cherry-picking your opponents for certifiable insanity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    If I can make the point in overstated form: journal editors don’t publish laughable work because it makes them LOL. I’t just plain self-indulgent.
     
    It sure is. What's the point if I can't have fun with it?

    I think I've had enough comments about my commenting moderation style.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Tom_R
    JAYMAN—INTELLECTUALIZING DISHONESTY.

    Dear Mr. Jayman: First of all, I do not want to criticize you personally, because it is generally against my character to do that, but I am responding in the spirit of an intellectual discussion since you yourself brought up this issue thus:

    You do know that “Ethnic Genetic Interests” Do Not Exist, right?

    and included yourself and your marriage to a white woman in that above link.

    Well, interesting, you, a colored man, marry a white woman and then claim “ethnic genetic interests* do not exist.” How self-serving!

    * “ethnic genetic interests”—whatever that means.

    But then at the end of the article, you contradict yourself by claiming that you intend to spread your black genes by having more colored children (thus sullying the white genes your wife could have spread by having white children).

    Just because there is a genetic basis for something, does not make immoral or inappropriate acts morally or ethically right. Just because a serial killer is genetically predisposed to kill, does not mean it makes it right. There are other spheres of knowledge and thinking besides genes, such as morals, culture, civilization, etc.

    You probably married a white woman because you are smart enough to realize that whites are more beautiful, but did not realize that, by the same logic, the white woman is too stupid not to realize the same, that whites are more beautiful.

    Looks like you want to have your own “ethnic genetic interests”, but not others! Others who do are “racists”, KKK, and “neo-Nazis”, in your view, it seems.

    P.S. Incidentally, many liberals (such as liberal black women) would consider you a racist for marrying a white woman and call you a "self-hating black" or Oreo.

    But then at the end of the article, you contradict yourself by claiming that you intend to spread your black genes by having more colored children (thus sullying the white genes your wife could have spread by having white children).

    This comment approved solely for the entertainment value. It literally made me LOL.

    Just because there is a genetic basis for something, does not make immoral or inappropriate acts morally or ethically right.

    No shit. That would be the naturalistic fallacy to claim such.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    Lame.

    This mentality, from both you and Razib, is completely out of place here at Unz. If you want to censor the comment section in such a heavy handed mannor you should stick to your own website.

    The average article here at Unz does have some comments that do not contribute value, but reading your policy it is obvious that you will be dolling out the bans with a heavy hand and will probably ban a lot of comments that are perfectly legit but do not follow the narrative you want.

    A comment policy that says no profane language, no slurs, no threats to acts of violence is ok in my book because you are still allowing any ideas through. You just have to say them without being a prick.

    The whole you must read my links and provide counter links is a dead give away of having an immense ego. Why spend so much time policing the comment section? Also, the whole Nazi name calling is also a dead give away that you will not mod fairly. How would you feel if your HBD views get called racist in other boards?

    Well, I doubt the com not will get through but I hope you and Razib grow some thicker skin.

    Well, I doubt the com not will get through but I hope you and Razib grow some thicker skin.

    Surprise, surprise.

    The whole you must read my links and provide counter links is a dead give away of having an immense ego. Why spend so much time policing the comment section? Also, the whole Nazi name calling is also a dead give away that you will not mod fairly. How would you feel if your HBD views get called racist in other boards?

    Someone has to be biased in favor of the truth somewhere.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Pat Hannagan
    Can't help but comment on this:

    I suppose a key misunderstanding in the matter is the failure to realize that each individual gene contributes to fitness independently. Each gene is “out for itself”, so to speak. It just so happens that in any given organism, genes achieve success by working together (most of the time). As such each individual gene’s “aim” is to make more copies of itself. What’s going on in the rest of the genome is tangential to this. Each gene would be just as happy to mix with any other gene, so long as its own fitness is increased in the process.

    Perhaps your arguments would be improved, and thus resistant to criticism, if they were to desist from anthropomorphising genes.

    Perhaps your arguments would be improved, and thus resistant to criticism, if they were to desist from anthropomorphising genes.

    Hopefully, that’s a joke.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    No. It's not.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    That gets rid of trolls and idiots with less effort, but also discourages valuable comments from people who are afraid of personal or professional consequences for speaking up on the topic at hand.
     
    Exactly!

    Well said.

    Though I'd argue even having people use their real names would not guarantee quality comments, so that further bolsters the structure I use here.

    Commenting with real names on dissident blogs is unadvisable, I believe. I wouldn’t do so in eastern Europe, where HBD is not controversial, at least among older people.

    A high-brow alternative to ‘racistsgettingfired’ tumblr might appear.

    Another thing are those curious individuals who ascribe magical powers to Jewry.
    This entire site seems overrun with them, and they are zealous.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    Addendum: Mr. Jayman, when I first wrote the above comment, criticizing your use of the terms “Neo-nazi”, “KKK”, etc. I presumed you were white. But then I went and read about you here:

    https://jaymans.wordpress.com/about/

    ...
    But I think in the interest of fairness, a more honest statement on your part would have been to disclose your multiracial identity upfront
     

    It's right on my About Me page. I haven't made an effort to hide it.

    You do know that "Ethnic Genetic Interests" Do Not Exist, right?

    JAYMAN—INTELLECTUALIZING DISHONESTY.

    Dear Mr. Jayman: First of all, I do not want to criticize you personally, because it is generally against my character to do that, but I am responding in the spirit of an intellectual discussion since you yourself brought up this issue thus:

    You do know that “Ethnic Genetic Interests” Do Not Exist, right?

    and included yourself and your marriage to a white woman in that above link.

    Well, interesting, you, a colored man, marry a white woman and then claim “ethnic genetic interests* do not exist.” How self-serving!

    * “ethnic genetic interests”—whatever that means.

    But then at the end of the article, you contradict yourself by claiming that you intend to spread your black genes by having more colored children (thus sullying the white genes your wife could have spread by having white children).

    Just because there is a genetic basis for something, does not make immoral or inappropriate acts morally or ethically right. Just because a serial killer is genetically predisposed to kill, does not mean it makes it right. There are other spheres of knowledge and thinking besides genes, such as morals, culture, civilization, etc.

    You probably married a white woman because you are smart enough to realize that whites are more beautiful, but did not realize that, by the same logic, the white woman is too stupid not to realize the same, that whites are more beautiful.

    Looks like you want to have your own “ethnic genetic interests”, but not others! Others who do are “racists”, KKK, and “neo-Nazis”, in your view, it seems.

    P.S. Incidentally, many liberals (such as liberal black women) would consider you a racist for marrying a white woman and call you a “self-hating black” or Oreo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    But then at the end of the article, you contradict yourself by claiming that you intend to spread your black genes by having more colored children (thus sullying the white genes your wife could have spread by having white children).
     
    This comment approved solely for the entertainment value. It literally made me LOL.

    Just because there is a genetic basis for something, does not make immoral or inappropriate acts morally or ethically right.
     
    No shit. That would be the naturalistic fallacy to claim such.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Lame.

    This mentality, from both you and Razib, is completely out of place here at Unz. If you want to censor the comment section in such a heavy handed mannor you should stick to your own website.

    The average article here at Unz does have some comments that do not contribute value, but reading your policy it is obvious that you will be dolling out the bans with a heavy hand and will probably ban a lot of comments that are perfectly legit but do not follow the narrative you want.

    A comment policy that says no profane language, no slurs, no threats to acts of violence is ok in my book because you are still allowing any ideas through. You just have to say them without being a prick.

    The whole you must read my links and provide counter links is a dead give away of having an immense ego. Why spend so much time policing the comment section? Also, the whole Nazi name calling is also a dead give away that you will not mod fairly. How would you feel if your HBD views get called racist in other boards?

    Well, I doubt the com not will get through but I hope you and Razib grow some thicker skin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Well, I doubt the com not will get through but I hope you and Razib grow some thicker skin.
     
    Surprise, surprise.

    The whole you must read my links and provide counter links is a dead give away of having an immense ego. Why spend so much time policing the comment section? Also, the whole Nazi name calling is also a dead give away that you will not mod fairly. How would you feel if your HBD views get called racist in other boards?
     
    Someone has to be biased in favor of the truth somewhere.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    Addendum: Mr. Jayman, when I first wrote the above comment, criticizing your use of the terms “Neo-nazi”, “KKK”, etc. I presumed you were white. But then I went and read about you here:

    https://jaymans.wordpress.com/about/

    ...
    But I think in the interest of fairness, a more honest statement on your part would have been to disclose your multiracial identity upfront
     

    It's right on my About Me page. I haven't made an effort to hide it.

    You do know that "Ethnic Genetic Interests" Do Not Exist, right?

    Can’t help but comment on this:

    I suppose a key misunderstanding in the matter is the failure to realize that each individual gene contributes to fitness independently. Each gene is “out for itself”, so to speak. It just so happens that in any given organism, genes achieve success by working together (most of the time). As such each individual gene’s “aim” is to make more copies of itself. What’s going on in the rest of the genome is tangential to this. Each gene would be just as happy to mix with any other gene, so long as its own fitness is increased in the process.

    Perhaps your arguments would be improved, and thus resistant to criticism, if they were to desist from anthropomorphising genes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Perhaps your arguments would be improved, and thus resistant to criticism, if they were to desist from anthropomorphising genes.
     
    Hopefully, that's a joke.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Tom_R
    JAYMAN’S VOCABULARY: RACE—WHAT’S THAT? MOTHERLAND—WHAT’S THAT?

    Addendum: Mr. Jayman, when I first wrote the above comment, criticizing your use of the terms “Neo-nazi”, “KKK”, etc. I presumed you were white. But then I went and read about you here:

    https://jaymans.wordpress.com/about/

    where you describe yourself as: “I am a second generation Jamaican-American of Black, White (English), Indian (Asian), and Chinese descent, living the motto “out of many, one people.”

    Thank you for stating your background as it helps me (and presumably others) understand your said comment in the proper context. And it did, so I would like to add the following.

    So you, given your “multiracial” and “multinational” origin, may not have a sense of strong racial or national identity like some others who are predominantly of one race/nation and identify with it, might have. And that is fine, that is your choice. But I think in the interest of fairness, a more honest statement on your part would have been to disclose your multiracial identity upfront so people can understand your dislike for a racial and national identity, which others have but which which you may lack.

    And just because a person cares about the race that he identifies with (whether black, or white, or oriental), does not mean he is automatically a “racist”, KKK, or a racial “supremacist.” Calling him that, now that is hate speech.

    P.S. I request that you please approve both my comments, even if it is one last time, to help unz.com readers understand your statement that I am writing about in the proper context.

    Addendum: Mr. Jayman, when I first wrote the above comment, criticizing your use of the terms “Neo-nazi”, “KKK”, etc. I presumed you were white. But then I went and read about you here:

    https://jaymans.wordpress.com/about/


    But I think in the interest of fairness, a more honest statement on your part would have been to disclose your multiracial identity upfront

    It’s right on my About Me page. I haven’t made an effort to hide it.

    You do know that “Ethnic Genetic Interests” Do Not Exist, right?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    Can't help but comment on this:

    I suppose a key misunderstanding in the matter is the failure to realize that each individual gene contributes to fitness independently. Each gene is “out for itself”, so to speak. It just so happens that in any given organism, genes achieve success by working together (most of the time). As such each individual gene’s “aim” is to make more copies of itself. What’s going on in the rest of the genome is tangential to this. Each gene would be just as happy to mix with any other gene, so long as its own fitness is increased in the process.

    Perhaps your arguments would be improved, and thus resistant to criticism, if they were to desist from anthropomorphising genes.
    , @Tom_R
    JAYMAN—INTELLECTUALIZING DISHONESTY.

    Dear Mr. Jayman: First of all, I do not want to criticize you personally, because it is generally against my character to do that, but I am responding in the spirit of an intellectual discussion since you yourself brought up this issue thus:

    You do know that “Ethnic Genetic Interests” Do Not Exist, right?

    and included yourself and your marriage to a white woman in that above link.

    Well, interesting, you, a colored man, marry a white woman and then claim “ethnic genetic interests* do not exist.” How self-serving!

    * “ethnic genetic interests”—whatever that means.

    But then at the end of the article, you contradict yourself by claiming that you intend to spread your black genes by having more colored children (thus sullying the white genes your wife could have spread by having white children).

    Just because there is a genetic basis for something, does not make immoral or inappropriate acts morally or ethically right. Just because a serial killer is genetically predisposed to kill, does not mean it makes it right. There are other spheres of knowledge and thinking besides genes, such as morals, culture, civilization, etc.

    You probably married a white woman because you are smart enough to realize that whites are more beautiful, but did not realize that, by the same logic, the white woman is too stupid not to realize the same, that whites are more beautiful.

    Looks like you want to have your own “ethnic genetic interests”, but not others! Others who do are “racists”, KKK, and “neo-Nazis”, in your view, it seems.

    P.S. Incidentally, many liberals (such as liberal black women) would consider you a racist for marrying a white woman and call you a "self-hating black" or Oreo.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Polymath
    I am completely sympathetic to your comments policy. The only alternative on a controversial blog to mediating the comments carefully is to only allow comments from identifiable people with real names. That gets rid of trolls and idiots with less effort, but also discourages valuable comments from people who are afraid of personal or professional consequences for speaking up on the topic at hand.

    That gets rid of trolls and idiots with less effort, but also discourages valuable comments from people who are afraid of personal or professional consequences for speaking up on the topic at hand.

    Exactly!

    Well said.

    Though I’d argue even having people use their real names would not guarantee quality comments, so that further bolsters the structure I use here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @B.R.
    Commenting with real names on dissident blogs is unadvisable, I believe. I wouldn't do so in eastern Europe, where HBD is not controversial, at least among older people.

    A high-brow alternative to 'racistsgettingfired' tumblr might appear.

    Another thing are those curious individuals who ascribe magical powers to Jewry.
    This entire site seems overrun with them, and they are zealous.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Stephen R. Diamond
    As this exemplifies, you vacillate between two objectives in managing comments: 1) Maximizing your discretion to deal with each comment as you see fit; and 2) maximizing the overall quality of comments.

    My advice: lose the sense of "discretion," and make yourself an impartial arbiter of adequate quality.

    My advice: lose the sense of “discretion,” and make yourself an impartial arbiter of adequate quality.

    That’s the target…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond
    A period of transition I understand. But not allowing comments warranting this response: "This comment approved solely for the entertainment value. It literally made me LOL."

    If I can make the point in overstated form: journal editors don't publish laughable work because it makes them LOL. I't just plain self-indulgent.

    I think that to moderate for quality effectively, you must apply consistent standards. Otherwise, there's the appearance of bias. Allowing the LOLed racist comment through while deleting milder forms of ignorance begins, then, to look like you're cherry-picking your opponents for certifiable insanity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Jay,

    I’ve dealt with comments since opening my first R/CPM bulletin board in 1984.

    Here’s what you do:

    1. Post your politely- and succinctly-worded comment policy “up front”.
    2. Delete any comments you don’t like, summarily and without regret.
    3. Don’t explain.

    If you’ve been busy, during which a thread has erupted from some pit of ignorance, delete the entire thread. Good forum software (a rare phenomenon indeed) allows you to graft good comments onto new threads, or related threads. I suspect the Unz software does not, so just delete and have done.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Thanks for the tip, JayMan. I guarantee that I will continue to not comment on your posts.

    PS. You and Razib should date each other.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • the good life: avoid boring people. stupid people in general bore me. at least to talk to. most people are stupid. ergo, most people are boring.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • It is a sad Fact Of Life that our human lifespan is so very limited and thus our time and efforts in using those talents we have been gifted with require a winnowing out of the inevitable dead end distractions we encounter.
    Surely no distraction is more dead end for a man of talent in your position than dealing with the Willfully Ignorant. There exist a sub-set of readers covering the spectrum from Marxist to Libertarian who apparently have a very strong ideological “vested interest” in HBD’s not being true. The vast array of evidence that proves otherwise is irrelevant- the psychic “cost” of examining it is apparently too high.
    In my estimation, you provide the best and most easily accessible source of that information and thus are a vital resource of Truth in a vast sea of error.
    So keep of your very good work, Young Fella, and don’t let the bastards grind you down.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jeff77450
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • JAYMAN’S VOCABULARY: RACE—WHAT’S THAT? MOTHERLAND—WHAT’S THAT?

    Addendum: Mr. Jayman, when I first wrote the above comment, criticizing your use of the terms “Neo-nazi”, “KKK”, etc. I presumed you were white. But then I went and read about you here:

    https://jaymans.wordpress.com/about/

    where you describe yourself as: “I am a second generation Jamaican-American of Black, White (English), Indian (Asian), and Chinese descent, living the motto “out of many, one people.”

    Thank you for stating your background as it helps me (and presumably others) understand your said comment in the proper context. And it did, so I would like to add the following.

    So you, given your “multiracial” and “multinational” origin, may not have a sense of strong racial or national identity like some others who are predominantly of one race/nation and identify with it, might have. And that is fine, that is your choice. But I think in the interest of fairness, a more honest statement on your part would have been to disclose your multiracial identity upfront so people can understand your dislike for a racial and national identity, which others have but which which you may lack.

    And just because a person cares about the race that he identifies with (whether black, or white, or oriental), does not mean he is automatically a “racist”, KKK, or a racial “supremacist.” Calling him that, now that is hate speech.

    P.S. I request that you please approve both my comments, even if it is one last time, to help unz.com readers understand your statement that I am writing about in the proper context.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Addendum: Mr. Jayman, when I first wrote the above comment, criticizing your use of the terms “Neo-nazi”, “KKK”, etc. I presumed you were white. But then I went and read about you here:

    https://jaymans.wordpress.com/about/

    ...
    But I think in the interest of fairness, a more honest statement on your part would have been to disclose your multiracial identity upfront
     

    It's right on my About Me page. I haven't made an effort to hide it.

    You do know that "Ethnic Genetic Interests" Do Not Exist, right?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I am completely sympathetic to your comments policy. The only alternative on a controversial blog to mediating the comments carefully is to only allow comments from identifiable people with real names. That gets rid of trolls and idiots with less effort, but also discourages valuable comments from people who are afraid of personal or professional consequences for speaking up on the topic at hand.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    That gets rid of trolls and idiots with less effort, but also discourages valuable comments from people who are afraid of personal or professional consequences for speaking up on the topic at hand.
     
    Exactly!

    Well said.

    Though I'd argue even having people use their real names would not guarantee quality comments, so that further bolsters the structure I use here.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JayMan

    Many of the things you tell people to read are you own interpretations at your own blog with varying amounts of footnotes. No, they are not incontrovertible no matter how much to tell people to go read them.
     
    The only reason I let this comment through is to address this point. I'm not demanding that people believe something just because I said so. But when I make a case with supporting evidence, it is then the responsibility of the doubting party to establish where and how I am in error*. Simply saying "I don't believe you" just because is your prerogative, of course, but it's not an argument (and it surely won't fly as one here).

    *Oh, and this doesn't mean where the commenter thinks I am in error. Your case must actually work.

    As this exemplifies, you vacillate between two objectives in managing comments: 1) Maximizing your discretion to deal with each comment as you see fit; and 2) maximizing the overall quality of comments.

    My advice: lose the sense of “discretion,” and make yourself an impartial arbiter of adequate quality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    My advice: lose the sense of “discretion,” and make yourself an impartial arbiter of adequate quality.
     
    That's the target...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    You look like someone of poor disposition who can't take criticism when you call people idiots and other names for calmly stating their disagreements with you. This is something you've done in many posts now.

    Many of the things you tell people to read are you own interpretations at your own blog with varying amounts of footnotes. No, they are not incontrovertible no matter how much to tell people to go read them.

    Being overly restrictive in your comments policy with opposing opinions invariable looks like an attempt to control the discourse. It's easy to not to address valid criticism when you can just broadly cast aside anything as "stupid" you don't agree with.

    Many of the things you tell people to read are you own interpretations at your own blog with varying amounts of footnotes. No, they are not incontrovertible no matter how much to tell people to go read them.

    The only reason I let this comment through is to address this point. I’m not demanding that people believe something just because I said so. But when I make a case with supporting evidence, it is then the responsibility of the doubting party to establish where and how I am in error*. Simply saying “I don’t believe you” just because is your prerogative, of course, but it’s not an argument (and it surely won’t fly as one here).

    *Oh, and this doesn’t mean where the commenter thinks I am in error. Your case must actually work.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond
    As this exemplifies, you vacillate between two objectives in managing comments: 1) Maximizing your discretion to deal with each comment as you see fit; and 2) maximizing the overall quality of comments.

    My advice: lose the sense of "discretion," and make yourself an impartial arbiter of adequate quality.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    You look like someone of poor disposition who can’t take criticism when you call people idiots and other names for calmly stating their disagreements with you. This is something you’ve done in many posts now.

    Many of the things you tell people to read are you own interpretations at your own blog with varying amounts of footnotes. No, they are not incontrovertible no matter how much to tell people to go read them.

    Being overly restrictive in your comments policy with opposing opinions invariable looks like an attempt to control the discourse. It’s easy to not to address valid criticism when you can just broadly cast aside anything as “stupid” you don’t agree with.

    Read More
    • Agree: Stephen R. Diamond
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Many of the things you tell people to read are you own interpretations at your own blog with varying amounts of footnotes. No, they are not incontrovertible no matter how much to tell people to go read them.
     
    The only reason I let this comment through is to address this point. I'm not demanding that people believe something just because I said so. But when I make a case with supporting evidence, it is then the responsibility of the doubting party to establish where and how I am in error*. Simply saying "I don't believe you" just because is your prerogative, of course, but it's not an argument (and it surely won't fly as one here).

    *Oh, and this doesn't mean where the commenter thinks I am in error. Your case must actually work.

    , @Leonard

    an attempt to control the discourse
     
    Of course it's an attempt to control the discourse. The whole idea is to remove the worthless or low-value discourse so as to focus attention on the good stuff.

    This may not please you. But I like it. I want a savagely moderated comments section. There are too many idiots and/or ignorants who all think they've got something to contribute when they don't.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The comment sections at most HBD (and related) blogs and columns are atrocious. They are essentially unreadable, and I personally don’t waste my time with most.

    As compared to what? What comment blog addressing racial matters (or anything else for that matter) is not heavy with stupid comments? Seems to me comments fall into a couple of categories, those who agree and want to embellish, those who disagree and want to correct the record (in their minds), those who want to launch into another topic or a related topic, those who want to marginalize someone or someone’s ideas and those who want to promote someone or someone’s ideas. I gather you are most peeved by those who disagree with you and want to correct the record but who overestimate their capabilities at said endeavor? However, for those of us reading the comments your responses correcting people is instructive. Yes, the information exists elsewhere, but information sinks in better when repeated often and in different contexts. Sure it is boring for you, but probably helpful for the readers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Can I ask where you acquired your PhD from?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Melendwyr
    There is a difference between qualifications and credentials. Forgetting that distinction is one of the things killing our society.
    , @Max Payne
    Are you not updating your blog anymore? Regardless of what people think I went to your wordpress and here and can't find new posts. Did you move it somewhere?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @BubbaJoe
    JayMan,
    I've read a good bit of your work. I find you interesting and knowledgeable (yes, more so than me). But ever since you've arrived at UNZ you've been abnormally rankled by the comments section. You're letting it get to you, and whining about it too much. "More quality, less whining" is solid advice, please do take it into account. Lots of good contributors here get sh*te comments. You seem aggravated by each and every one. If they bother you so much, just delete/ignore them. But please stop making it the focus of your posts. You have better things to be writing about. There's a comic that comes to mind... https://xkcd.com/386/

    Lots of good contributors here get sh*te comments. You seem aggravated by each and every one.

    See again:

    The comment sections at most HBD (and related) blogs and columns are atrocious. They are essentially unreadable, and I personally don’t waste my time with most. It’s my goal to have a useful comment section – something that readers can come to rely on. Having it cluttered with ignorant, stupid, and/or hateful junk doesn’t aid in that goal. Your comments are not just for me and yourself, but for our whole audience.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Easterner
    Why don't you and Razib Khan team up to have a dialogue about common interests? Develop some joint protocol and then expound on topics for the benefit of readers. It may take a lot of restraint by two strong-willed, knowledgeable people, but the results should be edifying.

    They might end up banning each other.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • LOL I was gonna say, “Is that you, Razib?”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Generally good to moderate comments too increase the productivity of the discussion.
    But , two things.

    1) Sometimes someone might make a useful error, they might not understand something in your work, but if you feel its a reasonable mis understanding, maybe you can restate your thesis clearer. As long as someone is engaging you in a civil manner, even mis understandings can be useful. Especially ‘common misunderstandings’ that pop up a lot, because those are highlight areas for extra communication.
    Though- I understand not wanting to hash over the same stuff all the time. Its also nice to get feedback about where people are generally not understanding your point.

    2) A certain percent, granted not most , but a subset of the criticism u reject, will in the long run turn out to be valid criticism.

    So, I mean, its not like an erroneous comment, phrased in a civil manner is really that disruptive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Olorin
    Not disruptive if you're reading.

    Huge waste of time if you get hundreds of these each month.

    I've seen countless instances where JayMan goes to the trouble of replying with a link that the ill-informed commenter should read before commenting. Then being accused of being terse. (Yeah? And?)

    That right there is way more effort than I'd go to, particularly when the link/issue/data is in the text upon which they're commenting.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • JayMan,
    I’ve read a good bit of your work. I find you interesting and knowledgeable (yes, more so than me). But ever since you’ve arrived at UNZ you’ve been abnormally rankled by the comments section. You’re letting it get to you, and whining about it too much. “More quality, less whining” is solid advice, please do take it into account. Lots of good contributors here get sh*te comments. You seem aggravated by each and every one. If they bother you so much, just delete/ignore them. But please stop making it the focus of your posts. You have better things to be writing about. There’s a comic that comes to mind… https://xkcd.com/386/

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Lots of good contributors here get sh*te comments. You seem aggravated by each and every one.
     
    See again:

    The comment sections at most HBD (and related) blogs and columns are atrocious. They are essentially unreadable, and I personally don’t waste my time with most. It’s my goal to have a useful comment section – something that readers can come to rely on. Having it cluttered with ignorant, stupid, and/or hateful junk doesn’t aid in that goal. Your comments are not just for me and yourself, but for our whole audience.
     
    , @Pat Casey
    The only thing that's wrong with the media is that people get away with lying, and teach other people to lie, and teach everyone to be ignorant, and teach the ignorant to be loud. I've tussled with Razib and Jayman and respect them more for it. We need heavy foots to be put down.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Why don’t you and Razib Khan team up to have a dialogue about common interests? Develop some joint protocol and then expound on topics for the benefit of readers. It may take a lot of restraint by two strong-willed, knowledgeable people, but the results should be edifying.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    They might end up banning each other.
    , @Another Canadian

    Why don’t you and Razib Khan team up to have a dialogue about common interests?
     
    Because a dialogue between JayMan and Razib would collapse into something like this...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6o881n35GU
    , @Olorin
    We need more informed, comprehensive, coherent, articulate voices, not fewer.

    Thermonuclear kudos to JayMan for this policy.

    I'm personally not sure what constitutes "white supremacy," since, for instance, I was accused of that in my 20s for liking Tannhauser and Parsifal (the operas), and for taking about my family's roots in Norway, Sweden, and Finland.

    But as a guest, I'm ever sensitive to the fact that while being a guest confers privileges (such as learning about megatons of stuff without having to dig it, refine it, smelt it, cast it all by myself), it's still the host's shindig.

    Fortunately there are now plenty of places to vent about population genetics issues on the internet. By contrast there are precious few where hard, rational, transformative thoughtwork is getting done.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A brilliant comment policy like this is why you and Razib are two of my favorite bloggers (I’d say he has a very similar attitude towards dumb comments). Anyone griping about your comment policy is certainly someone that shouldn’t be commenting anyway.

    Keep up the good work!

    Read More
    • Agree: EriK
    • Replies: @NickG

    you and Razib are two of my favorite bloggers (I’d say he has a very similar attitude towards dumb comments).
     
    Razib has good stuff and makes great points. However, he is prone to being a bit of a smug, ungracious, even rude arse (ass to you colonial types).

    He is also a crap writer - his prose is tortured, clunky and unnecessarily impenetrable. He would do well to fully take to heart and imbibe Steven Pinker's 'A Sense of Style: The Thinking Person's Guide to Writing in the 21st Century', and maybe brush-up on Dale Carnegie.

    These are not charges I feel even vaguely applicable to JayMan.

    Oh whilst I'm at it - yes - Steve Sailer takes sarcasm to stratospheric levels, but with Steve it's an endearing part his persona and essential aspect of his shtick.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • This occurs every now and then...legit comments without copious numbers of links get caught in the spam filter. Regular commenter Michelle has had her comments tagged as spam twice since she's changed her back-link URL to Scientific American. Today she tweeted me, and I noticed 4 other people who were also false-positived in the filter....
  • oh my! engineering is a bad oversight. hope you guys picked physical sciences though.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Your survey question on academic background needs two more options:
    1 software
    2 engineering

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Happened to me a couple of weeks ago when I put a link in.

    And even though I’d only just written it, it was so spontaneous I was entirely unable to remember what the hell I’d just written. So it’s gone forever. Lost!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • So over the past few months there has been an issue where manual comment spam is getting more sophisticated. The strategy is to leave an anodyne comment with really vague references to how the post is "great" and "very informative" or something like that. The English would usually pass a grammar check, but there's a...
  • Maybe we could all start using an unusual-sounding code phrase to accompany compliments, something that humans who regularly read the comments section here will know to use but spammers won’t. Something like “Praise be unto Razib! Great article!” Or would spammers pick up on that?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • [...] Comment of the week, in response to “Hold the praise (re: comments)”: This was a great post. Very informative! By the way have you seen my collection of genuine high [...]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • At least you spot it. Plenty of bloggers seem unaware that someone could be so devious and just leave the “great blog! I will bookmark it and tell my friends!” ones up, so that everyone can see how desperate they are for supportive comments. :-)

    If you get a lot of borderline spam, you could just remove the link (and let the praise through, of course). That should make this place useless for them in terms of link juice…

    There was an XKCD comic and a short story I read, I think by Cory Doctorow, where the whole concept was that artificial intelligence is finally achieved by creators of spam

    Obligatory favourite-author plug: The Rifters trilogy by Peter Watts also has AI spam as an element of the plot. It’s good too, and available for free (CC-licensed) at his site.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Hi Razib,

    You could consider switching to an agglutinating language :). Apparently, it is much harder for programmers to correctly parse morphemes and parts of sentences in a highly synthetic language than in an analytical one. Vowel harmony and free word order also help recognizing machine created text. For example google translate seems to be years behind itself in non analytical languages. Sure, it is also a matter of number of users, but that’s not the whole story. If you try to translate e. g. Czech to English the results are rather useless. From Hungarian to English even the subjects [person, singular/plural...] of the sentences are wrong half the time. Clearly, English is too regular and simple.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Razib wrote: “…now that’s getting meta. impersonate the impersonators!”

    Like Phil Dick’s “fake fakes” — maybe the spammers will double-negative themselves into actual commenters.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • got a lot of praise spam today actually….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Heartbroken women discovers Mr Right is just a kindly computer program trying to sell her replacement windows. Maybe it just belongs in the Onion today, but who knows about tomorrow.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Spammers are also taking other people’s blog posts, running them through some sort of semi-obfuscator, then putting those up on blogs. The idea is to create something that is statistically like a real blog, but not identical to another blog (which would be detectable).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Yes, I’ve been getting a few comments like this also. It is very hard to tell which are actually spam and which aren’t. In at least one case of mine, they explicitly included a mention of the topic in question. Relevant xkcd- http://xkcd.com/810/ .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • RE: askimet, it’s turned on. the spam filters catches most of the stuff. but the manual spammers are so copious than they’re getting through and i see them on the moderation queues.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • One of the most annoying variants on comment spam I’ve seen recently is posts made entirely out of quotes (usually whole paragraphs) from previous comments. It’s very easy to let one of those through by accident because it’s coherent and relevant to the topic, and only notice later that it consists of bits from the first three comments on the article.

    As an aside, while I’m here, I do enjoy reading your blog a lot; I just don’t post comments much.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • For whatever it’s worth, there’s a plugin for WordPress (Akismet) that does an excellent job of filtering out the simple comment spam. I believe it simply compares the comments/links to other people’s blogs using the same plugin, and flags things that are likely to be spam. (Presumably, it’s easier to spot spam when using a larger sample set?) I really have no idea if it works for other blogging platforms, however, so it’s worth mentioning, but only in passing.

    At any rate, I’ve been seeing these comments for at least a couple years on my photography page, as it seems that gallery2 software was an early target for spammers using this technique – and it had a very poor comment filtering system at the start. I’m very sorry to see it’s spread far beyond that now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • There was an XKCD comic and a short story I read, I think by Cory Doctorow, where the whole concept was that artificial intelligence is finally achieved by creators of spam trying to get through filters and convincing sysads they are legitimate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • elliot says: • Website

    i use wordpress’s built in spam checker for my blog http://se17.eu, and it seems very good at blocking spam – it produces very few false positives. every so often i check the spam queue anyway, and i nearly always see that the blocked messages are exactly as you described: “nice post” or “that was really interesting” – but with a link to some sort of spam. the most recent one was “your site is amazing, bookmarked!”.

    i often think that if these people used their obvious intellect to do something useful, then the world would be a much happier place.

    btw – nice post :)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I recall an NPR story where there was a contest on whose computer program could make the most friends. The winner did just what is described here, sending out thousands of happy complimentary vague comments and often engaging real people for long exchanges. Wouldn’t it be nice if some lonely heart out there fell in love with a computer program.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • This was an interesting post, R. Kan. I enjoyed the discussion in the comments as well! For a great time i also like to check out freesingleconnection.com. seriously, though, if anyone wants to get GNXP some serious traffic just take 30 seconds to create a reddit account and post his entries on there. 100,000 clicks for one blog post is much better thanks than a “Thanks!”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    What I find sucks the most about spam comments is that most of them are so nice that you start to wish they were real. Of course all that does is merely highlight the lack of genuine nice comments I get on my blog. Then I quietly weep to myself, wonder what the point of blogging is and don’t write anything for a month but that’s probably just me. ;-)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • If people just quit being normal decent human beings there’d be no problem.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #5, by link, i’m talking about the link which you can embed in your handle. so your name, “Bee,” goes to http://backreaction.blogspot.com. that’s what they’re doing. the “tell” is that the spammers are often linking to a specific page/post. but that’s not a total tell, some regular commenters do that too, especially if the link is relevant to the thread in question.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Bee says: • Website

    I delete everything that contains links unless it’s a commenter I know. You’re right that the spam comments are getting more sophisticated. I’ve had a few that did grab some random nouns from the text and made up some sentence around it that actually would have passed as okay English. Just that the content was complete utter nonsense (I mean some things just aren’t ‘cute *lol*’ no matter how you turn it.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #3, how’d i put them in limbo without checking them out? honestly the issue is that they’re starting to map really closely on some of the shorter comments, which means i have a tendency to almost nuking genuine comments.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Hi Razib,
    One way of dealing with these is to put them in limbo for a month- at least with blogspot, if the account linked to the comment gets terminated before the comment is approved, it fails to post. I dunno if your web guy has an automatic bad link disqualifier, though.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • now that’s getting meta. impersonate the impersonators! though to be fair, they’re getting much better. a lot less transparent flattery over the past few weeks has been showing up.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • This was a great post. Very informative! By the way have you seen my collection of genuine high end watches? I’m selling them cheap because I lost a lot of money in the financial crisis and have loans to pay off….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • So today I received an email from regular commenter German Dziebel: I have no idea what German precisely means by "public forum" or "private franchise," though I have a general sense. Discover Magazine pays me to blog. I also have an editor who I consult now and then. For example when I discussed traffic patterns...
  • #18, great. can i send you personalized spam to your email address?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • It is your blog but personally I do not think any person is wise or objective enough to be a lord of speech, as long as it is legal it should not be culled.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “because he can’t help but be an asshole”

    classic

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “I have no idea if leveling this at German is appropriate.” Oh yes.

    He reminds me of those evil mad geniuses from the old James Bond movies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • [...] Razib Khan – “Comments in the Republic of Khan” [...]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    I liked the “customer service” comment too :-p. One of my past programming jobs included handling user squabbles for a medium-large blogging site. Takes a lot of effort!

    @OP: “What does bother me is when he presumes that he should carry on with his views as if he is the only sane man in the asylum.”

    I have no idea if leveling this at German is appropriate. But I love that statement. It gets to the heart of why so many arguments between people blow up into chaos, instead of converging into a constructive and educational sharing process. Sympathy. It works, b1tc#es.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Germans comment “You should pay this guy more and pay for his training in customer service, too” made my day.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • How do you avoid becoming the new comprador class, though?

    you need to make the analogy more fleshed out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.