Our New Darwinian Comment Policy

Our goal in having comments on this site targets a single objective: enable the exchange of relevant information, including ideas, which are not so much factual as they are descriptive or aesthetic. To this end, owing to the huge amount of low-quality or insincere information out there, we need a comment policy.

This policy aims to avoid viewpoint discrimination:

When the government engages in content discrimination, it is restricting speech on a given subject matter. When it engages in viewpoint discrimination, it is singling out a particular opinion or perspective on that subject matter for treatment unlike that given to other viewpoints.

You have two options for enforcing quality: viewpoint discrimination, or discrimination of form. We opt for the latter, which means that “it does not matter what you say, so long as you put it in the proper form.”

This means excluding low-quality comments including spam, concern trolling, obscenity, slurs, and other forms of low-effort interaction. You can post these to your own blog where they will die in obscurity; we believe in quality over quantity around here.

Our policy protects your ability to say anything, since it regulates form and not viewpoint, including but not limited to:

  • Policy discussions favoring eugenics, depopulation, repatriation, or even genocide;
  • Noting differences between individuals, groups, sexes, and social classes;
  • Criticism of groups, individuals, cultures, religions, or ideas;
  • Pointing out the nü-metal and post-metal suck the same chode in Hell.

However, these must be expressed in the right form. “Kill Whitey” is not the same as “White people are an abomination of a race prone to primitive behavior like square dancing, design by committee, Agile development, and casseroles, and should be exiled, reduced, repatriated, or eliminated,” even if they focus on the same topic. Express any topic in the right form and it is acceptable; express something in the wrong form, even if preaching to the choir (the only “safe” expression), and we send it to the woodchipper.

Note that you cannot express anything illegal, but generally, this involves form, such as child pornography, nuclear bomb-making instructions, or direct incitement to a group that is able and willing to act our your commands immediately upon people in their proximity.

In this way, we preserve your right to an opinion while filtering out the constant verbal vandalism that has become a hallmark of the post-smartphone internet.

As in all things, this policy reflects our Darwinian and ancient morality of “good to the good, and bad to the bad,” or in other terms, rewarding only the good, relevant, sane, stable, balanced, informative, insightful, and constructive.

56 thoughts on “Our New Darwinian Comment Policy”

  1. Adventures of Lolo says:

    It just means you are playing it safe out of fear, bending the knee in slow increments, RIP Anus/dm.org comments section.

    1. Oh really?

      It means we just stood up for your ability to say anything so long as you can say it in a non-dumbshit form.

      It’s an anti-dumbshit rule. It means higher quality. That means that instead of seeing disorganized rambling profanity- and slur-laden discourse, people are going to see solid arguments.

      They will then pass those on.

      Also, I get to stop tolerating idiocy vandalizing otherwise important writings.

      However, our users have to put more effort into what they do. That should be interesting. Maybe it will stretch them a bit, just like the original reviews did. They might end up with more confidence in themselves, seeing what they can do when they stretch.

      Trust nature: reward the good, death to the weak. Don’t trust socializing (reward everyone, ignore reality, pursue individualistic drama).

      Here’s the other bookend by the way:

      http://www.amerika.org/politics/why-brian-laundrie-should-stay-hidden/

      1. T Malm says:

        Eh. Some of the dumbshit comments on this site have been the most entertaining. If you want more civilised discourse, maybe bring back the forums and institute this policy there. The way the main page works (crappy layout, spam trap, something about links, few comments in general, delay) makes it difficult to have anything resembling a discussion that would be normal in most other places on the net.

        1. People still use forums? There’s a lot of work involved there.

          1. T Malm says:

            Yes and yes. Many people also use reddit (which is much like a forum), but you know this. I noticed that you skipped over my negative criticisms of site as it’s run now. I’m not trying to be insulting, but seeing an announcement introducing comment curation makes me wonder about these other issues.

            1. Run a site, and you find that there is no shortage of criticism. People love to issue forth their lordly opinions and then have the admin scurry around to address them. In fact, you will find that no matter what you do, the complaints continue. Sometimes, if you do something really terrible, you get a whole bunch saying the same thing; however, B->A is not necessarily true: often, a lot of people complain about some thing for no reason at all, or just to try to get a rise out of you.

              Welcome to volunteer organizations. To make this make money, we’d have to write on mainstream metal, even mainstream underground metal (lol). No one wants to do that. So instead, it’s a volunteer hobby project because the audience for real metal is tiny and most of them will never log on to the internet unless forced. Those that do go to Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, etc., and consume normie entertainment. That means that the magic words here are “let me help,” keeping in mind that the people here have more in life than this one site to keep them busy.

              1. T Malm says:

                I’d love to help, although I don’t know shit about running a website. Also the fact that you get a lot of criticism running a site does not invalidate what I said.

                1. Shemale Gobbler says:

                  Only basement dwellers use forums and only cucks use reddit.

                  1. only cucks use reddit

                    It seems designed to be an echo chamber. Anything based on voting is suspect at this point.

                    1. Populismus Maximus says:

                      Why do you hate democracy!?

                    2. I don’t hate democracy any more than I hate meditating at the bottom of a lake of sewage.

                    3. Populismus Maximus says:

                      Yet we vote…

            2. Also, Reddit will give you AIDS.

              1. N.B. Apple products will also give you AIDS.

          2. D.A.R.G. says:

            You could forward the idea of PAID forums. This way only those actually serious about it would join.
            Make it US$200 a year, non-refundable, to participate in the new DMU forum, and see all the shit talkers scurry. Of course, this forum would have to offer more than just a space to discuss. Perhaps a training/education program on several different fronts.

        2. demon of life says:

          I second the forums. I miss those discussions dearly.

      2. AAAAARGH! Bloody 2-handed chainaxe blow says:

        Finally, after over 30 years of trolling, Brett Stevens realizes trolling decreases the quality of discussion. Better late than ever Brett.

        However, the argument is the same argument liberals use for censorship and political correctness. They want to shape speech in their view. And with this being your site, you want discussion here to be shaped in YOUR view under the guise of quality.

        Maybe we can add a definition of quality to the policy since you are sharing the policy?

        But hey it’s your site, do whatever you want.

        1. Maybe we can add a definition of quality to the policy since you are sharing the policy?

          Words, words, words.

          However, the argument is the same argument liberals use for censorship and political correctness. They want to shape speech in their view. And with this being your site, you want discussion here to be shaped in YOUR view under the guise of quality.

          O RLY? That’s why the definition made it clear that it was viewpoint-agnostic? Rokai, as they say. Rokai.

  2. D.A.R.G. says:

    Looking forward to what happens next.

    1. Infinitesimal Ballerism says:

      Is this THE D.A.R.G.?!
      I long for the time when you were lead editor or whatever of this website.
      If you still have your personal website, please give us that address.

  3. LordKrumb says:

    I welcome this new approach. “Ancient morality” is much needed!

    Brett, have you had any thoughts yet on the modifications to the DMU web page layout I sent you a couple of months ago?

    1. That’s a question for email. Unfortunately, that’s backed up as heck at this point. I appreciate your patience in this regard.

  4. Donald Duck says:

    You’re free to do as you want since it’s your site and no one is forced to come here, but to me ‘Darwinism’ means the actual commenters deciding what’s dumb or worthy of being addressed, as opposed to one guy arbitrarily censoring stuff he happens to find offensive. It seems like something you would find in China.

    1. to me ‘Darwinism’ means the actual commenters deciding what’s dumb or worthy of being addressed

      So… democracy.

      No.

      Also, the “to me” cracks me up. We all live in our own worlds!

      arbitrarily

      Ah, another tell. The whole policy just described how it would be non-arbitrary. If someone wanted to arbitrarily censor, then there would be no policy.

  5. Just So says:

    Censorship – A Haiku
    by Just So
    Dangerous winter
    A free censorship ruins
    because of the speech

    1. We are the robots
      All lives matter equally
      Jesus wept for us

  6. Ms. Manners says:

    By all means please squeeze the soul out of this website which is dedicated to the music of darkness and all the horrors that birthed it.

    1. We must maintain our evil, actually. Giving in to the herd is the utilitarian definition of “goodness.”

      Turn that cross upside down!

  7. Hrafn says:

    Long, long overdue – 4chan-tier discourse invites 4chan-tier minds, as has been painfully obvious so far. There might actually be value in checking out the comments now.

  8. nobody says:

    Cultivating worthy discourse is tricky indeed.
    After all, any comment-policy in itself won’t do the substantial part. In the end, it all comes down to the people commenting.
    Is there quality of spirit and ideas in the readership, or not?

    On the other hand, spirit and ideas may be abundant – potentially.
    But if the comment-section regularly turns out either A. Dead, or B. As a swarming vulgar mass of infected virulency…
    …it’s not exactly likely that intelligent readers feel compelled to make their voices heard.

    This new policy looks like a smart move… if the readership is smart enough for it.

    Oh, and…

    DEATH TO THE NEUROTIC WHITE MAN.
    SIEG HEALTH!

    1. …it’s not exactly likely that intelligent readers feel compelled to make their voices heard.

      On the nose. We are going to upgrade what we’re doing, so I gave fair warning, instead of just being sudden about it. My hope was that this was the gentlest way of going about this.

      1. nobody says:

        For a lot of people, and maybe even for most, freedom of speech equates to a total lack of standards.

        While such an interpretation is possible, it isn’t the only one.
        And since a total lack of standards invites stupidity; and since ‘stupidity’ itself could even be defined as the total lack of any standards of behavior and understanding…
        …it seems, quite possibly, to be the most stupid interpretation of them all.

        Judging by some of these comments, the purposeful removal of the obviously stupid, seems to be a slippery slope towards the vilest censorship.
        If we do not tolerate the stupid, we will get evil.

        That’s modernity in a nut-shell right there.

  9. Cyberdarwinism says:

    This is a new age, let algorithms choose that which is worthy!

  10. Doug says:

    Did the overlords sign off on this? I would’ve thought they would prefer things the way they were.

  11. Tit offensive says:

    Sounds good to me, Brett. Looking forward to what comes next. Hopefully these “upgrades” include reviews of some neglected albums…

  12. GHOST OF NWN FORUM says:

    “THIS IS SHEMALE MUSIC!”

    Wait, sorry

    “The quality of this compositional arrangement of sounds and themes appears to appeal to those whom suffer from an aggravated sense of gender dysphoria”

    1. Please use the politically-correct term strong independent kathoey who don’t need no *man.

  13. richard hofstadter says:

    Brett, I think too that you are sugarcoating the advent of censorship here.
    If the comment section were truly to be “Darwinian” then it would have to be a free-for-all, including trolls and disrespectful comments. And only the STRONG would survive. (oh, that wasn’t Darwin Herbert Spencer…lol) That would entail freedom of speech.

    1. That only works if the commenters kill one another. Otherwise it’s utilitarianism.

      1. Val Dagúr says:

        Commenters killing one another sounds like the ideal end state of any and all online discussions.

      2. D.A.R.G. says:

        Excellent point! I’m all in favor of this, too.

    2. Jebediah says:

      Reminder that Darwinism is not about being strong but about being adaptive to change, which means having essentially no backing principles and becoming whatever the environment dictates. Not trve kult. What Brett is really doing here is changing the environment to encourage the extinction of the weak-minded.

      If you remove comment policies, you don’t have ANY selection taking place. How could you possibly call that Darwinism? Imagine how great the world would be if horse flies were immortal…

      1. We are the transsexual says:

        This is no natural selection, this is Bretts personal soyboy cultivation farm.

      2. D.A.R.G. says:

        I agree.

        The program is not really Darwinian, but eugenicist!

        Heil!

  14. Ash says:

    will you stop people using retard as a derogatory insult? i am a retard and i take great offense in these comments

    1. T Malm says:

      Sorry about that, Rainer.

  15. Disable Comments says:

    No comments = no policy, no moderation, no mosh, no fun.

  16. The Dismembered One says:

    As long time lurker, the change doesn’t bother me. I’m usually against this sorts of policies because I don’t thrust the admins or mods to not abuse their power and the fact that most of them are lefties reinforce my stand. But Brett is one of the few people online where I thrust his judgment and has the balls to stick with his guns for years.

    Not gonna lie, I enjoy the low effort shitpost but I prefer the most sophisticated ones. However, the insightful and intellegent comments regarding the article are the best. I think discussing about the quality of music and the honesty and no-bullshit attitude of it is what make DMU unique compared to other metal/music outlet and is what attract a lot of people here.

    This site is the most integral part of my and others development of our musical taste and has help view music in a more objective lens. One of my relative had started is own band two year ago (they can’t do stuff now thanks fucking pinko pox) and introducing this site and the Dark Legion Archive (RIP) and that was a game changer for him. Keep doing what you’ve been doing.

  17. Admiral Tirpitz says:

    I have disagreed w/Brett a few times on here. Mainly about “philosophy” and it’s value. I find it interesting, but not anymore enlightening than spending a fair amount of time learning human nature and human tendencies from being around different cultures and different social types. He never deleted any of my posts. Just rebuttals. That’s dialogue.
    I am also a sports fan and I can tell you that comment sections on most sports sites like SB Nation are so brutally leftist that anyone who even hints at having a conservative mindset are banned. Most have a disclaimer stating “politics” will not be a tolerated discussion. Yet you can find leftist agenda comments consistently. There is no dialogue anymore on the internet, not without being censored or banned by these left-wing platforms.
    I don’t think, based on how this was laid out, that there will be that much of a wholesale change. I like the site.
    I think all will be fine.

    1. I find it interesting, but not anymore enlightening than spending a fair amount of time learning human nature and human tendencies from being around different cultures and different social types.

      Not all that different. Philosophy peers deeply into one culture, and develops an efficient vocabulary for analysis.

      Most have a disclaimer stating “politics” will not be a tolerated discussion. Yet you can find leftist agenda comments consistently.

      I have seen this a lot too. Basically, since “the personal is the political,” Leftism isn’t politics, but any dissent from it, or even disinterest, is enemy propaganda.

  18. Shawn Wright says:

    Ok this is Shawn Wright from Lashing Death Metal. I’m taking back the scene and handing out ass beatings. Bestial Evil is going to set the record straight at the next Maryland Death Fest. Deal with it. If you have a problem you can enter the octagon with me. I’m sick of people talking crap. It’s true, as a gay man my girlfriend supports me, if you’re jealous that’s not my problem.

    1. We need to invent the Sodomy Octagon.

  19. canadaspaceman says:

    oh, balls

    1. Hairy, tasty, succulent balls.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Classic reviews:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z