Comments in the republic of Khan

By Razib Khan | May 27, 2011 12:09 pm

So today I received an email from regular commenter German Dziebel:

Razib, what’s your relationship with the Discover Magazine? Up until now I thought of your blog as more or less a public forum, rather than a private franchise. Please clarify, so we don’t bicker about ethics in public.

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 to this website I asked if that would be OK, since I know that sort of information is often material sites like to keep somewhat private. When Marnie Dunsmore threatened to sue me for “stealing her ideas” I shot an email to the editor to notify him of her strange accusations. But in general my communication with Discover Magazine is limited to technical issues, as well as some exchanges of ideas and topics to post on (this isn’t formal, the editor knows the kind of stories and papers I dig, and will send me an email or point a tweet my way).

I like it that way. It gives me time to blog. There’s a lot of interesting stuff in my “task stack” which I never get to because of the pressures of time. When I began blogging in 2002 I did so with an assurance I wouldn’t have to spend too much time on technical or administrative crap with my co-bloggers. That didn’t totally work out, but it is an ideal which I like to aim for. This post is a violation of that ideal. I’m engaging in meta blather about comments policy and what not when I could be blogging, finishing the coffee I’m drinking right now, or watching the episode of South Park which I haven’t watched yet.

If I had to condense my summary for how I run these comments, I’d say I run this place as if I’m Sulla during the period in his life when he was the dictator of the Roman Republic. Since most of you probably don’t get the allusion, I will elaborate….


I have a vision for the type of comments which are edifying, or at least not detrimental to the project of greater understanding of the world around us. If comments or a commenter detracts from that vision then you are proscribed. Before I joined Discover I had a long discussion with the editor about the way I run comments. After a few hours of talking as we sealed the deal on the move I still came back to the comments issue. That was my primary concern about moving from ScienceBlogs. If didn’t have the freedom to bludgeon commenters when I deem it appropriate, I’d probably close comments altogether.

I don’t have an explicit checklist. I’m not going to let people “game” the rules of engagement. I’ve been aggressively moderating and pruning my comments since 2004, after seeing what laissez faire hath wrought. I have strong intuitions, and can sniff out future “problem” commenters pretty early on. As I suggested above I don’t like to devote much time to this, though as it happens I do spend a lot of time reading comments, reprimanding people, etc. A few people can burn up a lot of my time, and that detracts from the production of content. I once had a contributor to the Gene Expression group weblog who was a friend from college. Over the years of the weblog he has probably accounted for ~90% of the conflict resolution time which I’ve had to invest (I’ve been involved in blogs from 2002 on). Finally in the winter of 2006 I yanked his blogging privileges, and I’ve had to repeatedly ban him from commenting on my weblogs because he can’t help but be an asshole (I allowed him to comment a few times for the sake of our friendship, but he couldn’t behave himself). I don’t know why he’s like this, but that’s just how he rolls on the internet. I don’t have to tolerate it, and I don’t.

There is no philosophical issue for me with the way I treat people who comment. I am a person of the Right, I believe that there is a need for hierarchy, that humans are not the same and exhibit profound inequality in ability, and great difference in disposition. But I also believe that the world of ideas can be enchanting to all. I invite all and everyone to read and mull over the ideas which I explore in this space, but I do not invite all and everyone to offer their opinions. Some just lack the capacity or will to invest their time and energy with grappling with the topics at hand (e.g., they’re stupid, they’re ignorant, they’re lazy, or they’re inconsiderate, or some combination).

But others are in a special category of kooks. I doubt you’ll ever see a Creationist comment on this weblog, though you might if it’s really funny. That’s because I have to approve first comments, and when a Creationist shows up I usually send it to spam and ban the email and IP. I’m not interested in talking about Creationism. It’s a made up model for people with ideological blinders on. Creationists can, and do, read some of my posts and get something out of them. There’s nothing wrong with that. One of Phylis Schlafly’s sons links to this weblog sometimes. He seems to be an evolution-skeptic, but he doesn’t leave comments on this weblog promoting his views, so that’s his business. I don’t mind when very Left-wing bloggers link to my posts either. Sometimes bloggers take the opposite conclusion from the facts that I would, but that doesn’t bother me. What does bother me is when someone imputes their own norms upon me. This becomes an issue sometimes when readers, who reasonably expect me to be a political liberal like most science bloggers, take for granted that I’ll be on the same page as them when making fun of conservatives. Generally I will simply note that I’m a conservative myself. That being said, my offense threshold is high for political insults, so I don’t mind if readers insult political beliefs or groups that much.

Going back to the issue of German though, there is the nature of his kookiness. The original point of contention which triggered the email me is that I told him to stop acting as if his views were normative. By this, I mean that German has some strange ideas about human origins. That’s not a sin in and of itself. And German provides some interesting citations. Despite the fact that I think he’s really wrong I don’t mind him offering his opinions. 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. If this was German’s blog, that would be fine. But it isn’t. I don’t mind heterodox views, but if I’m on the other side of the debate, and you’re in the minority, you need to comport yourself with particular delicacy, understanding the nature of the audience. The world isn’t fair, and there’s no such place as a value-free neutral space.

If people persist in violating the norms and customs which I’ve long established on this weblog over the years, then I ban them. If they persist in emailing, as these types often do, then I block their email address. I very much doubt anyone is losing much sleep over being banned from a moderately prominent science weblog, so I don’t feel much guilt. I don’t mind if these people think I’m being unfriendly. I have friends enough as it is. If I ask you a direct question on this weblog and demand you answer, and you don’t answer directly, but answer evasively, I’m also likely to ban you. I don’t ask direct questions of people often, but since I put a lot of content out there, I feel that commenters who make bold claims should take the time to respond at length when asked by me to justify their claims. When the dictator speaks, you listen. Commenting is a privilege that can be yanked away.

There’s a lot more I could say. I don’t like to spend too much time at this sort of stuff when there’s real blogging to be done, but I do want to add something: if you use your real identity I’m going to give you a lot more liberty. People who are rude on the internet are much more likely to be “anonymous.” I put that in quotations because it isn’t hard to find the real identities of a substantial number of the people who think they’re being anonymous trolls (though often I look up the identities of people who are making technical claims which I can’t evaluate easily, as I want to validate their background or credentials)

P.S. I am aware that discouraging too much stupid back & forth in the comments probably dings me in pageviews. I don’t care.

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Administration, Blog
  • Amos Zeeberg (Discover Web Editor)

    Hey. In case anyone wants to hear the Discover perspective, we’re in line with Razib on this. This blog is his space on the site and he has very wide berth to do with it as he likes—kind of like how an op-ed columnist gets to say whatever s/he wants in a newspaper, with some very spare limitations, which haven’t been crossed. His views expressed in individual posts, comments, and emails do not represent Discover, but we do overall like his blog a lot and try to provide a good home for it.

  • Miley Cyrax

    “If people persist in violating the norms and customs which I’ve long established on this weblog over the years, then I ban them. If they persist in emailing, as these types often do, then I block their email address. I very much doubt anyone is losing much sleep over being banned from a moderately prominent science weblog, so I don’t feel much guilt. I don’t mind if these people think I’m being unfriendly. ”

    Hmm… The Wrath of Khan?

  • dave chamberlin

    We are all grateful for all the work you put in to this blog Razib, seeing the amount of thought pieces you produce on a daily basis, it is truly is a prodigious amount of quality writing. We have seen what other popular blogs turn into when there isn’t an iron hand flicking away the trolls and the silly yappers. All hail the great Kahn, and long may he rule.

  • Ian

    Always remarkable to notice how many people turn Khan into Kahn (Muslim into Jew?). Of course, the latter looks misspelt to me, and if I wasn’t careful i’d probably be inclined to do that opposite.

  • http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp Razib Khan

    #4, that’s 1/3 of my bills. common transcription error.

  • dave chamberlin

    for some damn reason I thought that silly movie was spelled “The Wrath of Kahn”, all I remember was Ricardo “you look maavelous” Montalbon as Khan, my bad.

  • gcochran

    Tell me when you figure out how to implement proscription.

  • http://schlafly.blogspot.com/ Roger Schlafly

    Thanks for linking to my blog. I do not post creationist comments here because I am not a creationist. I often read your blog because it is interesting and informative.

  • http://www.kinshipstudies.org German Dziebel

    Razib, thank you for taking my e-mail seriously. A couple of points and let’s close this topic. I am not going to be a nuisance to you in the future.

    “I have no idea what German precisely means by “public forum” or “private franchise,” though I have a general sense. ”

    You are a distributor of scientific information among laymen, not a producer of scientific knowledge. To me you are like a guy at the Genius Bar at an Apple store. As such, you can throw a couple of new articles out there, spice them up with your own thoughts and let people comment. Discover pays you to do this. Commenters don’t get paid. This is what “my blog” can mean and that’s a fair play. But you don’t have the academic credentials to call one thing “science” and the other “not” or call one person a “kookie” and the other an “expert.” Especially so, if you are talking to a knowledge producer like myself. There are indeed hierarchies out there and you live a couple of floors below me. You crossed an ethical line and your “my blog” cover makes little impression on me. I understand you work hard to distribute knowledge, and this effort makes you feel, at a late hour, like you are a producer of knowledge entitled to producer rights. But to think so would be a mistake, because your skill set is different from that of a knowledge producer. Maybe you should take it easy and work less hard. Plus when you call anthropology “voodoo science” and use the f… word while talking to a professional anthropologist, you lose your credibility even as a knowledge distributor. You begin sounding like a punk.

    “By this, I mean that German has some strange ideas about human origins.”

    Yes, I created the “out of America” theory of human origins as an alternative to out-of-Africa. Every piece of reasoning behind this theory is backed by peer-reviewed research in linguistics, kinship studies, genetics, archaeology, etc. The responsibility is of course mine. I introduced the theory in two peer reviewed books: The Phenomenon of Kinship (2001, in Russian) and The Genius of Kinship (2007, in English). The last one was reviewed (http://jsa.revues.org/index11417.html) and (http://kinsource.net/kinsrc/bin/view/Reviews/Kinship+and+human+social+history). Behind the research is a database of 2500 languages.

    This is how science works. You create alternatives for what doesn’t seem to work well. There’s nothing strange about it. The “out of America” theory is a theory, not a fact, and as such controversial but this is a healthy thing. I don’t believe in trans-Atlantic, trans-Pacific voyages, comets, volcanoes, extraterrestrials or creationism. But if I suggest that modern humans may have evolved from a species of East Eurasian hominids, speciated in the New World and then migrated back to replace all hominids in Asia, Europe and Africa, it shouldn’t be deemed more “kookie” than Multiregionalism, out of Africa or, say, Christie Turner’s theory of the origin of humans in South-East Asia. It’s just not as “cookie-cutter” as other theories.

    “The original point of contention which triggered the email me is that I told him to stop acting as if his views were normative.”

    You misread my comment. Go back and re-read it. It concerned the reasons behind Native American refusal to donate blood and bones to scientific causes that native communities deem not to be in their best interests. And scientists should give up something in order to get something. One thing they could give is “the recent peopling of the Americas” theme. As of 2011, it’s not based on any hard facts, so nothing would happen to science if this theme just leaves. But science would truly benefit from more blood and bones coming from tribal communities. As an anthropologist, I simply explain to the scientists where the problem in their relationship with the natives lies. It has nothing to do with my out-of-America theory.

    “I think he’s really wrong”

    The out of America theory was built mainly on the basis of the worldwide patterns of linguistic and kinship variation. Genetics and archaeology is consistent with this idea, although not directly suggestive of it. On a number of occasions you admitted your ignorance of linguistics and kinship studies. Unless you master them, you can’t say if I am “really wrong.”

    “if you use your real identity I’m going to give you a lot more liberty.”

    Likewise, Razib. Mind you, though, that not only do I use my real identity, I also use my real credentials. I have two doctorates from internationally acclaimed universities. I am an anthropology advisor for the Great Russian Encyclopedia. I have a website (www.kinshipstudies.org) on which I offer, for free, the most comprehensive bibliography of kinship studies across several fields as well as my database. Etc.

    “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.”

    You lost me on that one. I will behave like a sane man regardless of how preposterous my ideas may seem to you. Simply because I am. If your own blog feels to you like an asylum, maybe you should get some sleep.

    @Amos

    “His views expressed in individual posts, comments, and emails do not represent Discover, but we do overall like his blog a lot and try to provide a good home for it.”

    You should pay this guy more and pay for his training in customer service, too.

  • Sahar

    Great points.
    How do you avoid becoming the new comprador class, though? I’m worried about that myself.

  • http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp Razib Khan

    Commenters don’t get paid.

    nor do you pay. anyway, bye-bye forever!

  • http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp Razib Khan

    How do you avoid becoming the new comprador class, though?

    you need to make the analogy more fleshed out.

  • dave chamberlin

    Germans comment “You should pay this guy more and pay for his training in customer service, too” made my day.

  • http://whitesocksai.blogspot.com Eric “Siggy” Scott

    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.

  • Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: _______ Edition

  • Sandgroper

    “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.

  • Martin M.

    “because he can’t help but be an asshole”

    classic

  • JW Frogen

    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.

  • http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp Razib Khan

    #18, great. can i send you personalized spam to your email address?

NEW ON DISCOVER
OPEN
CITIZEN SCIENCE
ADVERTISEMENT

Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

Gene Expression

This blog is about evolution, genetics, genomics and their interstices. Please beware that comments are aggressively moderated. Uncivil or churlish comments will likely get you banned immediately, so make any contribution count!

About Razib Khan

I have degrees in biology and biochemistry, a passion for genetics, history, and philosophy, and shrimp is my favorite food. In relation to nationality I'm a American Northwesterner, in politics I'm a reactionary, and as for religion I have none (I'm an atheist). If you want to know more, see the links at http://www.razib.com

ADVERTISEMENT

See More

ADVERTISEMENT

RSS Razib’s Pinboard

Edifying books

Collapse bottom bar
+

Login to your Account

X
E-mail address:
Password:
Remember me
Forgot your password?
No problem. Click here to have it e-mailed to you.

Not Registered Yet?

Register now for FREE. Registration only takes a few minutes to complete. Register now »