For years I’ve allowed almost all of you to comment freely with very little moderation. That caused you to get into long drawn out arguments, forcing some of you to visit the blog every 5 minutes to write rebuttals. That was great for the value of this blog because the number of hits would skyrocket with all your repeat visits all day long, but it’s not so good for you, because you’re wasting your lives getting addicted to the internet when you could be doing far more productive things with your time.
I don’t want my blog (which is technically an increasingly valuable brand) to profit at your expense, so I’m going to move to a system where comments are moderated, and only get released from moderation a few times a day at the most.
At first you will hate this because you’re used to immediate chat room speed, but in the long run, you’ll be much happier, because you wont stay up all night quibbling with people, nor will you feel the compulsion to check the blog obsessively.
As the speed of commenting goes down, I suspect, so will the number of comments, but we’ll have more time to REFLECT on each other’s comments, and truly understand each other’s point of view, which will reduce endless pointless debates and perhaps improve the quality of discourse, not to mention, the quality of our lives.
Pumpkin Person 
I don’t comment often, and have been meaning to find the time to pick up where we left off a month ago (back when you were, as it now seems, destructively-timely with your replies), but this change is deterring me. I’m one of those types where if I don’t get back to you immediately, then it will take me months (as evidenced). Either I do it right now or it will be on the backburner forever. So if there is a time limit, I can already imagine bumping-up against that, getting pissed and saying F-it.
Also, the fact that someone is making changes with my “best interest” in mind is concerning. Why should I not have the right to “destroy” my life as I see fit? (Especially with the boredom of winter coming.) Have I still not out-grown my mother’s over-protective hand?
What drew me to comment in the first place was the admission from PP that comments are not moderated, in light of Trumpocalypse’s rants at the time. The freedom to say whatever one wanted, whenever one wanted, was attractive to me. I found it admirable that PP would allow aggressive comments to stand. But this step into moderation is making the desire to comment less compelling. When I see censorship, experience leads me elsewhere. You can’t stop me from destroying my life… I’ll just destroy it somewhere else and someone else will profit from it. Prohibition doesn’t work.
Not that this is a goodbye, but just that much less incentive to pay attention to the site. If I know I’m going to be moderated then….eh..
Well, here’s a serious comment you can unmoderate. Make of it whatever you will.
You own this blog so you should do as you see fit, and it is of course, a decent blog that I’ve learned some new things from. I agree that the discourse is sometimes over the top and rowdy.
Pros of PC
1. No legal issues and reputational conflict.
2. Commenters can develop more subtle or polished ways of making points which will be handy in real life conversations, or later writing.
3. As you say, less time spent on the blog which is good.
4. People’s feelings get hurt less (this is not a sarcastic comment, I’m very hesitant to truth bomb people in my professional and personal capacity as the things I’ve come to suspect are psychologically painful for most, including myself).
Cons of PC
1. Blog traffic drops and regulars leave the blog to others.
2. Quality of debate rises in rhetoric and declines in dialectic.
3. The topic of the blog doesn’t lend itself at all to political correctness. Point in fact, IQ differences among race as a concept is inherently heretical. Quality of writing and inquiry diminishes under new mantra.
4. Not fun.
The ideal system would in essence a code of conduct. We agree to abide by the code, but you get rid of the moderation. But moderate should a comment be foul or otherwise, with the explicit proviso (as per the code) that a repeat offender is banned.
My opinion is that the blog was an enjoyable yarn that was actually quite unique in that it’s one of the few HBD blogs that had no moderation. I genuinely think that due to the intelligence and capacity of commenters here it could have been much more crude, emotionally charged and small minded than if the experiment of open comments was done in others. It’s probably one of the few avenues one can find curious people on this topic without the threat of censorship like Quora or of course, mainstream press.
Ultimately censorship should be done either to improve the quality of discourse whilst removing obscenity, racial slurs, charged images and so on or to stop one with an alternative viewpoint from expressing their controversial views. I believe you’re in the former bucket thankfully, so its up to you how you want to pursue that.
The topic of the blog doesn’t lend itself at all to political correctness. Point in fact, IQ differences among race as a concept is inherently heretical.
This is an especially good point. If you’re telling people something they don’t want to hear, no matter how politely you say it, they’re still going to hate you, in fact, sometimes they’ll hate you even more, because at least the rude people discredit themselves, as William implied.
PP this is a very bad idea.
I appreciate the changes you have made..But it is my heartfelt request to restore the article on the Aborigine IQ. The changes instituted will be more than enough to make the blog politically correct as readers will desist from making “in-the-heat of-moment”, off-the-cuff comments and will make thoughtfully designed comments once every few days
But it is my heartfelt request to restore the article on the Aborigine IQ.
Why that one in particular?
Since I see your blog as a well framed, beautifully bound book, and it is very frustrating to see chapters just being torn out of it..I think many others feel the same way and donot want any of your articles go missing..That’s why I keep frequenting your old BrainSize blog..and on top of that the comments also add a rich variety to the blog, but I admit that chatspeed commenting has to stop as it puts off the readers who may be interested in reading the comments..The commenters should also chip in and make carefully considered thoughtful comments that make others ponder and go on intellectual reflection. and on top of that that particular article was also the first one where I started commenting earnestly..I first started commenting wanting to know whether there is a correlation between unbroken celibacy (no sex or mb) and intellectual or atheletic achievement..The evidence seems to be overwhelming, but I wanted to know your opinion whetehr semen not ejaculated and broken down nourishes the brain in ways normal nutrition cannot
My understanding of politically correct is nothing to do with to be politely correct but to censor people avoiding real and possibly fruitful debates because well politics is like that, always it was like that.
A post talking about your PayPal Don’t appear to be… Sensible.
Why isn’t Camacho/Videla/Mugabe posting anymore? Did you ban him?
Yes and no
Explain.
This is a terrible idea because the comment section is what makes your blog great to begin with. Other HBD/IQ blogs are so sterile. Yours is lively and chock-full of eccentric characters.
https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2016/11/04/a-simple-theory-for-the-development-of-homosexuality-in-males-and-females/
Limbsey is going full-tard. Amaze me in the negative way how this crap can believe he is smarter than most people* how*
To talk about developmental disorder he is very good after all, an expert in the subject, he is clearly disordered with this ugly/funny face. Someone who defend irrational totalitarian regimes like North Korea or Venezuela impossibly is in their perfect reason.
He is creepy mono-thinker, just repeat their piece of proto-knowledge without any holistic considerations at moral, abstract, literal, whatever–important levels.
Yes Limbsey you are right when you said i’m very wise and you even touch my feet in this department. You just deserve my ”nice” words.
Yes, homossexuality can be considered as developmental disorder but the reality is not done only by ”perfection” and some of this dis-order is possibly excusable.
A tiny fraction of population feel attraction to the same sex is not apocaliptical than…
full-retards such mister Limbsey believing in redondable wrong ideas, thinking, crappy ”ideologies” in all their life. THIS people are inexcusable and quite dangerous.
And can become even worse when we have this full-tards governing us. You don’t need a massive dysgenics when you have Limbsey breed types governing us.
No doubt, i don’t know any homophobic with a decent moral skills. None, all them look like savages quite pride by their pseudo-masculinity.
Robert Lindsay is an idiot. He’s dumb as hell. Idk how he convinced the brilliant peepee that he’s smart. He claims to be a genius despite failing high school algebra or something lol. People with a large vocabulary who suck at basic math tend to be the most confused people in the world. They have zero analytical skills. All form over substance! In Lindsay’s case, he has neither. Just a prole idiot.
He claims to have scored IQ 147 on the WISC at age 14, but since the norms were old, that’s probably about 140 corrected for the Flynn effect. I’m inclined to believe him because his range of knowledge is impressive and the fact that he’s honest about sucking at math and not doing that well on the SAT gives him more credibility.
Back in those days, the WISC had no subtest directly measuring logical analytical abilities, so an average logic IQ, combined with a mind that while completely sane, is closer to the tropical/feminine/schizo extreme than to the cold/masculine/autistic extreme, causes even brilliant people to have a few nutty opinions from time to time.
“No doubt, i don’t know any homophobic with a decent moral skills. None, all them look like savages quite pride by their pseudo-masculinity.”
“Tow the line. Believe the new PC dogma in America. What’re you, a bigot, goy?
You’re right it has nothing to do with anything in vitro. It is a choice.