Some questions asked about Angry Bear moderation of comments need answered. What it is not is a careful screening of content. It is not even a screening for ad hominems pretty much, which might be done later if missed, but in public and noted.
Since deletion, disemvowelling, or other standard editing was not working due to the volume and vitrioloc nature of some of the commenters, pending moderation has been put into use.
Main posters come by and approve comments, but the criterion has been purposely kept extremely simple…it primarily is a way to delete the comments from those in coventry who start fights through ad hominems or slanderous comment, those in coventry who exceeded even our standards.
I do not even read many comments in the process…the normal sorts of edits take care of the occasional swearing or ad hominems. The ‘review’ has nothing to do with political content, and does not involve editing unless clearly noted. Enough of us moderate to make the system as close to immediate publication as is reasonable, which we think helps discussion. You may have noticed paid sites use interns or teaching assistants…we are a working group without those particular resources.
So Paul, no, it is not like a magazine where letters to the editors are published after careful review to insure standards…it is a quick screening done as quickly as possible to screen out bile and slanders. The election appears to have energised many, some of whom misbehave badly.