We’ve updated our commenting policy. The rules will always be found here, but we wanted to repost the guidelines on the blog so everyone sees them. Thanks.
Welcome to the Good Men Project. In order to foster constructive, respectful debate in our comments section, we have established the following guidelines. Violation of any of these guidelines can result in you being blocked from commenting on this site.
Comments on the Good Men Project are loosely moderated. That means we don’t check every comment, but if it raises a flag it will be held in queue until a moderator makes a decision in it. If your comment doesn’t show up, it usually means you either used inappropriate language or violated one of our guidelines.
Look, we’re all about discussion here. That’s what we are. We are a discussion about manhood, masculinity, and what all that means right now. So we want you to comment. We want you to be passionate about the things we publish, but we want you to be passionate in a way that doesn’t offend anyone.
General Guidelines & Tips:
Be civil and respectful.
Stay on topic.
Don’t personally attack anyone—whether it’s their grammar, their intelligence, their name, or anything else. You can attack a viewpoint. That’s fine, but don’t go after the individual.
Don’t feed the trolls. They will bite, and they’ll keep coming back. Let’s keep them where they belong: under your bed.
Please be concise. No one wants to read a rambling, long-winded back-and-forth that forgets what it was supposed to be about.
Don’t generalize. No, all men aren’t dogs—just some of us. And if you want to say something like that, show us some evidence, post a link with more information. Don’t group people together just because it’s “your opinion.” That’s lazy and leads to all sorts of problems.
Stay on topic. Don’t come over to a sports post and tell us we’re all losers because we’re discussing the long-lasting emotional effects of the NBA lockout. We get it. “We should be worrying about the economy, instead.” Comment on the topic at hand, or just don’t comment.
Don’t write about the same thing each time you comment. We will find you, and we will ban you. Mix it up, and we won’t have any problems. If you have something to say that you feel strongly about, write a post, work with our editors, and we will run it. We encourage well thought out points of view on a variety of topics.
We will not tolerate attacks on the Good Men Project itself, people who question our motives, our intentions or our reason for being. If you want to create your own platform to talk about these issues, go ahead. We invite community participation and encourage people who want to have thoughtful discussions around the topics of important to men. Period. Questioning why we are doing it the way we are doing it is a quick way to get yourself banned.
We want everyone who reads our stories to comment. And we especially don’t want anyone to be scared to put their thoughts out there. The comments section should be an open place for thoughtful—and, yes, passionate—discussion. Stick to these rules, and it’ll stay that way.
Comments with more than one active link are held for moderation.
Please refrain from the following:
Posting threatening, harassing, defamatory, or libelous material
Posting material that infringes copyright or any other intellectual property interest
Ad hominem attacks**
Comparisons to genocidal dictators and their brutal regimes
Hijacking threads to push your own irrelevant agenda
Sweeping generalizations
Posting anything even approaching the length of the original post
Posting an article from another website
Putting Good, Good Men, or Good Men Project in quotation marks, as a means of expressing your suggestion that the Good Men Project isn’t, in fact, good
The Good Men Project does not employ a full time moderator; thus we may not be able to enforce these guidelines in real time.
*Please note that once you post a comment to one of our sites, it becomes part of the public conversation. We will not remove a user’s comments unless we deem them to be in violation of these guidelines. We cannot remove your comments simply because you have a change of heart about making them. Good Men Media, Inc., reserves the right to remove comments and block users entirely at its discretion, including for violations of these guidelines. Good Men Media is not responsible for the content of user comments.
**[“Ad hominem abuse involves insulting or belittling one’s opponent in order to invalidate his argument, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent’s argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent’s personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent’s arguments or assertions.”]
























What about the change of voting up or down on comments? Any explanation?
I think a lot of people were disagreeing with their “irrelevant agenda” and it starts to look bad when their “irrelevant agenda” becomes a minority opinion. Take away the voting and it’s not so obvious.
Several people who read, write and comment frequently had mentioned the up / down votes seemed to add to the hostility of our comment section around provocative posts. As a commenter said “I see both trolls and logical people get erased by the masses.” So we thought we would take those off for a while and see how people reacted. It would be easy to put back in place — make a case for them if you like them. We hadn’t heard anyone in defense of them before.
When we say “irrelevant agenda” we only mean in reference to the post itself. We will consider all post submissions related to men and men’s issues if they are well written and well thought out. We encourage people who disagree with us to write a post explaining their POV about a topic.
My only complaint about the voting system was when something was downvoting far enough the comment literally faded from the conversation. That makes comments hard to read and as you say logical and civil comments end up erased because of a bunch of angry haters. Most sites with a voting system usually have it set up so that when something downvoted enough it gets replaced with a link that says something to the effect of “This comment has been downvoted. Click here to see comment” and up clicking the comment shows up.
I just think the whole vanishing comment thing was what made a lot of people agree (and that autorefresh).
While you’re dealing with commenting, could you add a feature so that one can subscribe to notifications about new comments on articles one has commented on? Having to check back to follow several conversations is a bother.
Absolutely — thanks for the suggestion.
“Hijacking threads to push your own irrelevant agenda”
“We will not tolerate attacks on the Good Men Project itself, people who question our motives, our intentions or our reason for being.”
So…what is the supposedly “relevant agenda” of the Good Men Project?
Note that I didn’t put it in quotation marks because I know you guys are sensitive about that.
I answered this above, but I will add — it’s the comments that systematically push a point of view across multiple posts, regardless of the main idea in the post itself that we would like to curtail.
Again — if there is a topic you think is important for us to be writing about, you are welcome to submit.
No, you didn’t.
So…what is the supposedly “relevant agenda” of the Good Men Project?
We don’t have an agenda.
We are here to talk about men, manhood, masculinity, the changing roles of men, and have our community tell personal, insightful stories by or about men. Those stories often lead to discussions around the question of “what it means to be a good man” — which inspires some of our more provocative posts. Despite the provocative nature of those posts or some of the things we talk about — parenting, divorce, war, pornography, relationships, gender, sexuality — we hope that discussion will be insightful, intelligent, civil and without malice towards the writers and commenters in the community.
It was a serious question and everybody has an agenda, I was just hoping for an honest answer. Everybody knows anyway, but you’re much nicer than the gender feminists at this site and others. I suppose this commenting policy will only apply to men as usual.
Did I just break the commenting policy by being honest? I’m bad.
Troll control? Fine. Civility? Fine. Relevance to the topic at hand? Why, of course.
However, when your rules suggest that us peons refrain from honest criticism of editorial policy by placing it in a glass box that is unreachable (prohibiting quotation marks around the name of this site???? That’s petty.), along with several other benedictions usually reserved for writing for money, I begin to think there’s the rife aroma of rancid rodent in the air around here.
Does that mean for example, that if I disagree with the simplistic benediction that Hugh Hefner is “Da Debbil” as put forth by an article by the co-founder of this Project & I notice no “sanctioned” articles that disagree with that premise & say so, your cute lil’ leggo Darth Vader is going to BAN me for that?
Again, petty. I could cite more reasons I’m offended at this left-handed attempt at commentary thought control, but hey, I might just run into typing something longer than the posting that inspired me, & THAT will get me tossed.
Insulting your readership with these restrictions does not bode well for your stated mission.
What we’d really like people to do if they disagree with a post is write a counter post that we will publish. I don’t see that as petty.
We want to develop a community of people that understands the intention of the site and helps make the discussion the type of discussion that everyone feels welcome to participate in.
The quotation marks was an example of attacks on the site itself that do nothing to further the discussion. It is fine to disagree with a particular article. Of course. We encourage many different points of view around any given issue. But if someone has a problem with The Good Men Project itself — I’d prefer they talk to me directly, and work with all of us on what could make it better.
P.S. When I first came to this site & discovered that comments that were simply voted down were”cloaked”, I clicked on ‘em out of sheer SPITE & the belief that everyone deserves to get heard, troll though they may be. Not to mention that those concealed comments weren’t always troll-work.
That’s a case for why we took the voting off.
The reason we used the voting in the first place was so that the community could help decide which comments were most relevant to for them read.
Why didn’t you just turn off the hide at -3 feature, that just made reading difficult.
Ok, thanks, that might be a solution. I didn’t realize as many people actually liked the voting.
That’s what most of the complaints were about. I’m sure there were some people getting upset that so many others disagree with them. Personally, I like seeing Hugo downvoted into oblivion.
Thanks for removing the downvoting (and upvoting.) Most of the comments that were downvoted were, in my opinion, not abusive.