Comment Policy Update

I’ve long held the comment policy here pretty open. The only thing I have not permitted is the posting of links. As a result, one who looks through the posts here over time can find no shortage of hate filled nonsense directed at me and my readers.

Links aren’t the only way to spam. I banned one user a month or so ago for containing within his nonsense hateful comments that they would be discussing his nonsense hateful comments on his podcast, announcing its name and air time. His co-host then came here, repeatedly telling other users to search Google for the title of her blog, and she got banned as well. Another guy made a Disqus account with the name of his blog, bloviated with hateful nonsense, and he got banned.

Having a recognizable name and highly trafficked website attracts envious wannabes who want to promote themselves by attacking you. For the most part I’ve learned to tune that out. I’m a purposely controversial figure, it’s part of my marketing scheme. People spewing hate about me on the Internet is driving traffic to this website, and I’m grateful for it. When they spew that hateful nonsense here in hopes of driving traffic to other websites, I draw the line.

Today I banned three more users. One was the same person who had a different account banned for using it to promote his blog. Another who made an off topic comment mentioning the name of the aforementioned female podcast co-host. The third was a person who comes here every day to post hateful nonsense comments without reading what he’s commenting on.

So here are the rules for commenting here, violating them can get you banned from the comments. They will be added to the FAQ momentarily.

1. No links will be posted in comments under any circumstances. If you put a hyperlink in a comment, the comment system will automatically hold your comment for moderation, and I will never approve it. Even links to other pages of this blog will probably never be seen, because I just don’t have the time or the inclination to go and read through every self promotional piece of shit that get’s posted to the comments here. Make your point in some other way, hyperlinks are not allowed.

2. If you want to promote something here, buy an advertisement. I am here to spread my ideas and sustain my existence, not to assist my rivals by driving traffic to their websites. I worked for years as the abuse admin at a major internet service provider, I know that spammers find innovative ways of evading spam detection systems. I know that just having your name in the comments section is in and of itself a form of promotion. The fact that your spam did not contain a hyperlink makes it no less spammy. The ad space here is affordable, if you can’t afford $30/month to promote your brand, then your brand doesn’t deserve to be promoted here or anywhere else.

3. Comments should advance a discussion and address the issue at hand. I honestly welcome disagreement, and even hostility. If you respond to my economic analysis by calling me fat, you’re not only wrong, you’re a useless bloviating dullard who shouldn’t be breathing the same air as me. If you are purposely spreading misinformation, you’re a liar and I’ll ostracize you. If you haven’t read the article or watched the video, you shouldn’t be commenting on it. You might get your comment deleted, you might get a warning, or you might get banned, it all depends on my mood at the time. If you just want to say something nasty about me without putting any thought into it, share the post on your social media outlets and have your hatefest there, I’m no longer going to let you derail discussion here.

4. There are brands and individuals that I am ostracizing. They will not be mentioned here, not in articles, and not in comments. If you see me obviously referring to someone, but not mentioning them by name or linking to them, don’t say who it is. I am denying them the exposure on purpose. This won’t get you banned unless you’re obviously doing it on purpose, but I’ll be adding their names as keywords to blacklist from comments. That means your comment will get moderated and nobody will ever see it.


Most of you never have to think about this, just keep on commenting as usual. It’s a very small fraction of the users here that are going to be affected by these changes. My hope is that their expulsion makes this a more enjoyable place for the rest of us.

There are other changes coming to this website to further that same purpose. I want to improve it, address a wider range of subject material, make it more appealing to a wider audience, more serious, faster, and more profitable. That means there will be some experimentation, and not everybody is going to like it. Those of you with the decency to disable your ad blockers may have noticed things are a bit ad heavy right now for example, I’ll be scaling that up and down trying to find the right balance. I hope you’ll stick around while I see what works, but if some of you don’t come back, that might be best for all of us. If you like the work I’m doing, but some update to the functionality, content, or policies of this site bothers you, please contact me privately with your feedback, and I’ll take it into consideration.

  • Christopher William Day

    seems fair. constructive criticism: I’ve seen you use the word “effect” when it should be “affect” at least twice. You’re a phenomenal writer, but making a few grammatical tweaks will add credibility. “Effect” CAN occasionally be used as a verb, but the more appropriate verb is “affect” the vast majority of the time. “Effect” is a noun more often than not. Cheers.

    • Christopher Cantwell

      Thanks. I know that’s one I need to work on. It’s just as bad as your/you’re, but so rarely pointed out that it gets by easily. I’ll work on it in the future.

      • Christopher William Day

        You’re welcome. This particular quibble doesn’t make your articles any less hard hitting.

        • Richard Chiu

          Well, I do have to admit that whenever someone talks about effecting people I always think something dirty. Which is kinda a bonus in the case of a Cantwell article, I suppose. You go on effecting users with your policies, Chris, it’s probably sinful and wrong, but so is a lot of what you post.

          Oh, and sorry about posting using an address the other day, but after all it was in response to your post linking the same site.

  • Kyle Rearden

    Thanks for the notice, Chris. I’ll refrain from posting hyperlinks from this point onward.

  • Thanks for the explanation. I will now refrain from hyper linking in the comments section.

  • I can already hear the “I gotcha” wannabes making some ridiculous arguments such as; ‘freedom advocate Cantwell bans freedom on his website’. Of course that’s nonsense. It’s not about freedom, it’s about property rights. Chris owns the rights to this website and can choose its operation accordingly. No one’s freedom has been denied. Anyone is free to spew their nonsense on their own sites. Just because you’re free to say whatever you want, doesn’t mean someone has to provide the platform for you to say it.

    • Kevin_Carson

      Nice strawman. I think the actual irony is that the “Fuck MLK” and “left-libertarians are child molesters” guy objects to “hate-filled nonsense.”

      • Christopher Cantwell

        Speaking of strawmen, I like how you put “left-libertarians are child molesters” in quotes as if that’s actually something I’ve said.

        I’m fine with your hate, it’s your nonsense I’m no longer going to tolerate. So the next time you comment here, say something meaningful, cause your next lie gets you banned.

      • Doofor

        You’d think a post-carbon neckbeard such as yourself would applaud Chris’s shortening his wisdom supply chain and making his comment section more sustainable.

      • My comment wasn’t a straw man. A straw man defense would be if someone made an argument and instead of rebutting the argument put forward, I substituted a wholly different argument and rebutted that. That’s not what was done. In this instance, I simply preemptively rebutted an argument I knew would be forthcoming. I did so to avoid having to wade through an incoherent, half page dissertation, that came to all the wrong conclusions, about freedom.


    Blunt Force Trauma is a hardcore punk band from Texas. Google their song ‘Hatred for the state’ and see the youtube video of the song’s video.


    It penetrates and permeates my brain.

    The purest form of hate, like a prisoner shackled to an iron chain.

    Every hour I’m awake, I pray for change, it always stays the same.

    I can’t escape my fate to destroy the state til nothing else remains




    Help me annihilate!

    I’m gunna storm the gate!

    It’s not up for debate!

    It’s hatred for the state!

    With there scheming and their scamming, they will rue the day the shit will hit the fan.

    When we rise up with impunity and smash the motherfuckers where they stand!

    Hatred for the state like an order that’s imbedded in my head.

    From corrupted local cronies to the governor and even to the fed.

    The thought of revolution and rebellion has become my daily bread.

    I’ll never stop untill the fire of insurrection catches and it spreads!

    • Doofor

      die spambot

  • strycat

    For those of us who don’t keep up with the latest in fighting within the Freedom Movement, how do we find out who hates who so we don’t get our comment sent to oblivion?

    • Christopher Cantwell

      Worst case scenario is your comment gets held for moderation. There are only a handful of keywords I’ve blacklisted. Just comment as normal, you’ll more than likely never have it happen to you.

  • Waldetto

    Hmm… I often use a link to PROVE my point, or how stupid the person responding really is, it kinda does suck to not be able to back up claims with proof through a link, but oh well.

  • Jim Jesus

    I remember when Cantwell was perfectly OK with people trolling him, now he was speech codes on his blog.

    Should we put trigger warnings too, Chris?