Is it ok for AusBT to delete comments they don't like from news posts?

Wilsoni: I subscribe to a broader definition of moderation which can also involve keeping comments appropriate, and I don't think lame 'slow news day' comments on an article are at all useful or relevant to the article. But people who complain about an article being re-run, get a life guys. This is a website which costs you NO money, you get it for free and you still want to act smart and complain just because a story is repeated? That's small thinking.

TruffleQueen, indeed the owner of this website has the right to delete ANY comment that they wish to, regardless of the reason.  They are free to create their own policies re deletion, like it or not.

Of course, you are free to create your own website or blog with user feedback, and you can then allow all users to leave any comments they wish.

ABT readers are free also to give up on the site and go elsewhere.  If a policy is thought unacceptable, don't defer to it - vote with your feet. It's called freedom of choice, and in this great nation we still have it.

I tried to post a reply to last week's article about the NZ 787, but it was deleted. Someone had commented that it would be nice to see a profile photo of the aircraft, so I posted a link to another web site with what I (mistakenly?) described as a "better" photo. I wasn't abusive and believe I was contributing to the interest of the topic.  Was my only crime to imply that the article's photos weren't good?

F8: If I recall correctly your comment wasn't deleted, it was simply held in moderation because it contained a link to another website (we do this to avoid comment-spam, of which we get a dozens a week). Standard practise is then to vet held comments at least once a day and publish those which are relevant. In this case I believe you'd linked to another website with more pics of this plane, but by the time we got around to checking the held comments I'd already updated our article with those same pics, so by that time there was no need for that comment. I could be wrong, it was a while back for me and things move pretty quickly here, but I believe that's the circumstance. I certainly have no issue with links to other sites of merit and certainly not when they add value to a story.

I find it incredibly rude whenever someone posts "slow news day?" comments. They are aware they're recycling content. We as readers don't love it. Maybe it would help if people approached this site more as a community and less as a consumer. When I'm with friends and someone tells a story I've heard before and don't find that interesting, I don't say, "slow news day?" or otherwise rude comments about how boring their life is.

Friends are not allowed to be sarcastic with each other?

Is that a true friendship?

of cos, with close friends. quintessential part of our culture :)

spinoza, do you listen to people repeat their story 5 or 6 times though? If I've heard the same story a couple of times I just let them know nicely that they have previously told me. Had it happen to me only this morning. Perhaps the wording of "slow news day" wasn't entirely appropriate but I think the questioning behind it was.

yes, but they are aware. david is not the forgetful friend in this situation

no it isnt the best choice of words. it just expresses a level of entitlement i think. how dare they not give me better free news!

i should say i don't love it either, and im not sure why they do it. it confuses me. maybe it is SEO related as hugo says.

but there are also articles here I don't like or enjoy. e.g. the points hacking articles. but i just skip through them without whinging. 

I agree. I think the intent was just to keep the guys on their toes to make them aware we notice these things as per Hugo's post below.

It certainly does bother me when ausbt recycles old or low-effort content pretending it's new. The objective of these sorts of posts is invariably to raise ausbt's position in google search rankings to bring in new clicks at the cost of annoying regular readers.

It bothers me that ausbt exists in that nebulous realm in between "useful source of information" and "low-effort SEO spam". 

Refer previous comments about this site been a subscription free site.  Also, the recycling will benefit new readers and also useful reminders to people who have been reading it for a while.  Generally the re-runs are not that often and are often relevent to the current topics, for eaxample, there was a recent rehashing of the best way to obtain a status match, pretty topical given changes at QFF with status credits and the fact that many readers, but not all, were extremely dissapointed with Qantas and AJ for the changes and are looking to move their international travel elsewhere.

It is absolutely right for them to delete and control some of the posts.  Very valid points are raised by numerous readers on many issues and they even interject them with some humour which is acceptable.  It is unacceptable for some of the abuse posted by a minority of readers and commenter’s though. During the wailing and gnashing of teeth after Qantas decimated the status credits of OW flights for example, there were a few comments made claiming that people who didn’t buy full tickets were bottom feeders etc etc.  Now everyone is entitled to opinions about the SC issue but to resort to name calling is petty, bullying and in many forums the person making such comments is often blocked from making further ones.

Be very careful what you put on these kind of sites.