Authors to decide whether comments are of any value and moderators (we definitely should call those warders instead) are allowed to leave comments even if authors have comments [b]locked.

This is definitely not what I meant. I meant disabling comments from the scratch to avoid goddamn moderators^W warders to interfere the discussion, voluntary marking what they dislike as “violating Code of Bullshit,” even when it does not violate a word from there.


So the issue you have is not with the comments themselves, is with the moderation that you perceive as unfair. Maybe that's what you should be posting about?

I honestly have no issues and I don’t care how fair am I moderated.

I just want to have an ability to post something without entering the discussions with not-as-competent strangers.

I'm ultimately against this feature for the same reason you appear to be in favor of it. Not-as-competent strangers make posts to, and although I expect it rarely happens, people need to be able to correct them.

If that is the case, write your own follow-up post with all the corrections and right approach.

That's possible, but it would be better to correct errors where they are rather than having that information spread out all over. I guess it's a matter of how much you consider your post part of a collective or just yours.

Admittedly banning factual inaccuracies in the CoC would solve my issue much better.

it's a matter of how much you consider your post part of a collective or just yours

I consider my post being 100% mine, having nothing to do with any collaborative work. When I need collaborative work, I go ask for the collaboration before writing and put the name of the collaborators alongside in the preface.

Admittedly banning factual inaccuracies in the CoC [...]

I am not sure I follow how censorship is connected to my proposal.

I consider my post being 100% mine, having nothing to do with any collaborative work.

I don't mean it's collaborative work, I mean it's part of a collection with some overarching qualities.
Technically this is the case because has a CoC, making that the overarching quality. Not a very good one but it exists.

I am not sure I follow how censorship is connected to my proposal

It's a potential solution to a problem I believe might arise from disabling comments.

In my whole life (including but not limited to my professional career,) it always has been happening: people constantly come up with their points of view on everything. I believe that is sitting deeply inside human nature :)

Wrong views / approaches / theories do quickly sink into oblivion. They somehow dismiss. The correct ones stay. That happens eventually.

But I never saw a wrong idea that was successfully shut down by censorship. Exactly contrariwise, censoring whatever out instead of just letting it be forgotten feeds the wrong, gives it the power and strength.

That said I do not believe in CoC at all (especially when it’s being executed by biased and undoubtedly incompetent people—the latter is not insulting, rather it is obvious: people cannot be competent in anything, check StackOverflow, mods there do supervise the narrowed set of topics they initially belong to as professionals.)

What I do believe in, is the opinion exchange, in the form of posts, not comments. That is necessary to narrow down the audience; leaving stupid comments under well-received posts is a clickbait, sorta.)

There's a big difference between censorship as you describe it and deleting/editing information that is provably, factually incorrect.

For instance, saying concurrency is the same as interleaved execution is factually wrong and needs to be corrected. That is not a matter of censoring ideas but correcting mistakes. In the later case you do not care if the original content is still visible, so long as it comes with a warning label of sorts.


saying concurrency is the same as interleaved execution

Are there people all around who claim that? They should be sentenced to three months of interleaved pair programming then!

I see what you are saying, but I do still value the ability to speak freely the most, even if all being proclaimed is a misconception and fallacy. Nobody learns conceptual things from blog posts made by strangers. Time will put everything in their places and the wrong stuff will be inevitably forgotten.

I do still value the ability to speak freely the most

As long as it's not other peoples responses to your opinions.

Nice try.

People always have an option to speak. I am asking for their speech belongs to their accounts, not to mine.


Personally I've never seen the value of disabling comments (if not to avoid spam?), even after years, people might stop by and say something meaningful.

I understand that someone posting "announcements" might not be interested in the comments but there's a value in them for other people too.

With AMAs maybe there's value in that but I don't know, what if what they actually want is a lock after 30 days?

Is it really about not letting people comment or maybe really about not being notified about them?


It is about not letting people comment.

If they have what to say, let them write a linked post as an answer, elaborating their point of view. I am not interested in reading whining about how I misunderstand everything and I do not want my readers (who are 99% not members) seeing that crap.


Well, I don't agree. It would be a community of people beating their chests, talking to the wind without any discussions or counter arguments.

It would be great for metrics though, every single comment would be a post 🤣

There's a lot of value in comments and in some case even more than in the post itself that sparked them, I'm sorry you haven't had the chance to notice it. You should check out the collections of "best comments of the week"

Eh. I never proposed to disable comments on the whole site or like.

I proposed to give me and maybe some others such an option via markdown comment (could be hidden and not well documented.)

I admit many comments are valuable, when it comes to topics that assume some arguing. E.g. marking this particular post as comments: false would be silly :)


Just spitballing but Dev is more a community and discussion platform that relies pretty heavily on creator/consumer relationships. I very much love this platform but fully agree that not all content is meant for it. Kinda like how I would never post weight loss or financial advice on Reddit because people would come out of the woodwork to call me a moron or acuse me of hating black people or repressing women (still not sure how redditors come to that conclusion EVERY time, regardless of content). There are some social platforms that are simply better suited to the architecture and advanced CS concepts that you tend to write about. I think Dev could be that place someday, but really isnt yet. Largely because (in my opinion) there are relatively few of us that understand the lower level stuff.

Make no mistake, I love your content because it helps me to approach problems differently by comparing your thought process to mine and seeing how I can combine my strengths with the ones you reveal. But the more complex principles and techniques are abstract and rely on approach rather than concrete rules. Arguing happens when we forget that despite many languages arguments of "there is only one 'best way' to go about that in my language", I've never actually seen that be 100% true. So we fight about it. Because we, as people, are dumb that way. Totally get where your coming from though: "Yeah hey, I didn't ask what you thought about this topic. This post is telling you what I think about this topic. 😁😁

I didn't ask what you thought about this topic. This post is telling you what I think about this topic.

LOL, no, not at all.

And I never implied anything like my language is better than yours (whatever yours is :))—mostly because I use not less than 6 languages in my daily work on professional level.

I simply want to be able to balance between keeping to use this platform to post the stuff I write and having the posts clean enough to link to my teammates without being asked: “Dude, who are all these people in comments, unable to understand a word from what you have written?”

I am not mentioning moderators who constantly come to my posts and mark my and only my comments as being of low quality.

I still stay because a) I know there are people who is interested in what I am writing and b) I like how produces a twitter snippet for my posts and I was always too lazy to do that myself.

Very easy. Dual post on Medium and send your colleagues a link to your Medium post. I dual post all my posts so I can Facebook link my Medium posts to non-techs. Different reason but could also work for your scenario.

Medium does not support github flavored markdown nor RSS syndication.


I do not want my readers (who are 99% not members) seeing that crap

If indeed 99% of your readers aren't from this site, wouldn't your own Markdown-based blog without a comment feature be a reasonable alternative? Host on e.g. Netlify directly connected to a git branch and you even get a better editing workflow since you can use your editor of choice on your local machine. That's what I do, though I dual-post most stuff here too.

I do it already with GH pages; I also do cross-post here for a potential future reader who might be interested.


Yes, please!

Sometimes you just don't want anyone posting their opinion below your article. By allowing comments, you're giving your audience to potentially everybody. This might not always be ideal, especially for sensible topics. That's why I would highly appreciate a disable-comments-flag.

Anyone can post a new article with a response to their followers if they wish.


One of the reasons to allow comments always is that if you post something that is wrong (anyone can make mistakes), you need to know and people should let you know about it. Otherwise we'd be filled with info we don't know is reliable if no one is able to contradict it. That kind of sounds more on the faith side than the peer-review side of things. Imagine a peer-review meeting where your peers are not allow to disagree with you :)


people should let you know about it

Mind to find the example of that on and point me out to it?

The best you can expect here trying to correct the author is the email from core team saying you’d better shut up because of CoC and all your comments hereinafter grayed out.

Unless you state your objections in the form that implies you generally agree with “2×2≡5” and the author should write more, and everything is great.


If it's a choice between

  • 10 response posts to a comments-disabled article
  • 10 comments on the article

I would choose the latter. Response posts can add clutter to many people's feeds. Whereas comments keep it contained with the source material.

It seems like a better solution to your problem is a view of the post which does not include comments. "Permalink post only". That seems like a useful feature. There is already a "View Full Discussion" view which is basically comments only.


Well, that feature request implies the question what kind of website is going to be. Is it a community, where everybody has the right to speak up, no matter if it's bullshit or not. Or is it a publishing platform like Medium, but for developers? Or something in between? Maybe it's worth taking a look at the solutions of other platforms like reddit. Or let's take a look at slashdot - there you have the feature of downvoting comments so that they don't appear anymore (unless you change the threshold for downvoted comments). That might be a compromise. However what's the point of copying slashdot? What makes special compared to reddit and slashdot? IMHO the community feedback is essential on, so sorry Aleksei, but I hope Ben, Jess, and Peter decide against your feature request.

Classic DEV Post from Dec 22 '18

The 10 most popular posts of 2018

I took the 10 most popular posts in the year section of and added some t...

Aleksei Matiushkin
NB! I am _not_ a member of #DEVCommunity. → I like: Elixir, Erlang, Ruby, R, C, COBOL. → I hate: Apple, JS, Rails, haters. → I am more functional, than object oriented.