GHOSTUSER

God damn it hayden. I had (no CR) peppered throughout my posts. Locked out of my own thread

Financial Times

I get what you’re saying and appreciate telling me about Dissenter which I’ll check out. The regular WSJ commenters are a community and in this age of isolation wrought by technology was a familiar place for me to enjoy some downtime. It also is encouraging to read others with similar right wing views countering the liberal (no CR) Chinese cultural revolution like enforced orthodoxy. I mean have y’all read what Michelle Goldberg wrote today in the Times about Krijsten Nielsen. It’s fucking straight up Mao red book shit.

You have to use your real name on the WSJ comments brisket. That moderates things. It is a much more civil place than the CR.

Username checks out. Tucker Carlson is my favorite. He is falsely accused of being a racist. I guess I’m in good company then

Barack HUSSEIN Obama was a Swam4 specialty. Yes, I was being sarcastic about that

Really. How do you explain the treatment I have received in the CR at surly. I’m not the only one, all of us on the right have. I have refrained from posting there for Lent. It’s been much better for me as it’s reduced the hatred and vitriol that would arise in my heart from the shit flinging. Take a look at my previous posting history there if you have time. I linked a lot of articles from the NYT and WSJ with my spin on them. No unprovoked personal attacks on my end. I’d get called out with epithets saying I’m a liar or have my addiction which I’m clean for years now thrown in my face. That didn’t happen at the WSJ and I enjoyed laughs from the regulars there. They took that from me and the rest of the crew there.

That’s like your opinion man. Isn’t the WSJ the most profitable newspaper in this country? If not they better be. They’re a lot of people like myself who enjoyed things as they were. Trying to gain favor of someone with your worldview, even though you’ll always choose the Times instead, doesn’t seem like a wise move. The loss is even more acutely felt for me because the CR is such a shithole and there isn’t a release valve there. I don’t want to be negged and personally attacked for my views.

It was something that we all had that was taken away. I’m not the only one bemoaning the changes. I prefer the WSJ both for the conservative bent of the Editorial Board AND the WSJ commenters. It was a wonderful symbiotic relationship between my beliefs and reinforcement and affirmation received by the commenters.

Tell me more. What is Dissenter? There was this one comment I read recently that had my laughing at my desk at work. It was a play on Democrats (Dhimmicrats) when referring to one of the new Muslim members of Congress. I thought that was funny as shit. I pay $40 a month for the WSJ. I read the NYT comments too. If they limit what you can comment on like the NYT what’s the point of subscribing to the WSJ. I will just get the Times which is cheaper.

Check out how these new rules are being received. Everywhere we can still comment, people are ripping into the WSJ and threatening to cancel their subs.

Yes now digs like Barack HUSSEIN Obama and Alexandria Occasional-Cortex are blocked. I haven’t tried to see if great quotes like this one from Churchill can get through: “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”

I have a subscription to both the NYT and WSJ. They’re both good newspapers with different philosophies and world views (No CR) and I read both because I mainly read op-Eds and want both perspectives. I prefer the WSJ because it hews closer to my beliefs; however, I really like it more because you could comment on every article. The WSJ reader comments were a gold mine with some really funny, intelligent posts and lots of sarcasm by people I identify with - namely highly intelligent, conservative (No CR) professionals. Lots of funny digs at the President, current political figures, etc. I have always thought the most liked commentary represented the silent majority in this country or really the the segment of the population that really matters the most. Well, they have changed things yesterday. They are flagging and censoring comments and are not allowing any comments at all on lots of articles. This is the letter I received from them yesterday: Elevating Our Discourse Dear Iconoclast Texan, Our readers like active engagement with the news. We have heard from you that you strongly desire a place to read a variety of audience perspectives, that you want posts that are thoughtful and, also, that you would like an environment in which you feel comfortable to share your own insights. In interviews and surveys of our membership and the broader public, people say they would like to contribute to audience conversations on our web site but that they have, over time, become turned off by the growing toxicity that is rampant all over the Internet. We want our web site to lead the way in pushing for elevated discourse. This week, we are introducing initial steps that will pave the way for audience conversations that more of you may be interested in reading and perhaps in contributing to. We will have more steps and new features in coming months. We welcome your feedback and you can write me at the below email address. News thrives when it lives amid a conversation between journalists and the public, and amid conversations among readers themselves. Thank you for feedback and hope you will join more of our conversations on WSJ.com. Matt Murray Editor in Chief m.murray@wsj.com The Five Most Significant Changes: Only WSJ members can participate To keep discussions free of objectionable content streaming in from outside the WSJ community, the audience conversation feature will now be an exclusive benefit for our members. Audience Conversations will only be available on certain articles and for a set amount of time To give both our members and WSJ editors the ability to focus on the day’s top stories, we will be limiting the number of open articles and closing discussions after 48 hours. You will be able to find articles with open conversations in a featured box on the bottom of all articles on our site. We’ve strengthened our moderation and will highlight exemplary responses We’ve improved our moderation process to better enforce existing policies. We have hired additional journalists to engage with the Audience Conversation to enhance the free expression of ideas and foster civility in our community. Thoughtful postings will be regularly selected and highlighted within stories to further amplify your voices. All open articles will include a question To facilitate thoughtful and meaningful discourse, a WSJ reporter will initiate the discussion with a question. This will help keep comments on point and give members the ability to interact with our journalists. We've set up an email alert system We are committed to transparency and created a system to immediately notify members when comments are approved or rejected. For more information, you can read our updated Community Rules and FAQs. These fucking changes suck ass. Reading the WSJ comments was one of my favorite pastimes. Making snarky comments and making comments about Islam are now verboten (no CR). Because CR is such a shitty place filled with people who neg if you do not follow the orthodoxy there, WSJ was my release valve. I don’t have that now because they want to silence voices like mine. I don’t know what I’m going to do now. Fuck “elevating discourse”. It means silencing those voices that disagree with the MSM.

Yup. I go hard in the paint. UVA just pissed me off with all the lucky breaks and calls going their way. I wanted a Texas team to win it. I’m spent. Goodnight

Haha yes!

Exactly. There is a lot of residual goodwill towards Tech because of the Pirate.

I’m not a Techtard. Acho is the type of guy who needs to be humbled by having someone raw dog his girlfriend in the ass and send a video of it to him.

Emmanuel Acho is a fucking cunt. He needs to be knocked down a peg or two

God you’re as annoying as Fat Bastard.

I wanted a NCAA championship for the state of Texas badly. This one hurts like UH in 83

Jesus dude you seem really calm and rational. What’s wrong with you it’s that championship game

Maybe because we are Texans dipshit

Absolute fuck job

COMPLETE UTTER BULLSHIT

This is fucking Tech’s ball. Fuck these refs