Update 2: 3 March 2009. Added an acknowledgments section.

Update 3: 4 March 2009. Added an exception to the “Relevance” rule. Now zero-content-praise comments are allowed in some cases.

1. The main comments that triggered this policy have been deleted and I cannot “resurrect” them for the purpose of this discussion because they were in the “defamation” category. Bringing that content back opens PuneTech up to legal liability.

2. In one case, it was a long personal attack against the author of an article, not talking about the issues in the article, and had at least one factual inaccuracy. Had to delete that based on our understanding of defamation law.

3. Here is another example of a comment that I had to delete:
I have heard that you do not have any of your own software and u have mixed of pirated software and that is the reason when my Technical Person called you to visit your facility, he was told that you do not allow people inside later on we have come to know that you are having all pirated software but you do not have anything of your own

I am able to reproduce it here because it does not give any indication of which company this comment is directed towards. But as soon as this were to be attached to a specific post (or contains name of the company) this is immediately defamatory, and grounds for suing. You would agree that this is not appropriate for PuneTech.

4. In a third case, I had carried an excerpt from a news report of some software being developed in Pune. A commenter is pointing out that this software is stolen. I deleted it and let the commenter know why. Now they are pointing out that this was in the news some months ago. I can’t find the news item online, and I can’t carry the comment unless I confirm that the news item indeed exists and says what the commenter says. (Note: if the news item later turns out to be false, the said software company can sue PuneTech for damages. Yes, sadly, this is the law. I don’t think it is in the best interests of PuneTech to get into this.)

In this particular case, a carefully worded comment that points to the source of the news might still be OK to put on PuneTech, because it does contain information that would be useful for the readers. If indeed there is dispute about the copyrights issues with some software, then it is our duty to inform the readers. But we need to tread very, very carefully. So we are still keeping a dialogue open with that commenter and hoping that we can reach a mutually agreeable comment that we feel can be carried without putting PuneTech in jeopardy.

Makes sense?

5. Requests for jobs! I post an article about company X. Some idiot posts a comment on PuneTech saying that they want a job with company X. This happens on a regular basis. In some cases in the past, I allowed these comments to remain, because we did not have a clear comment policy. Now we’re going to delete all such comments in the future.

6. I’d like to re-assert that we do NOT have a problem with carrying comments that disagree with us, or with the author of the article. Take for example your interview on PuneTech. There were comments that disagreed with that article, but we left them in because they were each raising specific issues that they had a contention with. And lots of credit to you as well as the other commenters for keeping that discussion polite and civil.

Sridharo: Changing ToS,Comments Policies…..this is what WEB is NOT about.

PuneTech: @sridharo, Web has always been about moderation. Every unmoderated forum gets taken over by idiots and trolls and becomes useless.

Sridharo: @punetech Truly said.But you know in many cases,the comments actually enhance the post. Remember Slashdot?

PuneTech: @sridharo that is why our comment policy encourages relevant comments (whether agreeing or disagreeing) and deleting irrelevant/illegal ones

Sridharo: @punetech completely agree to your second case…rest all seem overdone…imho….

Sridharo: @punetech Esp since the site is techie..a post about programming lang wouldnt have many ‘off the mark’ comments.We arent into philosophy

PuneTech: @sridharo Right. most of our comments are relevant. But forced to define the comments policy after a few ‘off the mark’ recent comments.

@IamSB, if you say XYZ doesn’t understand a thing about technology, and the rest of your comment gives reasons why, or gives counterarguments, or simply lists the specific technical issue on which you have a difference of opinion, your comment will certainly not be deleted.

If you say “XYZ doesn’t understand a thing about technology” with no further explanation, then you are on the borderline. Basically, in my opinion, for a reader, this comment is not very useful. Chances are that we will delete it, unless there is something in the context or previous comments that makes this oneliner useful.

Does that make sense?