Dear readers,
This publication updates Must Read Alaska’s Comment Guidelines, last published January 29, 2020.
Must Read Alaska is dedicated to promoting rational, civil discourse. Our website is not a social media platform. We provide a platform for serious, down-to-earth dialogue about the news and issues that matter most to Alaskans. We also maintain X and Facebook accounts. These accounts are not subject to comment guidelines beyond those enforced by X and Facebook.
We welcome our readers’ ideas, whether right or left of center. However, we do maintain a set of rules in order to keep this discourse rational and respectful. Each comment is personally reviewed by the Operations and Communications Director, Natalie Spaulding. Every comment which follows our guidelines will be approved in a timely manner. If any reader has concerns about the approval or disapproval of a comment, please reach out to [email protected].
All comments must adhere to the following:
Limited to 200 words
We appreciate readers taking the time to express their ideas and engage with our content. However, the comment section is not the appropriate place to publish an op-ed. All op-eds go through a rigorous editorial process, and writers will not be permitted to circumvent this process using the comment section. If you need more than 200 words to express your ideas, you may submit an op-ed to [email protected] for consideration.
No name-calling or personal attacks
Ad-hominems will not be tolerated at Must Read Alaska. We love to hear feedback, opposing ideas, and questions. Comments demeaning an individual (whether a writer, an MRAK executive, another commenter, a political figure, or anyone else) with name-calling or insulting language are unacceptable. Comments challenging an individual’s ideas are welcome.
Limit use of expletives and explicit language
While sometimes a point benefits from a well-placed expletive, the overuse of such language hampers civil discourse. The Operations and Communications Director will approve or disapprove comments using expletives and explicit language according to her discretion. If the comment still makes sense without the expletive, just the expletive will be deleted, and the comment will be approved.
Please do not use all caps
There is no need to yell in civil dialogue. Please refrain from the use of all caps when submitting a comment.
No external links
We do not allow any commenters to include external links in their comments. If the comment otherwise follows our guidelines, we will remove the link for you and approve the comment. Sources may be cited as [title], [author], [publisher], [date].
No insulting pen names
We discard any comments written by someone using a rude, insulting, or inappropriate pen name. You may use an appropriate pen name or your true name.
Please proofread your work
Occasionally, we will lightly edit a comment to fix a substantial spelling or grammar error. If there are too many typos to fix, we will spare you the embarrassment and toss your comment. You can always try again.
Please be patient
Each comment is read in its entirety by the Operations and Communications Director. Additionally, the Director takes time to reply to comments when she feels additional questions or clarifications would benefit readers. Good conversation takes time. If your comment is not approved right away, please be patient. There is no need to submit the same comment multiple times.
Thank you for engaging with MRAK content! We trust the dialogue we have here will be to the benefit of our great, beloved Alaska.
God bless,
The MRAK Team
Agree to all terms, yet reading the title, I was anticipating a rant on the current hot issue of the “Terrible Six seditious Democrat Senators efforts to again attempt to derail President Trump’s patriotic efforts to correct the ills of many past “Deep State” Presidents (Rep and Dem) concepts of controlling the folks with deception and ill advised wars.
Well and Good, enjoy the publication.
Cheers, Al Johnson-Ketchikan
Complicated request, however, the ideal that one sect can openly endorse and promote an intention to eradicate the souls who won’t convert to their ideal but we are restricted from a word or statement in defense of love and honor of all souls.
I’ve never said kill all Muslims but they don’t belong in the USA, though those who do kill or intentionally cause the death of Patriots should be executed in public to deter continuing attemts
Amen to that Don!👍
Why don’t Muslims belong in the USA?
This new policy will likely discourage even more readers since the take over of Suzanne’s blog. If readers cannot express dissatisfaction with the new owners and the authors of the article published then what use is this publication. Sometimes it is necessary to point out how stupid a writer is or how inept the authors are in stringing their words together.
I am now only a very part time reader because my criticisms of the quality of the writing or the knowledge of the subject matter were not published. . So I will not be surprised if this comment will not be published.
The owner, Mr Faulkner is hyper sensitive to criticism and that has had a chilling effect on the readers resulting in fewer of them. Instead of allowing a free for all for commenters to express their opinions the new owner is now going to unreasonably
Restrict what is said. Bad policy. Real bad.
Hello Alaskans first, thank you for engaging with our content. In answer to your question “then what use is this publication:” the use of this publication is to inform readers about important things happening in Alaska and provide a means of civil discourse about topics that matter most to Alaskans. Our writers are not “stupid” or “inept” and Must Read Alaska’s purpose is not geared toward providing a space for personal attacks, but rather a space for the exchange of ideas. If you disagree with ideas expressed in our articles, please feel free to push back respectfully and express your own ideas!
The former editor of MRAK itself used this space to personally attack people who are not relevant to the political landscape. Will you remove those posts ?
MRAK published a photo of a woman being sexually assaulted in downtown Anchorage, re-victimizing her by publishing a photo of her, for the entire world to see, in what has to have been one of the worst moments in her life. Now that photo lives on forever.
Shame on you. Jesus would not approve.
Hello Sunshine Superman, thank you for bringing this to my attention. I was not part of the MRAK team when that image was published. If I had been, I would have strongly opposed it. I have removed the image. While MRAK welcomes opposing ideas from all sorts of perspectives, current management does not support the publication of inappropriate, demeaning, or disrespectful content.
MRAK published many reprehensible things over the years. Hence, there were always those who pushed back against it in the Comments. Sadly, the tradition is continuing over at the new SD site. But if you look closely, it does not, at least yet, seem to be attracting nearly the same level of traffic as the old MRAK. I wonder how many people will eventually migrate. The new MRAK tends towards banality and dullness, and in fact seems desperate for content with SD gone. Love her or hate her, she could put out the work that people (regretfully) craved.
“Love her or hate her, she could put out the work that people (regretfully) craved.”
While you are dishing out credit for “work” that people crave dont forget the “fake” news, The View, Jimmy Kimmel NPR(national propaganda radio) etc.
Here here!
156 words, and not even remotely close to long enough to justify an op-ed.
I concur Don Thompson!!!
Well written sir.
Alaska has changed so much since I was a kid…
My only suggestion is to have one comment section for persons with a verified real name. And an equal section for pseudo names.
Also, certain hot topics could have a moderated debate comment section with the editor keeping the debate on track.
Chris, your suggestion defeats the purpose of the comment section. An opinion/suggestion/comment needs to be able to stand on its own and be evaluated for its merit, regardless of the personality of the writer. Segregating by your arbitrary criteria (especially your demand for “verified” real names) from the outset stifles the very discussion and expansion of viewpoints this publication is attempting to deliver. This blog is already moderated. What you seem to really want is censorship! I find that very sad.
Control much.
You’ll be the type that will dox people if they say something you disagree with.
It’s called a “nom de plume”.
The practice of using a “pen name” instead of your real name, in a public forum, protects one who has controversial opinions that goes against what the majority, “Karen” type individuals, or the State agrees with or approves.
A little sus MRAK and N. Spaulding. But I will allow it.
Onward and Upward!
Great, now how,about thinning the troll infestation? You know who they are, unless you’re click-farming them
Sadly, Chuck, you are confusing trolls with people who have an opposing point of view. They are not the same thing.
No, I do not think Chuck is doing that at all. Trolling is pretty easy to spot, and it is no where close to opposing opinions. And, MRAK is awash with trolling. And, yes, I have trolled folks on MRAK myself, so I know from where I speak.
Just the sort of thing a,troll would post
I see no change in policy and intent, or even from past practice. Good to lay policy guidance out for all to see. I hope and pray that Natalie and the rest of the MRAK crew would have and practice the wisdom that Suzanne carries with her every day. I wish you the best folks, and all the commenters too – but you will run into this awful thing called human nature, and you will find yourselves censoring more than you anticipate now. I agree that a call for civil discourse is needed – nationally.
Hello Rich, thank you for noticing our policy and intent maintains and clarifies past practice. Here is MRAK’s original guidelines written by Suzanne Downing: https://mustreadalaska.com/a-few-words-about-mraks-ad-hoc-commenting-policy/. I should have made the consistency with past practice clearer to readers.
Well, it is good to see the limit increased to something like 200 words. The previous policy that was advertised at 50 words was really just too short to say anything at all.
Natalie,
I’m glad to see that you’ve (re)informed yourself on your own established guidelines, as it was clear from previous interactions regarding this issue that the publishing of comments was not following the established MRAK guidelines. Thanks for clarifying the expectations for all parties.
I wonder what might’ve happened if The Independent Journal, the New York Packet, and The Daily Advertiser had taken it upon themselves to edit the essays and articles written by Hamilton, Madison and Jay, or if they had taken offense to the pseudonym Publius. . .
Civil discourse will sometimes need more than 200 words. And, a comment of 225, or 250 words is not sufficient to warrant an op-ed submittal. I see that number as arbitrary, and in fact, I see it as limiting reader participation.
.
However, I do appreciate your posting the comment guidelines, and reminding everyone they exist for a reason. If 200 words is the limit, it is the limit.
Sounds reasonable.
Go ahead and censor me if you think my comments are not compliant with your rules. I’ll simply stop being a reader.
I’ll try hard to adhere to your comments rules , but I will say that that may be hard for me to do at times knowing the Grand Thefts of Alaska that has been allowed to occur for decades ; My late brother & I have fought them for decades , exposed them , questioned many Politicians that only gave false promises , some on video ; It is horrible that we do not have term limits , since some that gave false promises are still in Juneau .
Absolutely none of my short, none capitalized, no swear words comments in almost a week, have been posted! Whyyyyy??? I have adhered to your rules but still none have been shared.
Hello J Kirk, thank you for engaging with our content! Within the past seven days, you submitted 7 comments. 5 were approved! Only 2 were denied. The 2 comments which were denied pertained to your opinion of our no caps request and contained insulting/ disrespectful language. I understand you are upset about the “Please refrain from the use of all caps when submitting a comment” guideline. The goal here is to maintain a space for civil dialogue about the things that matter most to Alaskans. While MRAK’s website is a space reserved for rational civility, you are completely free to express your emotions on our social media pages (Facebook and X), which are subject only to the guidelines enforced by the respective companies.
First, thank you for responding so quickly. You paint me in a pretty negative light. Insulting language???? I have read some pretty nasty comments from people. Mine is nothing like that. We the people will not be silenced. This is sad.
Speech is Free.
Censored speech hurts everyone.
Have a prosperous day.