Ongoing Site Changes and How They Affect Comments

Last weekend I spent about an hour writing a blog entry about how comments on this site were going away. This decision was made for a number of reasons including the overall tone in the comments lately, the server overhead involved in having such an active comments section, and an overall desire to somehow slow down the site just a bit to better match with our abilities to work on it. After doing some local testing I found that removing our commenting (and related up/down voting) abilities would cut our server load to less than 30% of our current usage. In other words, the site would be faster and able to handle getting slammed. Obviously removing the comments section would make many unhappy, but if it becomes more of a burden (either through server overhead, or being more detracting than beneficial) than it is worth then obviously we will have to make changes. After emailing a few people asking for their help in improving the candor of commenting here we left the commenting system in place for now.

As a sort of compromise between having commenting and not allowing commenting to bring the server to its knees - commenting has been 'throttled'. Basically what that means is that when the server gets busy (20+ logged in users or 40+ anonymous users) the comments section will disappear temporarily. If the server load goes back down in 2-3 minutes then a quick refresh will show the comments section again. Temporarily disabling these commenting abilities cuts our server load to a 1/3rd of normal - and facilitates the site staying running well and not locking up.

Beyond this comment throttling, I made a number of changes to the server tonight - which will definitely have an affect on the site - hopefully a good effect. If things go wrong then there may be issues again tomorrow (Wednesday), but hopefully these changes will add up to a more responsive site, and if they have a large effect perhaps we won't need the comment throttling.

Regarding the mention of a dedicated server.. This still remains an option, however I am going to wait a bit longer on this to first see if the changes above have made a large difference in the site's performance, and to continue to feel out if the comments section here is more useful or distracting - because we won't need a dedicated server if we drop the comments section. If we do end up going the dedicated server route we will setup a fund raiser on and go from there.

Finally, if you like the comments section here, or want to see them stay around if at all possible, then please encourage other members of this site to use them properly. This site is not a message board, nor should it be anyone's primary place of discussion. There are plenty of discussion forums out there for 9/11, and the comments here are not meant to serve as a replacement or substitute for such sites which are better built for ongoing discussions or debates. Please take the time and join up on a message board community if you have not, here is a short listing of places you might want to check out:

On a side note, the 1 minute rant on the Sam Seder show was submitted today. It will air Thursday in the 3rd hour (11am EST - 12pm EST) and I would encourage users to plan to call into the show both before and after the rant airs. Once we have a recording of Sam Seder's comments and the rant's airing we will post it here as well as release a press release. It is important that this site be up whenever this rant airs, and as such I may disable commenting or other features during this time to facilitate handling a larger number of visitors.

Best wishes all, and keep your fingers crossed that tonight's changes will get the site back in order quickly.

Thank you for all the work you do, dz

While I admit I would be disappointed if commenting went away, if that's what you need to do to keep the site going that's what you have to do.

A thought though: while I respect what you are saying about this not being a primary place of discussion, I think the reason there is that tendency is that people want to interact dirrectly with the news they're reading here and give feedback. Also, bloggers want and appreciate dirrect feedback. This might be unfeasable right now, but what about a 911Blogger Forum ? A satilite site?

Okay, Jenny's hazy on the details, but the community feel of 911Blogger is part of 911Blogger's attraction. Granted, that is also the same thing that makes us a target for disruption. Anyone have better ideas?

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

Giving constructive

Giving constructive feedback, or posting additional information, etc. on an entry are most definitely great examples of why commenting here is so valuable.. Unfortunately there are detractions as well which sometimes seem to get way out of hand at the cost of their overall effectiveness.

That's all I ask is that they get used usefully, and don't become a huge distraction whereby somehow the comments (and any ego's contained therein) become more important than the news itself and taking action upon it.

BTW, don't thank me - this site's users are what is carrying this site at the moment, because I just can't dedicate the same amount of time to the site that I have in the past. So thank you, and everyone here that contributes to it in various ways.

Best wishes.

dz -

I think that commenting is vital to the dynamic of this site, however I understand the dilemma you face and share your frustration with the pointless server clogging flame wars.

If you do go the dedicated server route you can expect a significant donation from me as I consider this site to be a critical resource for the truth movement.

Thanks for all your work.

I hope that you and yours are well.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Eliminating the comment

Eliminating the comment function would ruin the site, imo. The comments are one of the main reasons I come here. It's vital for people to be able to discuss the information posted. Abolishing comments would rob the site of its community character and place all of the decision making power into the hands of a few people. We need constructive criticism to keep things open and healthy.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

I second that.

The comments section is what makes this site so interesting.

What about automatically creating a thread entry in the forums you mention for each 911blogger entry. You could then have a link under each 911blogger news item that links directly into the appropriate forum section relevant to that story.

Another alternative would be to use something like [] to host the comments like - although I dislike the blog format since it's not threaded like on


Would be a very sad day, if they ditched the comments.

Would be better if they warned / banned abusers before such a dramatic change that affects everyone.

911blogger rocks with comments, please keep them.

Thanks for such a brilliant site.

Best wishes and good luck


I shall train an armada of pigeons lest the comment feature perished.


Let's just get a real server, we can afford it.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month


I will ignore any and all provocations from now on. And I apologize for letting myself be baited into flame wars. It will stop from my end, period.


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force



This is a vibrant site because it's a news AND discussion site.

One hundred and fourthed...

I've got tin cans and string, should the day come we ever need to re-invent the network.

Call for collection of money today... dz needs it, and deserves it!

Dedicated server fundraiser --

I posted this lower in the thread and however worthy it might be, I'm honestly not trying to be an obnoxious spammer, but second-page stuff tends to be harder to see. Nonetheless, get your wallet out and head over to dz's dedicated server fundraiser.

The comments are essential

The comments can be used to post additional information and links to supplement the original blog (which is VERY useful).

I read the comments as much as I read the entries.

Perhaps we should all limit ourselves to a certain number of comments per post. I'm not saying this should be a restriction—rather a personal choice. This is the best way to avoid flooding the blogs. Make your major points and then let it be. If you really have such a strong opinion about something and lots of points, write a blog! My two cents.

Yes, at times there can be heated discussions. I don't mind that too much, as long as it doesn't degenerate into name calling and personal battles that ignore the subject of the post. 9/11 can be an emotional topic, and this is why it can happen at times.

What I have noticed is since the implementation of register only comments; the amount of "trolls" has significantly decreased. This has been an overwhelming success. I'd rather spend time debating with people who are willing to admit they had a father and mother if it is inconvenient to their argument.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."


Try a fundraiser for a new server. I'll cough up $20. Don't laugh. But that's big to me.

And I think Colonel Sparks has a great fuzzy idea. linked every time you click on add a comment

Justice deferred is justice denied-MLK

Sharing Ideas vs. Personal Attacks

I know that DZ’s focus on the server issues is perhaps his diplomatic way of addressing the underlying issue of flame wars here. And, I know that recently I have been at the center of a few of these flame wars for taking some controversial positions on anti-Semitism in the movement. These feelings I expressed were party due to the frustration and anger I feel over how the Arizona conference was painted in the media, how CNN portrayed the movement recently, how disruptions in NYC have taken to using Nazi imagery – including photos circulating of DZ himself juxtaposed against Nazi imagery.

Certainly everyone can agree that the Nazi imagery being circulated associated with 911Blogger is not a good promotional tool for the website. And, since the “anti-Semitism” holocaust denial reputation has been reaching the mainstream press, it is my prudent opinion that this is a very serious problem.

So, when I see holocaust denial subjects showing up on these boards – I react.

I remember DZ at one time making the very salient point that an open forum is a great tool of freedom of speech – but unfortunately is wide open to attack and abuse as well. And so we are faced with a double-edged sword here. If we shut down the comments section we are effectively capitulating to disruption techniques that include posters who attack Stephen Jones and advocate no-planes theories and space beams and Judy Woods and Jim Fetzer and – yes – anti-Semitism and holocaust denial. It is my opinion that SOME of these individuals WANT to shut us down.

On the other hand, keeping the comments section wide open also creates some major problems in that these boards can be used to spread disinformation and smear the reputations of activists. And while it is very useful to allow people to express their opinions – it is quite another thing for a handful of posters to troll these boards and control them by openly accusing people of being ‘government agents’ and ‘paid by Larry Silverstein’ SIMPLY for expressing opinions that they wish (for whatever reason) to suppress.

Awhile ago I received an email from Jon Gold which was also addressed to many of the most prominent and influential voices in this movement. It read as a virtual who’s who of 911 Truth activism. In that email he asked if they would be willing to visit 911Blogger and perhaps ‘chip in’ and share their ideas. It would be great to have prominent names in this movement show up and be visible and available to the public. Very few accepted that invitation. I do not know why. But, I wonder what sort of environment we are creating here if we do not PROTECT contributors and prominent members of this movement if they WERE to choose to show up and post comments under their own names? Would they be attacked as LIHOP or ‘Hang-outers’ or “patsystan” advocates or ‘shills’ ?? Would they be accused of taking money from Larry Silverstein?

Surely you are aware that the more influential a person is the more of a target they become.

I myself enjoyed some success with my film. And I believed that by showing up and participating here, using my real name, I could express my opinions unmolested, and add some value to the dialogue. Sure, people can disagree with me. People are free to PASSIONATELY disagree with me. That’s what debate is all about. But, when people openly accuse me, repeatedly, of taking money from Larry Silverstein (without a shred of evidence to support such a claim) this is simply a bald-faced lie designed to intimidate me, silence my opinions, slander my reputation and control these boards with one set of belief systems.

I think 911Blogger is a great site – and the administrators are doing a great job. But, I do think there is a legitimate issue here regarding disruption – and if prominent members of this movement (or anyone else, for that matter) cannot show up here under fear of being accused of taking money from Larry Silverstein – then this is no different than the utterly bald-faced lies and accusations that Nico Haupt and 911Researchers levies against people to intimidate and silence them.

JA, are you aware...

That the Arizona "holocaust" smear campaign, has been admitted as a coordinated effort by 9/11 truth "debunkers" to wreck it.

This was probably supported by other "anti-truth" factions also.

More Info :

911blogger rocks because it supports free speech, I love it because the majority of members are "top class"...

Long live free spech, 911blogger comments and the ability to vote them up or down.

It works very well and would be "crazy" to change such a winning formula.

Just my tuppence...

Best wishes

I know

its one of the reasons i have been pushing for coordinated legal action.

i have been having extensive conversations with one of the founders of and she reports that the attacks against this movement have been EXPONENTIALLY increasing. some of it is quite mind boggling and scary. It has gotten to the point where it is so out of hand that many feel it is the #1 challenge to this movement in 2007.

at the same time - with all the recent revelations in the news of FBI abuses of the Patriot Act and the recent abuses at the Justice Department - now may be the time to expose governmental abuses against this movement.

i think Blogger is a great site also. but, i think there is value in discussing this subject.

i think that deserves a quote...

And I think it's safe to say that some of us seemed to know all of this instinctively, while others played right into the hands of these disruptors.

"I know this didn't come through when I blogged it, but then I had to adhere to guidelines, which I am not free to disclose at this point. And this is not to mention the push to all but invent the crisis of Holocaust denial among the twoof movement, though in fact, it is no more prevalent there than anywhere else.

In the same vein we were to tolerate Nico Haupt and I'd been explicitly advised to visit his news aggregator. At the time it seemed odd, but I then I saw so much that seemed to confirm the "truth" movement was a scam. I should have been more suspicious, but as this was where my head was at the time, I only saw it as validation. This was a point of contention between James and I: first I was supposed to push Nico's 911Blogger parody, that included Nazi imagery as amusing, then I was told I must acknowledge it's offensiveness but defend Nico's free speech rights."


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force


I appreciated that bit too.

I appreciated that bit too. It highlights the hyposcrisy of "debunkers", though it turns out this might all be a ruse to increase traffic at SLC.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

What if it was put up by a

What if it was put up by a misguided Truther?

Your point? You're not imply

Your point? You're not implying RT did it, are you? ;-/

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

Doesn't seem like his kind

Doesn't seem like his kind of stunt, so no.

I'm just saying that there is no evidence that any debunkers were involved in perpetuating this hoax and it doesn't do anybody any good to lay blame in that direction based on nothing. I think it's much more likely that somebody in the "Truth Movement" got fed up with the Screw Loose Change crew and this was his or her response.

That's what it looks like on the surface anyhow, and unless there is some good evidence for a contrary position I don't see why we should assume something that's counter intuitive.

Well, I as a general point

Well, I as a general point of policy, I would take NOTHING at face value that comes from "debunkers", or even "alledged debunkers".

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

Could you provide any reason

Could you provide any reason to believe that a debunker was involved in perpetuating this hoax? If not the you are, by definition, being unreasonable.

What the hell are you on about?

Not taking ANYTHING a debunker (or alledged debunker) says at face unreasonable, how?

Or are you having one of your reading comprehession problems? You sound like you want to start a fight about NOTHING.

Don't make Jenny post links...

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

You asked "How is 'not

You asked "How is 'not taking ANYTHING a debunker (or alleged debunker) says at face value unreasonable?"

In this context your skepticism towards debunkers appeared to me to be a way to defend your previous position that a debunker or, more precisely, someone from Screw Loose Change was behind the "Pat Hoax." Please correct me if I'm misconstruing what you meant to suggest. Have you changed your mind about who the likely culprit would be?

If you haven't changed your mind then you ought to be able to provide a coherent and compelling reason for your belief that somebody from Screw Loose Change was behind the hoax. I agree that the things debunkers say can't be taken at face value but see no reason to believe a debunker is involved in the "Pat Hoax." Could you provide me with any evidence that implicates a debunker, circumstantial or otherwise?

Basically you can't turn your lack of evidence into evidence, sorry.

You are a very confused man...

..if you cannot tell the difference between a) thinking out loud(throwing ideas out while being married to none of them) and b)actively pushing a theory about this hoax.

But then communication DOES seem to be a problem with you.

For the record, considering the evidence available, NONE of us has the answers here. And the idea that the hoax was to increase SLC traffic came from some other board--I didn't invent it. It's just an idea.

EARTH TO MISTERGUY--this isn't important--it's just a curiosity. Stop acting like it's one of the key's to 911 activism.

Moving on here.. let's see if you can--WITHOUT responding further. ;-)

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

I would say that taking this

I would say that taking this phony confession seriously and spreading it around as good info is playing into the hands of the disruptors.

The voting system...

Does not work well. My blogs get voted down all of the time. Like the one that was my interview with John Feal, and my delivery of his check. Surely that deserves a 1 right?

Compare that to some of the Holocaust Denial posts that have gotten between +6-+10 votes. WHAT?!?

There are also people intent on voting down everything I say, regardless of whether it's good or not. It seems there are "teams" of individuals who's sole purpose is to vote certain people down on this site.

That being said, and as someone always tells me, "You're the highest rated poster here, quit your whining".

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

I first gave you a down vote,

before giving you an up vote. (someday maybe we'll see the end of popularity voting.)

What a timely illustration below, of the very trouble dz's having here in our 911 Romp-a-Room.

The "Holocaust Denial" discussions have had elements of extreme importance trying to separate those two words in the context of overarching 911 truth... that you continue to join them is if you don't know.... is simply frustrating. I went to synagogue too, yet completely reject the manipulation of this subject by non-jew-jews (the greater purveyors of confusion on this, in my stupid opinion). Please stop. That's why the negative vote... and for your suspicions of a roving band 'out to get you'.

I swapped that to a positive vote (which IS getting boring) in the hopes that you will quite whining. Your extraordinary work towards truth and justice will never go forgotten by me.

p.s.: The site loads of internecine flame-wars, voting, and external 'attacks'... are not soon to ebb before we earn the satisfaction of flowing truth. Stand strong.


But there is a "roving band" that votes me down, regardless of what I say or post. It's been that way for a while, and confirmed as well. Whether it be Nico & his merry band, or others, it does happen. Especially to me.


"Your extraordinary work towards truth and justice will never go forgotten by me."

You say that as if my time is done. As if my relevancy is retired. Rest assured, I'm not going anywhere, and I'm JUST as relevant as ever.

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

Just so you don't think it

Just so you don't think it is a conspiracy - I voted you down for whining.

And I didn't...

Even use your name as the one that told me to quit my whining...

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

is there a difference

between whining and legitimate feedback?

you raised these questions - and I do not think it is whining to point out some of the obvious problems.

Or is this some sort of a Darwinism 'survival of the fittest' type of situation where people can simply be bullied and slandered off these boards for expressing opinions that differ from a particular clich of people?

Are their any boundaries worth noting here?

Or is this simply a free-for-all truth-be-damned slamfest of 911 activists mudwrestling for control of Blogger?

i would personally concur with Jon on the voting problems - and not just based on my own experiences. all in all i fair pretty well.

But, I will give an example. I have seen one poster - Mister Guy - whose posts are voted down - and out - without regard for their content. He appears to have crossed the wrong person at some point - and now is censored whenever he even attempts to engage certain people in debate.

yet - a review of his posts indicates to me that he has some valuable feedback to share. in fact - i tend to agree with most of what he posts. but i think it is clear that the table is not level when engaging certain people. somehow people will suddenly get habitually voted down regardless of the content of their posts.

just an observation - and - to me - i kinda sense some sort of manipulation of the system in some of these exhanges.

Mister Guy - sorry to use you as an example - but if i'm wrong please say so.

I was just joking with Jon

I was just joking with Jon and I'm sure he knows it.

I do occasionally do random checks for any sort of abuse of the comment voting, but have found none so far. Generally there are just those out there that do not like one another, and so they vote down every comment they see by that person. Likewise there are those who come off as jerks to those unfamiliar with themselves and as such end up being voted down as they appear to be jerks.

Perhaps the better question is, should I email users about their voting of comments which I disagree with? Like if someone calls another user a profane term which is totally out of line, and others vote it up, should I warn them?

I think...

That if people are consistently touching on subjects that stir up a mess of problems, or if someone purposefully "flames" someone, consistently, then you should perhaps email them a warning, etc...

I also think everyone that posts here should have two things on their mind as the priority:

1. Is there something relevant I can contribute?
2. Is there any activism I can partake in?

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

I don't think you're wrong.

I don't think you're wrong. My approach now is to simply not concern myself about whether my comments are voted up or down.

I think it would be worthwhile to institute a rule that a person can only have one account here. I think it's possible that a few members are voting on multiple accounts.

This is something which I do

This is something which I do routinely look out for.. I have only found 1 person that has done this, and that was resolved quickly. Obviously I would not keep the system if I thought it was being abused - but obviously i can understand why those who cannot see the votes might think otherwise sometimes.

If you limited the accounts

If you limited the accounts people had to one then you wouldn't have to police the voting. Of course you'd still have to keep your eye out for multiple accounts.

with all due respect

anyone could download a proxy server plugin for their browser, shuffling their IP address at will. I'm not sure how you can reliably check it a person uses multiple accounts.

anyway - this was a constructive discussion and we can now watch what develops.


why not just be transparent

and let everyone know who is voting up who and who is voting down who and then it's right there for people to see. why the secret ballot?


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force


If it's technically feasible

I would be all for that.

I have some reservations...

but I would be willing to give it a spin...say a month? Then give it a review and go from there.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

No cliques, no cabals...sorry.

IMO, that is not even a remotely accurate assessment of what is going on here, with voting. That's all I'm going to say and I would describe myself as someone who observes this board closely.

The only reason a person

The only reason a person would want to eliminate the term Holocaust Denial is that they have bought into lies from characters like Ernst Zundel. When a person knows that there was a final solution, that there were death camps, and that millions of Jews were killed during World War 2 then the term "Holocaust denier" can be seen to be an accurate description of a person who denies those facts.

This is a hoax story, of

This is a hoax story, of course.

While I agree with your

While I agree with your point--Holocaust is being agressively used to smear 911truth--I'd go with caution on the Prison Planet thing. This might be an elaborate hoax.

Even so it's probaly only a matter of time before a "debunker" does admit to their shady methods.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

you don't know what i would give

to catch one of these f*ckers. whether it is the debunkers - or disruptors - or disinformation crew - i would pay cash for a smoking gun linking one of these guys to a government agency.

Comments like this create dissension

"If we shut down the comments section we are effectively capitulating to disruption techniques that include posters who attack Stephen Jones and advocate no-planes theories and space beams and Judy Woods and Jim Fetzer and – yes – anti-Semitism and holocaust denial. It is my opinion that SOME of these individuals WANT to shut us down."

This comment by Albanese is clearly trying to create the idea that Profs. Wood (spell her name right next time) and Fetzer are not a legitimate part of the 9/11 Truth movement. Those of us who support the research of these two eminently qualified people, do not accept Mr. Albanese's crude attempt to link them to disrupters and holocaust deniers.

I myself am a big fan of 9-11 Blogger and have helped financially, as dz can attest, so I am definitely not a disrupter. Nor am I an anti-semite.

The Arizona conference, by having Jim Fetzer and Steven Jones both participate, helped greatly to show the world that we are a TRUTH movement that is open to diverse areas of research, and not the narrow sectarian group clinging to a politically-correct orthodoxy that some appear to want us to be. And Bob Bowman, in his great conference-ending speech, warned us about the danger of warring among ourselves over issues such as "planes vs no-planes".

Let's keep 9-11 Blogger open!

I'm new here but . . .

I'm for a dedicated server. How much would one cost more or less?

I got a quote last week for

I got a quote last week for a server..

P4 2.66Ghz, 2GB RAM, 120GB storage, 2TB bandwidth, fully dedicated server = $199.99/mo + $80 onetime.

Right now our google ads are bringing in about $80/mo, so we would only need about $120/mo extra - or $720 every 6 months.. I already have about $200 pledged via email, and I will setup the fund raiser soon if we go that route.

Thanks everyone for the input, it is important to hear.

this is a good cheap hosting company


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force


hrm.. none of those plans

hrm.. none of those plans appear to be fully dedicated, but rather shared servers - which are no longer an option.. plus their bandwidth only goes up to 500GB a month.. i looked at their sister site for VPS solutions, but those won't work either..

thanks for the suggestion though!

Dedicated server.

dz has set up a fund-raiser (and written a blog about it.) It's not much money for six months -- and there's really no reason anyone with any disposable income who enjoys comments here shouldn't get over there and donate.

Cough it up, people.


This web page is an awesome tool for getting to the truth.
All your effort is appreciated.