When Comment Sections Stop Wanting Readers and Start Wanting Actors
I recently left a comment on a blog post I genuinely enjoyed. It was thoughtful. It referenced the article. It asked real questions that came up while reading. In other words, it sounded like something a real reader would write. The comment was not approved. The explanation I received was interesting.
I was told the comment sounded “too polished” and might come across as fake or AI-generated. What they really wanted were short, casual comments that looked like someone stumbled in from Google, picked one small point, and asked a light question.
That moment stuck with me. Not because my comment was rejected. But because it revealed something bigger about how many online spaces now operate.
Engagement Versus Appearance
There is a difference between engagement and the appearance of engagement. Engagement invites thought. Appearance manages perception. When a comment section exists to support credibility rather than conversation, real curiosity becomes inconvenient.
Questions that challenge ideas feel disruptive. Depth feels suspicious. Clarity feels “too much.” Not because it is wrong, but because it interrupts the flow. And flow matters when the goal is persuasion.
When Thinking Becomes a Problem
My comment raised questions about pricing, content quality, and the growing trend of repackaged information sold at premium rates. These were not accusations. They were natural questions any reader might have. But those kinds of questions slow people down.
They make readers think before they trust. Before they buy. Before they move forward. And in some spaces, thinking is the enemy. So instead of welcoming the discussion, the solution becomes asking the commenter to sound less thoughtful.
- Less structured.
- Less articulate.
- Less themselves.
That is not about improving communication. That is about protecting a narrative.
The Quiet Shift in Online Culture
Many websites no longer want readers. They want signals. They want comments that look organic, feel casual, and reinforce trust without introducing friction.
- Not dialogue.
- Not disagreement.
- Not depth.
Just enough activity to reassure the next visitor that “others were here. That turns commenters into actors. And it turns conversation into set design.
Authenticity Cannot Be Curated
Real readers do not all sound the same.
- Some write short reactions.
- Some write reflections.
- Some ask layered questions.
That variety is not a flaw. It is the proof of humanity. When only one type of voice is acceptable, the space stops being authentic, no matter how carefully it is managed. You cannot manufacture trust by filtering out thought. And you cannot build credibility by discouraging intelligence.
A Simple Boundary
If a space is built for performance, that is a choice. But it should be named honestly. Because asking someone to shrink their thinking in order to appear more “natural” is not about tone. It is about control. I do not expect every comment to be approved.
But I do believe this: If you invite responses, you should be prepared for real ones.
- Not rehearsed ones.
- Not strategically harmless ones.
- Real ones.
Because the moment genuine engagement becomes a problem, the conversation was never the goal.
Canty
Join FREE & Launch Your Business!
Exclusive Bonus - Offer Ends at Midnight Today
00
Hours
:
00
Minutes
:
00
Seconds
2,000 AI Credits Worth $10 USD
Build a Logo + Website That Attracts Customers
400 Credits
Discover Hot Niches with AI Market Research
100 Credits
Create SEO Content That Ranks & Converts
800 Credits
Find Affiliate Offers Up to $500/Sale
10 Credits
Access a Community of 2.9M+ Members
Recent Comments
42
I think, in today's times when we as content creators seek subscribers & followers on social media and it is acceptable if we share direct links with them, then shouldn't we move away from the pretension of having comments only by an organic traffic? The commentators can be people who follow us on a platform, including WA. And it should be OK, if those are not an organic traffic.
Each of us here at WA heve different expectations. Some overlap and many do not. Some people just want....
Canty
Yes, that is the most fascinating part of human brain. In any given situation, it is not guaranteed that peoples' perspectives and expectations would be aligned.
I'm sorry to hear that the blogger that posted an article wasted your time but not approving your comment which probably took a lot of time and effort to write and leave out so if I were you, I just scratch them off your list and move on to the next....
Myra ♥️
Hey Ronnie,
I'd love a comment like yours rather than the type of message that seems to be more standard and doesn't read like genuine engagement.
I like comments where it's evident the reader has actually taken time to read my articles and where they raise questions about the content. Seems curious that your message wasn't approved.
Head over to my site, I'll approve your messages anytime! Lol.
Thanks for this post, very curious shift happening.
All the best
Cherie
See more comments
Join FREE & Launch Your Business!
Exclusive Bonus - Offer Ends at Midnight Today
00
Hours
:
00
Minutes
:
00
Seconds
2,000 AI Credits Worth $10 USD
Build a Logo + Website That Attracts Customers
400 Credits
Discover Hot Niches with AI Market Research
100 Credits
Create SEO Content That Ranks & Converts
800 Credits
Find Affiliate Offers Up to $500/Sale
10 Credits
Access a Community of 2.9M+ Members
Hi Ronnie,
What I am about to say will bring me a lot of prejudice, especially from newer members. Veteran members will understand the point I am trying to make. Still, if I may, I would like to use your article to highlight a few common and frequent aspects related to how comments are offered on this platform.
This does not mean that I am questioning the quality of the comment you left on that article. Since the comment was not attached here for me to form a personal opinion, all I can do is address things in general terms.
Starting from the premise that any action brings different perceptions, your comment also determined the perception of the article’s owner. From your perspective, the comment was engaging. From his point of view, it was not.
Let’s start from the beginning:
1. In the title, you said something like “Comment Sections Stop Wanting Readers,” which is not true at all. The reality is that very few people read an article completely anymore.
Most read a bit at the beginning, catch parts of the middle and the end, and maybe go through a few questions. Excluding articles that are AI bullshit or copy-paste, there are still people who put effort, time, and energy into creating an article that truly brings value. Those people do want their article to be read.
2. One aspect that many members omit is what is actually expected from a comment (see the attached image).
Most do not even notice that section when leaving comments. They jump directly to “What a beautiful article,” or they review the article by repeating things that are already written in it.
In 98% of cases, a member who puts effort into creating a valuable article will not accept such a comment. That is clear.
3. A comment that brings engagement includes a clear reference to a specific point that triggered a cognitive reaction in the reader, a personal experience that extends the article, and/or a logically formed question that invites reflection while keeping the conversation going.
This does not mean a performing act; on the contrary.
4. In most cases, comments are written entirely by AI, which is why the text sounds “too polished,” even if the ideas were suggested.
If you want a comment to be approved, make an effort to touch at least one of the three aspects mentioned in point 3 and write it yourself. You cannot go wrong with the human touch.
5. Many members leave comments only for credits, even if the category the article belongs to is not of interest to them. This is a factor that generates most low-value comments.
Although my comment could easily have been an article, I chose to leave it as a complementary comment to your article. It was a reminder for me and, I hope, a roadmap for the other members.
Diana.
I definitely understand where you're coming from especially in the age of AI now. When I was fully engaged in the comment sections years, I always made it a point to leave a question to get more info or more of an understanding of some points of the article. This is still not a guarantee your comment will be approved even when following the correct points or guidelines.
Back before AI took hold and was not a part of WA, I made full use of the comments section here at WA until I had one particular comment rejected that really had me fuming. Now I've had just a couple rejected before this particular one and while I wasn't happy about it, I definitely understood their reasoning and moved on. This particular rejection, I did not and I left the comment area for a LONG time.
The comment I left basically was that I was really intrigued about the MMO program the person wrote about and I wanted to know more information about it so I simply and politely asked what is the pricing of this particular product because it was not mentioned anywhere in the article. My comment was rejected on the basis that I should NOT ask or inquire about pricing because it does not matter. He claimed that the product is so good that it is worth getting no matter the cost and that I should be willing to pay whatever it is. I was FUMING after that and I did send a message to this person letting them know that is not how you treat someone with genuine interest in said product especially if they want to know about the pricing since it was never mentioned anywhere.
This happened years ago and so after I long period of time, I slowly started coming back to the comments area, but more sporadically. Because of that experience, I'm using a little more of a different approach this time.
Thank you for disecting my article. To start, the article's owner gave an example of the responses they expect. I didn't and will not put anyone specific on blast; therefore, I said what I said in my article and reserve the right to vent.
As far as your five points, the article wasn't that serious. Trying to explain/justify what people say/do/believe is up to the individual in that moment. None of us are the same and think/act/respond differently.
Again, thanks for your input,
Canty
Unfortunately, you weren't supposed to ask intelligent questions or appear to have more than a third grade comprehension level.
Go figure,
Canty
Hi Brian,
There can be many different cases. In your situation, it is clear that the person in question was ignorant and arrogant, and that their interest was by no means to build a stable business based on transparency and genuine connections. Their only concern was to push sales aggressively, without taking into account the key fundamentals of a business. And there will be more cases like this.
Personally, I always recommend that before leaving a comment, you take a moment to browse the website, especially the About page. See how the person presents themselves, whether they have a clear identity and coherent positioning, the consistency and style of their writing, the quality of the website content, what types of comments they accept, and whether they respond to them. These are just a few examples, but I believe you understand the idea I am trying to convey. All these clues will give you perspective and help you understand how to frame your comment.
I hope you won't let a negative experience deter you and that you continue to participate by leaving comments, especially on articles that fall within your areas of interest.
I wish you much success both personally and professionally, and a new year that brings you direction and concrete results.
Diana.
Thanks, Diana! Wishing you the best as well.
Canty
Thank you for that. I left the comments area for a long time after that, but I do see the value in it and so I'm slowly getting back into that. I never thought about checking the About Me page which is an excellent idea.