Commenter approval is something I never really acquired at Gizmodo so I'll drop my  2 cents here on my own site. At the same time it'll most probably give them that all important traffic that everyone is vying for on this virtual arachnid home even if it is only a slight "trickle".

Having been a frequent visitor of the Gizmodo gadget blog for some time its strange to see a particular post about comments. I'm not sure exactly how many visitors they do actually get. But if it’s the case that they are getting the traffic despite all the complacency I reckon they can be as stringent or as lax about their comments screening process as they like. Personally I think there are more then enough other websites to visit other then Gizmodo if any potential punter didn't actually like what the Gizmodo collective do in terms of the content they provide. But I guess it would be foolish of them not to take into account the more sensible feedback from the more sensible sections of their readership in order to hold onto their readership who in a sense are their customers. No doubt the team at Gizmodo do read and consider carefully any valid constructive criticism that they do receive even if they don't publish them for the general Gizmodo punter to see.


As for their heavy Mac slant they have rocking over there I don't really have any issue with it. At least you know what to expect when you visit the place and the whole Mac thing has kind of become their thing. Just to clarify I don't even own a Mac branded machine other then my 5th gen iPod that’s had a broken hold button for damn near a year now. I generally just skip over the articles/blogs I don’t want to read to then just read those ones that are enticing enough to tempt my interest. However I think for me personally its become a lot more complex then that. I would most likely read all the articles if I could but for other reasons I have to be very selective about the ones I do read no matter how damned good an idea it can sometimes seem in the collapsed teaser. I don't really know any grown adult that would intentionally stab themselves with a pin to decide it actually hurt and that they didn't like it to then continue to repeatedly stab themselves with the same pin in exactly the same place over and over again. Clearly they would have stopped the first time to then go onto to do something else instead. Which brings us on nicely to the fact that there are more then enough other places to comment or even vent beyond the realms of the Gizmodo website which to all intents and purposes should be relatively free of Gizmodo's jurisdiction in regards to what people can say. (The limitations of which I guess are entirely dependent on what the people that run those sites find acceptable if its not your own)



Its not like the people who visit the Gizmodo website are contractually obliged to read the content that’s on their site in any exclusive capacity and nor is anyone invested in some sort of strange personal relationship of some kind that they can't just go somewhere else in lacking some sort of closure. I think people are more then capable of collectively organizing themselves when they want to given how many an internet phenomena manifest to induce mass collective numbers of people to partake whether online or in the real world.


Other then that there's more then enough interesting and informative content on Gizmodo despite the fact that some of the writers do in fact act like complete pricks at times. But that’s just the way it is. Just because a couple can be complete tools doesn't mean they all are.


Bottom line? Just go somewhere else if you don't like it? The fact that people stay when they apparently don't have any reason to within the vast expanse that is the internet must mean they want something from the place.