Comment: Grappling With Anonymous Comments Issue

Reader opinion on allowing anonymous comments on articles is obviously sharply divided, as shown in our reader survey this past week, ""

With 113 votes cast as of this writing, 34 percent said yes, 36 percent said no, 27 percent said yes with prior registration of the real name (not to be published), and 1 percent chose undecided. (Total doesn't equal 100 percent due to rounding.) It was not easy to select a Comment of the Week from the many thoughtful responses, which raised key issues and reflected the complexity of the debate. To provide a taste of the discussion, we are highlighting the comment by Luke Sides:

This sort of thing is the worst at sites such as Yahoo, making it impossible to read and not worth the time. I see both sides of the argument. It’s not fair to be accused of something by an anonymous person but yet without that protection, some facts will never get out. Even if someone is registered with a name, there’s no way to prove that’s the poster’s real name. Even Facebook which requires you to register with your real name, have no way of regulating or enforcing that rule. I think in the end, it’s up to the editor to regulate the comments being posted.

In regard to the WR (Windrush) stories, considering that there is a total of close to 1K posts, if not more (I haven’t counted), I’m surprised to see only few comments that are out of line considering how many heated issues are involved. But when comments are out of line, people usually call them out, hence self regulated.

• Editor's note: The "Comment of the Week" doesn't necessarily reflect the view of El Cerrito Patch. It's chosen according to what we believe will be of general reader interest. For other examples from our "Comment of the Week" series, please click here.