I can see thE potential for a Lot of Abuse on this.

The threads on some of my reviews get bogged down with crap that has nothing to do with the topic. Youtube allows users to own their threads and delete off topic and abusive comments. It works good.

Update: This is a good example of getting a disagree (Automatt) for no good reason. Youtube allows its users to get rid of abusive crap comments.(which I like) Matt say he disagrees with me ( because he likes me soo much) RIA does the same thing, they just don't allow the member to do it. I'm sure Matt enjoys reading comments about motorcycles on a political post.

Thanks for being crystal clear.

I'm not so sure about this. Wouldn't this just lead to censorship?

I've seen this implemented on sites like Flickr and YouTube, where if you post a video or a photo you can delete comments underneath it that you don't like.

Does it work? The comments on YouTube are still pretty much the worst comments I've ever seen on the internet. Whenever my faith in humanity grows too strong , I can go read YouTube comments.

On Flickr, there's a "block" option, which prevents people from posting comments on any of your photos, and people use that a lot, because after all, once you delete a comment it's pretty easy for someone to just repost it again.

Rereading this I'm not sure if the other reviewers are referring to off-topic reviews left on items on your list, or off-topic comments left on your review. These are two different issues. For the former, there's the Flag a Review feature, where you can mark a review as Off-Topic.

We don't currently have a good solution for off-topic comments on a person's review, but I'm hesitant to say that allowing the review owner to simply delete any comment they don't like would solve the problem. I'm curious what other people think about this.

On some sites like Digg, you can down-vote a comment, so below a certain threshold, it doesn't show up by default, but it's still there. On other sites like BoingBoing, a moderator will "disemvowel" comments that they think are putrid, which leaves the comment there but makes it hard to read. Another option might be expanding the use of the flag feature so that users can flag comments.

I'm of two minds on the issue. On one hand, I'd like to be able to police the content of my lists. On the other hand, I'm concerned that people will misuse the feature as they have in past to delete stuff for the sake of being a dick to someone that they either don't like or don't agree with, and then we're tampering with content, which I think was the whole reason RIA stopped allowing this.

Get rid of it. If people create a weblist, the theory is that they are inviting public opinion and debate about the subject. The thing about public opinion and debate is that, as soon as you open yourself up to it, someone is very likely to attack either yourself, or your ideas. It's how people respond to these attacks that make a site like this interesting. Simply making it go away.....droll.

I have never deleted any comments left on my list, so I really could care less either way on this. I can see where in some cases, as PzKpfw_VI_E points out, deleting posts can be necessary in order to minimize the number of nonsensical comments left on weblists.

ClassicTVFan is absolutely right! If weblist makers use good judgement, they can eliminate comments completely irrelevant to the list, that way the weblist manager can get sincere comments and ratings, instead of postings by some moron who just wants to trash the list, etc.

Damn straight. If you can't take a little heat don't put out the list. If you truly have faith in Lawrence then let him sort out what is and what isn't appropriate. Deleting posts simply because you don't agree with them is childish. Grow up and take the negative posts or don't make new weblists, it's as simple as that.

I think this would be useful, but then again the option is useful in itself. For example, my 'Best Guitarist' list, people well give Hendrix a one star because they like Clapton or vise versa. I feel that if someone gives a musician like Clapton or Hendrix a one, they have to properly explain why, because both are great. So, I usually delete any nonsence. This also occurs on my many WW2 lists, where some people have shown obvious bias towards certain things, giving them lower ratings then necessary and not explaining it. I think it is useful, and I hope it stays.

Don't care either way; though I'm not a big fan of those who remove comments which are neither offensive nor off-topic (those occasions which I've seen/experienced were mostly simply a matter of the listmaker disagreeing with the sentiment rather than removing an offensive remark), it reveals and speaks volumes of those who utilize the function in that fashion. If you don't want to hear dissent, don't make a list asking for people's opinions; you're bound to be dissapointed.

Not a bad idea. Might eliminate or minimize the pinheads who use their lists to settle scores.

Deleting posts left on your web list, means its your web list, we should all be able to agree to that. So if it is your web list you should be able to edit it as you see fit. If you leave a post and it gets deleted, oh well its not you list. The point of the weblists is that you can come up with a list and over see it yourself, releasing RIA from taking care of all the list everyone comes up with. On my lists if the post has nothing or very little to do with the topic, its gone. This is called quality control, a term that some on this site have no clue about what it means.

This is a pretty tough call. If someone makes a weblist, they should expect to see all kinds of opinions and shouldn't censor those opinions. However, we should still have the option to delete something because of foul language or something improper. Glad it's not my decision.

No. Some people have different standards than others. If we create the list, we have the right to manage it as we see fit.

The only time I delete anything is when they blaspheme my God. You can say anything you want about me and I will leave it. I don't like it when people say F... this or that but it's their intelligence at work not mine.

I don't use it anyway and don't think others should either but I suppose some people find it necessary to have it around. My only question is why post a weblist on an opinion website, only to delete anything you don't like?