Is it ok for AusBT to delete comments they don't like from news posts?

Agreed. Removing abusive comments and banning persistent posters of such is just effective moderation.  ABT can, and should, clean up the site without constraining expression of opinion - whether ABT agrees with it or not.

Yes agreed.  I do not think the site will block counterpoints to their articles though and certainly will not become a propoganda tool for Qantas, Virgin Australia or any other airline.  The site generally has a good reputation for factual reporting.

I agree woganfan. There is an article on the website today regarding the new CX seats for the A350. A couple of posts on there do not add any anything further to the artice or discussion, yet they haven't been deleted. It is consistency I am looking for.

Perhaps they will be deleted in time, (remember people have many things going on at once and they will get to the nonsensical comments), or there are some minor issues regarding which ones are deleted.  I'm sure the consistency will come through soon though, especially when the site is relaunched. 

TruffleQueen I asked the exact same question on the exact same article and my question was removed aswell... perhaps they don't like hearing the truth... (just kidding)

I thought it was strange my question was removed aswell

I think that there needs to be a clearer and more transperent policy regarding comments and moderation if there is going to be increased moderation. The more casual approach worked when the site was smaller and the readership less active, but with articles and questions now attracting dozens of comments I feel that there is value in setting out exactly what is considered to be relevant, offensive etc rather than David taking the burden of being the sole judge. 

It's really only fair to let people know what the expectation is (however obvious it might be) rather than just saying 'nup, don't like it' after the fact. 

The site is called Australian Business Traveller and as such should be conducted in a business and professional manner,not stupidity.David or any other official of ABT has the right to reject rubbish or damaging articles full stop .

All: I'm back from the Airbus/AIX Hamburg trip and now have time to address this.

1. "Seven Tricks of Savvy Frequent Flyers" has been republished only twice (our CMS records this stuff) - once at the start of March and again last Wednesday.

2. In both instances this was done because on those days we were expecting a wave of traffic from articles in News.com (March) and Fairfax (April) which cited and linked to AusBT. This traffic consists of new, 'first time' visitors to AusBT and they naturally lean more towards articles which are slightly more accessible and mainstream than some of the topics we cover which are aimed more at the frequent flyer / business traveller brigade. It's also important to serve them articles like this which are actionable due to their links to other AusBT stories, as this in turn exposes them to more of the great content we have and increases the chance they'll bookmark us, come back again, sign up for our weekly newsletter and join the AusBT community – all of which are Good Things.

3. I've previously explained this strategy in relation to other republished articles. Yes, we do republish articles from time to time and we'll continue to do so when the timing and the article is appropriate. If I have a wave of first-time AusBT readers hitting the website I want to maximise this by showing at least one article that's got maximum click-through appeal.

4. And yes, I know that some readers notice this. But when we typically serve a bunch of new and mostly newsy articles every day, then for the sake of a handful of times a year which we might republish a more timeless article which has solid value to new readers... well, I honestly don't care if a few people grumble over that. How does it hurt you to see such an article? How does it in any way detract from your day? Think on that.

5. This is definitely not 'SEO gaming', nor does it take away from any other article we may write on that day. It's a simple editorial measure to give a bunch of new readers a 'soft entry' story to which they can relate.

6. I've earlier outlined a tighter moderation policy, and when we relaunch with the new design I hope to make this more prominent without it getting in the way. But the bottom line will asking if a comment adds to a story or the ongoing reader discussion of the topics it raises.

7. Lame and ill-informed comments like 'slow news day' which are not about the story and add not one whit of value to the story for a reader or ongoing dixcussion are suitable for the spike.