Posted on 5 June 2026 by SkS-Team

From time to time, we announce housekeeping items that cover various changes in the Skeptical Science (SkS) web site. Today, it's an important one for all people who are posting comments on our articles: an update to the Comments Policy.

Reasons for the Updates

The Comments Policy is an important document at SkS: not only does it provide guidance for the behaviour of commenters, but it also provides guidance to the moderators on how to deal with comment threads that are starting to go off the rails. The moderation team strives to apply a reasonably uniform level of moderation, and the Comments Policy is the set of rules we follow.

We have been discussing some updates internally over the past few weeks, and now it is time to have the changes go live. The changes have been prompted by a few recent comments that started to use AI to generate text. (We'll stick with the formal definition of AI as "Artificial Intelligence", although I am sure that readers will have their own favorite interpretation.) Moderators have been asking commenters to limit their use of AI, but there is nothing in the previous Comments Policy related to AI. That is now changing.

Essentially all of the previous Comments Policy (archived here) is still in force. There are a few changes in wording, and the order has changed slightly, but if it was in the old Comments Policy, it is in the new one. The updated Comments Policy groups the various policies under six headings, as follows:

• Purpose
• All comments must be on topic
• Speak for yourself and back up your argument
• Civil Conduct
• Account creation and usage
• Summary

The new material falls under the "Speak for yourself and back  up your argument" heading. The main text in that section talks about the  importance of providing links to relevant information, explaining what the reader should find at those sources, etc. SkS is about the science of climate change, and scientific discussion expects references to relevant material and proper citation of sources. Two items from the old Comments Policy are located here: "No sloganeering", and "No link or picture only". But there are two new items of importance, related to copying large blocks of text or images from other sources. The first item covers copying from regular sources such as journals, reports, web pages, etc. The second specifically covers the use of AI-generated text.

Using AI in comments

In essence, when you use AI to generate text and want to add it to a comment, you are no longer speaking for yourself - you are quoting a different source. Proper scientific citation rules require that you indicate that you are quoting a different source, and provide a reference to what that source is. To quote from the updated policy: "Quoting or copying material from other sources without a proper citation constitutes plagiarism, which is not allowed."

The use of AI is not banned, but we are placing strict limits on how it can be used. Full disclosure: after we wrote the new sections of the Comments Policy. we asked the Gemini AI to suggest if there were options to improve the sequence of the various items. Gemini suggested grouping the items into several categories. We had already grouped some items into the "Speak for yourself and back  up your argument" category, but the remaining items were still in a simple list. Gemini suggested grouping the remaining items into a few categories. In the end, we went with different categories (and labels for the categories), but we did find the Gemini suggestion useful.

....and this demonstrates a reasonable use of AI: ask it for help, look at its suggestions, but apply your own judgement to the results. The SkS Comments Policy is an SkS product, and we need to be willing to stand behind it. It is the voice of SkS, speaking to all our readers.

Small change in wording

The astute reader will  notice one key change in the Comments Policy, compared to the old one. In the old policy, we referred to "global warming". In the new one, we refer to "climate change". The second phrase is more all-encompassing with respect to climate science, and makes more sense in the broader view covered here at SkS. Before anyone gets their knickers in a knot over this change, we suggest they read the "Global Warming vs. Climate Change" rebuttal that sits at the number 89 spot on our Global Warming and Climate Change Myths list.

One last point: although "Moderation complaints are always off-topic",  this is one blog post where limited discussion of moderation will be allowed. Behave yourselves, though.

And now, a copy of the full new Comments Policy:

Purpose

The purpose of the discussion threads is to allow notification and correction of errors in the article, and to permit clarification of related points. Though we believe the only genuine debate on the science of climate change is that which occurs in the scientific literature, we welcome genuine discussion as both an aid to understanding and a means of correcting our inadvertent errors.  To facilitate genuine discussion, we have a zero tolerance approach to trolling and sloganeering. To that end:

All comments must be on topic

Comments are on topic if they draw attention to possible errors of fact or interpretation in the main article, or if they discuss the immediate implications of the facts discussed in the main article. However, general discussions of climate change not explicitly related to the details of the main article are always off topic. Moderation complaints are always off topic and will be deleted. To expand on this requirement:

• Make comments in the most appropriate thread.  Some comments, while strictly on topic, may relate to issues discussed in more detail in some other thread.  Extended discussion of those points should be carried out in the more appropriate thread, with link backs to reference the discussion as needed.  Moderator's directions to move discussion to a more appropriate thread should always be followed.
• Comments should avoid excessive repetition. Discussions which circle back on themselves and involve endless repetition of points already discussed do not help clarify relevant points. They are merely tiresome to participants and a barrier to readers. If moderators believe you are being excessively repetitive, they will advise you as such, and any further repetition will be treated as being off topic.
• No copying and pasting earlier comments. Comments repeated from earlier comments (or from other websites) will be moderated. However, short excerpts from earlier comments are accepted if making an on-topic point, preferably with a hyperlink. Note that with each comment, the date/time is a hyperlink. If you link to this URL, clicking on the link will take you directly to that part of the webpage.
• No spamming. Spamming will result in deletion of comments and suspension of the account without warning.

Speak for yourself and back up your argument

When you are posting comments, it is expected that you are speaking for yourself and are willing to back up your argument with relevant information. We encourage you to provide links to relevant scientific papers and reports, images available on the Internet, and sources of information that provide additional detail regarding the points you want to make. You need to explain in your comment why such sources are relevant, and what a reader should expect to find in that source. You are the one making the argument, and the reader should not have to spend large amounts of time trying to figure out your point. As a consequence of this policy, we also state the following:

• No sloganeering.  Comments consisting of simple assertion of a myth already debunked by one of the main articles, and which contain no relevant counter argument or evidence from the peer reviewed literature constitutes trolling rather than genuine discussion. As such they will be deleted. If you think our debunking of one of those myths is in error, you are welcome to discuss that on the relevant thread, provided you give substantial reasons for believing the debunking is in error.  It is asked that you do not clutter up threads by responding to comments that consist just of slogans.
• No link or picture only. Any link or picture should be accompanied by text summarizing both the content of the link or picture, and showing how it is relevant to the topic of discussion. Failure to do both of these things will result in the comment being considered off topic.
• No cutting and pasting of large blocks of text or images from other sources (journal articles, reports, web pages, etc.).  It is reasonable to include one or two paragraphs or images in your comment from a scientific source such as a peer-reviewed paper or report, but this should only represent a portion of your comment.  Provide a link to or a clear identification of the original source - this is the standard approach to scientific citation. Quoting or copying material from other sources without a proper citation constitutes plagiarism, which is not allowed. The reader must be able to find the original source, in order to verify the material. If the source you want to refer to has a lot of material that you think is relevant, provide a summary of what you want the reader to see and provide a link so that the reader can easily access the full material. If you are unwilling or unable to read the source and provide a summary, then there is little reason to think that the source is on-topic or relevant. Moderators may delete such posts as off-topic.
• The above ban on pasting large blocks of text also applies to AI-generated content. If you want to use AI to help you understand the topic, then that is your choice. Keep in mind, however, that AI sources are energy-intensive and you should ask yourself if that cost really provides a value-added contribution to the conversation. AI-generated content should be kept to a minimum, identified as such, with indications of the source and key words or questions used to feed it. As is the case for any other links, images, quotes, etc., provide a summary of the AI content to demonstrate that you understand it and see it as relevant. When you add AI-generated content to your comment, you are no longer speaking for yourself - you are quoting someone (something?) else, and need to cite the source.

Civil conduct

All participants are expected to conduct themselves in a civil manner. More specifically:

• No accusations of deception.  Any accusations of deception, fraud, dishonesty or corruption will be deleted. This applies to both sides. You may critique a person's methods but not their motives.
• No ad hominem attacks. Personally attacking other users gets us no closer to understanding the science. For example, comments containing the words 'religion' and 'conspiracy' tend to get moderated. Comments using labels like 'alarmist' and 'denier' as derogatory terms are usually skating on thin ice.
• No politics. Rants about politics, religion, faith, ideology or one world governments will be deleted. Occasional blog posts on Skeptical Science touch on issues intimately related to politics.  For those posts this rule may be relaxed, but only if explicitly stated at the end of the blogpost.
• No ALL CAPS. You can't have a civil, constructive discussion if you're shouting.
• No profanity or inflammatory tone. Again, constructive discussion is difficult when overheated rhetoric or profanity is flying around.
• No cyber stalking. Posting personal details of another user results in your account being banned from Skeptical Science.
• No dogpiling.  In the interests of civility and to enable people to properly express their opinions, we discourage 'piling on'. If a comment already has a response, consider carefully whether you are adding anything interesting before also responding.  If a participant appears to be being 'dog piled', the moderator may designate one or two people from each side of the debate as the primary disputants and require that no other people respond until further notified. On topic comments on other matters not being discussed by the primary disputants will still be welcome.

Account creation and usage

• No multiple identities.  Posting comments at Skeptical Science should use only one registered screen name. Use of more than one account will result in all accounts being banned.
• You are not allowed to use two different identities at the same time.
• You are not allowed to create a second identity to replace an identity that has had its posting rights revoked due to an inability or unwillingness to follow the Comments Policy.
• Commenters must register a valid email address. To register and confirm a user account at Skeptical Science requires a valid email address. 

Summary

Please note that posting on Skeptical Science is a privilege, not a right. We try to avoid harsh application of the comments policy in the interests of a free flowing discussion, but expect your cooperation in return. If that cooperation is not forthcoming, moderators will resort to a very strict application of the comments policy to your posts, and if persisted with, it will result in deletion of your posts, or the suspension of your posting privileges. If we all followed these guidelines in any discussion, perhaps the world would be a calmer and more constructive place.

The Comment Policy page was already updated on June 4, 2026 in preparation for this housekeeping blog post's publication on June 5. Any comments posted after this announcement will be moderated based on the new Comment Policy.