There are many reasons why I didn't go into teaching elementary school: my general dislike of math, the early mornings (web editors work from about 11-7 or 8 or 9 most days, fyi), that weird peanut butter and jelly + chicken nuggets + milk smell that lingers in the cafeteria, the crying children, dealing with runny noses and all manner of other bodily fluids (that was also a big strike against going into medicine), and the idea of settling fights between children who use name-calling and fib-telling as their weapons of choice.

Please don't misunderstand me, I have great respect for those who do go into education. I had wonderful teachers in elementary school in Schenectady and middle and high school in Burnt Hills and at Boston U. My middle sister is studying to become a guidance counselor, my youngest sister is getting her degree in elementary education and my mom works at an elementary school in Schenectady.

But, it's just not for me.

Sadly for me, the hours I spend each week moderating pissing matches between our online commenter, deleting comments that contain name calling, coarse language and much worse all feels a bit too much like refereeing the sandbox.

This was a particularly tough week for me... many commenters were driving me crazy. Crass, insensitive, inappropriate comments were flowing onto our website faster than I could keep up with them. The last thing I did almost every night was delete a comment and by the time I woke up the next day, there were more that needed to go.

At their best, story commenters provide thoughtful commentary and counterpoints. They often alert readers and reporters to additional information on stories or mistakes and, in doing so, enhance the final product of the story. The comment section also offers a forum to mourn public tragedies.

For instance, the tragic death of Eleanor Adams last month affected the entire community, not just her family and friends. In the comments on that story community members had a chance to express their grief:

TrueSaratogian wrote on Sep 30, 2010 9:00 PM:

" Our prayers now need to be with Ellie's family during this difficult time. "

judy926 wrote on Sep 29, 2010 11:33 PM:

" Our Condolences To Eleanor's Family And Friends. May She Rest In Peace. "

And then there's the less productive side of commenting.

Last month I had to close commenting on a story from 2007 about a foiled heroin sale. Two people were using the story to discuss the finer points of packaging heroin for sale and slinging vulgarities at each other. This is the second years-old story I've had to close comments on recently.

Also last month, I deleted several entries from one user who was calling the 15-year-old victim of a sex crime a "whore" and a "pig."

Remember the trial of kidnapper Victor Hernandez Perez last spring? A comment had to be removed from a story I wrote about that trial because someone with a personal grudge decided to write that the victim had it coming to her. As though her brutal assault, kidnapping and attempted rape was somehow karmic.

On a recent story about a man charged with beating and killing a Chihuahua a commenter suggested that the dog "had it coming" for being small and yappy.

Also from the deleted files: A comment on a story about Sept. 11 which linked to an online video about making a homemade bomb.

It doesn't inspire much confidence in humanity.

We're now a little more than a week away from midterm elections. Your mailbox is probably full of political fliers, your answering machine blinking from robocalls and tv commercial breaks seem like one long political ad. Also full: the comments section under every political story.

I get it, people need a place to express their opinions. But the vulgarity, the name calling, the UNBELIEVABLY IRRITATING USE OF ALL CAPS... it's just not necessary.

Calling each other "wackjob teabaggers" "morons" "retard" "stooges" "dimwit" and, the most frequently used insult: "f***ing idiot"... none of it adds much to the conversation. What's the point?

When I signed on for the Online Editor position, I knew moderating comments would be a significant responsibility of mine, but I don't want to do it passively. I don't want to simply wait in dread for yet another offensive or inappropriate comment to be posted.

In the coming weeks I want to review the rules we have for commenting and adjust them to be more effective, and I'd like your input.

Do the comments under stories keep you coming back or keep you away?

Right now we require registration, but almost no commenters use their actual names... should that be changed?

We rely heavily on readers to use the "report abuse" button to alert staff to inappropriate content, but I don't think it is used nearly enough. When someone hits report abuse, they are asked to fill in their e-mail address and a reason for reporting abuse, an e-mail is then sent to me, Managing Editor Barbara Lombardo and Copy Editor Kellen Reill (who works nights and weekends). From there any of us can review the comment and choose whether or not to remove it. Since I am rarely away from my blackberry, more often than not I am the one who does the removing. The system is far from fool-proof. Many offensive comments are not reported and although I check story comments every day for anything unacceptable -- several dozen times Monday through Friday and at least once daily on weekends -- I cannot always keep up with the round-the-clock commenting.

Our sister paper, the Troy Record, has a pre-approval system for commenting. Far fewer comments are actually posted (their most commented story right now has 11 comments, ours has 52), I'm not sure if that is because fewer people offer comment or if very few make it past their editors' scrutiny.

Moving to a pre-approval system would be extremely labor-intensive for our already-strapped staff and I believe would result in delays of several hours before comments posted. The delays would eliminate much of the back-and-forth between commenters that currently exists (some of which is thoughtful and productive, but much of which devolves into angry name-calling and hating). Would that be a better situation or a worse one?

I can see positives and negatives, I'm really not leaning toward either option.

I'm looking closely at what the newspaper websites in our region are doing and at the trends around the country for guidance. For instance, the Times Union doesn't seem to allow commenting under any news stories, rather readers are referred to a relevant blog where they can post comments. I like that idea, but I'm not sure if it could translate to the Saratogian. The Post-Star posts comments to a tab behind the story and the rules for commenting are displayed prominently in a large red box on top of the comments. They also pre-approve comments.

Three newspapers in Maine shut down their comments sections for more than a day last week citing " vile, crude, insensitive an vicious postings." The papers then reopened commenting using a monitoring system called IntenseDebate. Readers can give comments a thumbs up or down and then sort comments by their rating.

Our Rules for Commenting appear only after a user has signed in. Then they are as follows:

We encourage your feedback and dialog. We ask you to follow a few simple guidelines when commenting on stories on saratogian.com.
1) Please post responsibly.
2) Be polite.
3) Don't hate.
4) If you object to someone's post, use the "Report Abuse" button and we'll review it.
5) Users who don't play by the rules will be blocked and won't be allowed to participate.
6) Self-promotion of businesses or advertisements of anything for sale are not permitted.

I think they need revamping. What rules would you suggest?

How can I keep the discourse civil and productive without stifling debate or feeling like a kindergarten teacher?