B5Media Blog Network Launches

Source Title:
New blog network: b5media launches
Story Text:

Duncan Riley, Darren Rowse and Jeremy Wright have formed a new blog network called B5Media that will be paying it's bloggers a 40% revenue share.

Good luck boys.


40% - Woweee

Don't these bloggers realise they can have 100% of the revenue if they set up their own blogs.

P.S. Just off to launch my own blog network, I'd happily give my bloggers 75% of the revenue and still have trouble sleeping at night thinking I was a cpaitalist pig exploiting the workers.

It does seem rather low

It does seem rather low doesn't it?

I mean, isn't it normally done that the majority get the majority and the few skim a minority off of the majority? - sheesh, did i really say that?

You know what i mean thouguh, i hope...


If you were writing a book or magazine article you wouldnt get 40% would you? (unless you are JK Rowling or self publishing)

My personal blog gives me 100% of what adsense pays .. about enough for a latte a month .. 40% of something is better than 100% of nothing. And there are other reasons for blogging other than cold hard cash.

"majority get the majority"

I think to are eluding to the 80/20 rule. 80% of the money from 20% of the users (or whatever)

In the case of Jason's network, when I analysed that a few months ago, it was certainly the case, a small number of his blogs bring in most of the hits. And I would suspect get a much better deal than the blogging equivalent of the poor bloody infantryman.

b5Media will no doubt be in the same boat, and are bound to get some deranged bloggers signing up. It costs b5Media little money or time to set up, so anything they get from bloggers is profit presumably.

I think it's a superb idea -

I think it's a superb idea - contact lots of people and tell them that you want them to do work for you, but not get paid for it, excepting that they can get a minority commission on the advertising revenues you eventually earn from their work.

EDIT: Anyone looked at the blogs on the network? Don't exactly say "quality" or even "content".

.. exactly Brian

And its just so easy that anyone can do it :)

What I would expect to see is that each of these Blog Networks will start up, then the successful bloggers (i.e. the ones who make some money) will splinter off into their own network where they can perpetuate the ripoff on new unsuspecting bloggers.

If they have any sense they will probably take all their content with them and republish it under the new network - with all that implies.

I dont see what the problem is

Maybe I am daft but I don't see a single problem with it. I owe a large part of my career and the stuff that comes from it to writing for little or no money. I am by no means successful but I can trace the little successes I have had directly to helping people in communities and writing articles. Sometimes you do not need direct financial compensation to be richly rewarded.

2 posts a day required from bloggers

Practically speaking, this means that your blog will stay active (at least 2 posts per day during the week),

One of the advantages would

One of the advantages would be being directly plugged into a network, with a certain amount of traffic and promotion thrown in as part of the mix.

Whereas i'd not consider doing it for myself, i can see why some writers might like to build a name for themselves then move on when rep is built...


Practically speaking, this means that your blog will stay active (at least 2 posts per day during the week),

not only that, they say in the contract that all the work you publish belongs to them.

Adsense is still just like

Adsense is still just like 50% of what Google gets payed.


to be fair you haven't presented the pay scale correctly. All bloggers on b5media get the first $100 in advertising revenue on each site they write for and then 40% after that. For example if the revenue was $200 from the site in a month the take would be $140 (or 70%) or $300 would be $180 (60%) for the blogger. We aren't going to see a cent from a lot of these sites for months. Sure, its not the highest out there, but I'd also aren't exclusive either like some other networks, we are aiming to promote the bloggers as well, their own sites and other projects with other people, indeed we've got people writing for us who are working for other networks as well. Its also not demanding, its a min. 15 posts a week gig. Its is literally a part time job which has the potential in the longer term to return good money for the bloggers, and even potentially launch them onto bigger and better things. In the longer term once things get rolling well also be exploring things like different pay structures (like set monthly rates) for those who are interested in them.

blog networks are "the new

blog networks are "the new black"

>$100 pffft... If the blog



If the blog makes any reasonable money, who cares about $100?

I think im with kali, i dont think i'd be happy paying bloggers on a commision only (bar some beer money) @ 40%!

Should be 80% IMO

Time Will Tell

how we share the revenue with bloggers in the network has been soemthing we've toyed with for quite a while. We've researched how some of the other networks do it and considered the options. The $100 and 40% method is our starting point and soemthing we'll test over the coming months. We don't want to go chopping and changing it too often - but the reality is that if it doesn't work we'll change it to something that does.

Time will tell whether bloggers and network core team members think its a good system for all concerned by whether they continue to run with it.

I know when I first started blogging that if someone had offered me this type of deal in exchange for a well designed, optimized and promoted blog where someone would look after finding the best income stream and seeking advertisers for me - I'd be pretty tempted.

It's not for everyone - but judging by the caliber of those who are applying to join in - there are quite a few people who see it as something that fits with their blogging aspirations.

I think I speak for Jeremy and Duncan here in saying that we are open to suggestions on better ways of doing things - it's easy to say '40% isn't enough' - but we're interested to hear other options and solutions if anyone has them. As I say - its something we've debated and researched - so we're open to people's ideas.

blog networks are "the new black"


I'm not sure that long term the feudal model has legs.

Networks: Deja vu all over again

Been here before. Themed website networks were all the rage back in the 1990's when banners paid big money. I remember a lot of scifi and gaming networks back then. There are still a few that survived from that time but most have fallen by the wayside.

A big problem is ownership of content. The blogger has done all the really hard work to gain traffic and readership - then they sign with this network and suddenly they don't own the rights to what they produce from thereon out. Something wrong with that, especially on commision payment.

The other problem is that some blogs will be cash cows while others will be dogs. About.com ran into that problem with some sections, except when they cut the income dogs out they also cut some of the best content and some of the reasons people made About.com into a destination.

60 posts required a month

If they make only the example given of $100, that's about $1.50 a post.

Cannot really see anyone queuing up for that sort of money.

It really is, as NFCC says, the "feudal model"


I really think this is between the network and the authors to decide what is fair and what isn't.

In magazines I get paid by the word or a flat fee. Nowhere near 40%. In fact the article I submitted last week I did 1200 words for free.

Book publishers I get paid a royalty % and advance. Nowhere near 40%.

As far as I know all of the content on threadwatch is provided free gratis by the authors. Some of this content is written by experts in the fields and blogging networks would love to have them.

I am seriously struggling to understand what is motivating the criticism...

reminds me of advice from a friend

I can't recall the number of times Lots0 mentioned how important it was to keep control of your content and what a bad idea it was to let it become part of a network that someone else controlled.

>>I am seriously struggling

>>I am seriously struggling to understand what is motivating the criticism...

It's more fun than the google getting sued story...

I think the problem you are

I think the problem you are running into Chris is that you are comparing a blog network to traditional publishing models. On the web there is less need for that sort of stuff.

The whole point of the web is that nearly *anyone* can publish whatever they want.

Another interesting point is what happens if any of the individual blogs get sued...does the network eat the $10,000 in legal bills or remove the content and lose credibility, or do they put those legal bills and that decision in the hands of the 40% earning writers?

Most of you are coming at

Most of you are coming at this from the understandable site builders viewpoint. You already know how to build a site, set up hosting, blah, blah, blah. Many bloggers or people who fancy themselves writers and authors, really don't want to be involved at any level with the IT aspect of the job. Yes they could always go out and use blogspot or some other service, but do they know how to market the site, drive traffic, or even want to be involved with that in any way, or do they just want to have their voice heard by as many people as possible? That's what the blog network can bring them. Cross promoting blogs across the blog networks with "Blog Network X Week in Review" or "The Best of Blog Network XYZ" can do wonders for lifeless blogs with no readers.

disclaimer: I am working on my own blog network, not affiliated with the B5Media project in any way.

You might be right

seobook, yeah you might be right but I still disagree. The graph of the web in terms of traffic and attention is not flat. "Where you say it" is as important as "what you say" and "how you say it" :O)


>Cross promoting blogs across the blog networks with "Blog Network X Week in Review" or "The Best of Blog Network XYZ" can do wonders

I don't think it is wise to assume that just because gawker and weblogs inc have passed the SE's sniff test that everybody else gets a pass.


Agreed NFFC but you do see an awful lot of it going on, the key would seem be make sure you have a blog network, not a splog network. Might be an interesting idea for a famous and well known search engineer to address on his blog.

Agreed.. as well

Graywolf, would be interesting to see Googles take on it. When is a network not a "bad" network?

it's easy to say '40% isn't

it's easy to say '40% isn't enough'

Sure, it's easy to say so because it ain't. Do the math. The more successful a writer's blog is, presumably because of the writer's talents, the less of a cut the writer gets. Not very motivating.

Turning it around would help, a sliding scale upward as those used in many sales commissions: the more you sell the bigger the cut you take home.

The ownership clause is quite flabbergasting. Very, very rarely does a media outlet own full rights to a writer's work. It's actually almost unheard of except in specific work for hire situations. For commentary, creative writing, much reportage, etc., ownership usually is held by the writer with only specific rights granted to the publisher.

Not sure why you have to buck "traditional" practices.

Some thoughts from b5 guy #3

Jim: I completely agree that a sliding scale would work best. Honestly, we struggled for 3 weeks trying to come up with a payment system that would both empower bloggers and actually earn b5 some money.

We also needed a system that was simple enough for anyone to grasp quickly.

For now, this is what we're using. There's nothing that says that in the future we won't go sliding scale, flat rate, true WFH, etc. Ultimately it will be up to our bloggers to decide what works best. They're the ones that matter to us in this.

In terms of content ownership, I think you'll find that writing for most major newspaper or publishing companies (I've done a fair amount of this) gives them "exclusive rights and unassailable right" to use your work.

This is standard. Some practice more loose terms where they license it from you to use, but having done pieces for most of them (and having just glanced through the contracts), work that I've always done under work for hire was always licensed exclusively to them.

Realistically, though, our perspective on "we own the content" really just means that if the shit hits the fan, we're the ones who have to deal with cleaning up the mess. It also means that if the blogger leaves, we don't need to delete posts (nor will we find the content suddenly show up on a new blog in direct competition to us) and that kind of thing.

It's a practical thing that simply sets boundaries... If those aren't appropriate boundaries, though, I'd love to know ones that would be appropriate for our bloggers.

I could get all chintzy and say "nobody's complained yet", but the reality is that we all know that there are better ways to do this yet. We haven't found them, but I'm sure somebody out there is smart enough to figure out a way to balance the needs of bloggers with the needs for a company to make money.

more than $$

someone could choose to blog their for exposure -- if any node in that network gets high traffic, it will spread to the rest of the sites in the network via cross promotion, sidebar links, etc. From my perspective, you're giving up 60% of your revenue (and 100% of ownership) in return for having experts advertise/promote/code your blog. [I can understand why most Threadwatcher-types would never go for this, but I can also understand why some other folks would]

e.g., I blog @ Threadwatch for no $$$... Nick gets free content, I get exposure. Exposure = worth something.

onestly, we struggled for 3

onestly, we struggled for 3 weeks trying to come up with a payment system that would both empower bloggers and actually earn b5 some money.

And you came up with this?

You're not trying hard enough. And you're not thinking long term. You know this isn't a good deal, but i'll go one further and say that it's a rotten deal.

Making a quick buck now isn't what i'd be looking at, I'd be looking at getting 100's of bloggers, not 10's of bloggers - give them 80% and skim 20 minus costs off the top of LOTS of blogs.

With that model, dont expect to be making any money over the next year, but do expect, indeed, anticipate, happy bloggers, and lots more of them.

I think your payment plan is short-sighted.

Not standard

I just can't agree with you here Jeremy. After more than 20 years in publishing -- on both sides of the fence -- I do know that "exclusive rights and unassailable right" is far from standard.

Authors don't actually sell an article to a newspaper or magazine, what they are actually selling are specific publication rights, such as First North American Rights, One-Time North American Rights, First and Second Serial Rights, Non-Exclusive Worldwide Rights, etc.

Newspaper reportage and commentary is something of a mixed bag. For most established reporters rights can be negotiated between the parties; columnists usually retain ownership of their work.

And yes, as I noted in my post above, work for hire is different. If you pay me to write an article or a book the resulting piece is yours to do as you please. Put your name on it if you'd like as I never owned any rights to it.

As you are not contracting with your bloggers to write specific pieces that might fit well under a work for hire contract, I think a better model might be for you to treat your bloggers as "columnists." That is basically what they are after all. It would be a win-win if you can come up with something where the blogger retains ownership, assigning only specific rights to the network.

IMHO - It's arse about face

Your model effectively rewards those who don't generate you the revenue and penalises those who do.

If it was me I would be looking at paying 40% up to $100/month and increasing the percentage thereafter. Set the scale to encourage those who make you the money. At least that way you inspire loyalty in your peasantry (to use the feudal analogy) - for the most part they will be content if they know that if they earn you another couple of hundred they'll take an extra 5%. They have targets to attain, and given that most people don't think outside the box will not be inclined to look for alternative publishing networks.

Currently with your model you will find that you are servicing a lot of low income blogs, and that you will have very great difficulty retaining top earners. And I know its a well worn path but if it follows an 80/20 rule then 20% of your blogs will provide 80% of the income (at only 20% of the overall cost) - business is about making a profit not about propping up lame ducks and I just don't see how your business model differs from selling crutches for ducks.

>>nor will we find the content suddenly show up on a new blog in direct competition to us

I'm not sure that you will be able to enforce this one - it is exactly what I would expect to happen as soon as your higher earning bloggers realise there is better money to be mde elsewhere.

Negative PR

>>nor will we find the content suddenly show up on a new blog in direct competition to us

I'm not sure that you will be able to enforce this one - it is exactly what I would expect to happen as soon as your higher earning bloggers realise there is better money to be mde elsewhere.


Could you imagine the negative PR it would generate for a blog network if the best bloggers leave on less than favorable terms and leverage their popularity to explain WHY they left.

Just what the internet needs

Just what the internet needs - more blogs.

Just to balance things out..

I'd just like to mention that if B5 can generate advertising for the blogs that pays 2.5 times what an individual can get off their own back then it becomes worthwhile.

Having a decent size network could make this possible, maybe not to your average TW poster, but quite probably to Joe Blogs the non-techy blogger.

Rotten Deal?

I'm not sure it's a rotten deal. Our hope is that we'll either go to a flat-fee model (bloggers like it) or something which is more based on actual value the blogger brings (pageviews + comments received + links=$ or something).

For now, this was simple enough to launch with.

If a single one of our bloggers complains about it, then we need to figure out something better. But even if they don't, we want to see our bloggers properly rewarded. To me, this model is fairest for bloggers making less than 500$/month. After that there is less and less incentive.

This story is far from over, and the fact that you guys (many of whom I know and respect) see issues with it shows me we have some work to do - even if our bloggers aren't complaining (maybe they don't know any better).

But, I still don't think this is a rotten deal ;-)

It's all about quality

I think that it all comes down to a question of quality. There are different levels of quality when it comes to blogging. You have:

1. Quick quality - Like Gawker, which is quick hits, essentially light commentary, good for driving a lot of traffic.

2. High quality - Like Problogger.net (one of B5 owners). Each post is well thought-out and helpful and well written.

I'm assuming B5 only wants ultra high-quality content. Or maybe some of the blogs are going to go for the quick hit. Maybe a combo?

Each blog should be paid differently. The time it takes to write a well thought-out blog entry, as opposed to the time it takes to link to a story and write a one sentence comment about it is radically different.

For example, each needs to post twice a day. A quick hit blog could spend 15 minutes a day writing blog entries in total, while a high quality blogger really needs to spend an hour or two a day writing high quality stuff.

So, should the person who spends 15 minutes a day make as much as the person who spends 2 hours a day? I don't think so.

Quality matters, then you can price value.

> So, should the person who

> So, should the person who spends 15 minutes a day make as much as the person who spends 2 hours a day?

By the end of the day we all live by the value of our work - one way or another. If the high quality article can drive as much more traffic and revenues as it takes to write it then yes, the author should be paid more. However, that is far from allways the case. Crap makes a lot of money. Just look at the press and book industry :)

Personally I would love quality to win over crap but just don't think the odds are very good that it will ever happen.

Having said that, I do believe you can make decent money on quality content. It's just a different game than crap content.

I actually wrote a long

I actually wrote a long comment about why I chose to blog for b5media, but I just erased it and will offer this more simple statement. How much do you think it would cost to have Jeremy market your blog and solicit advertisers for you on a daily basis? How much would you need to pay Duncan to critique your content or hire Peter Flaschner design a beautiful custom blog template for you? How much would it cost to hire Darren to offer AdSense optimization tips for your blog on a daily basis?

This is what I get from them every day for being a writer on their network. Then I can go back and apply this knowledge to my other blogs outside of the network. So I get all of this first class consulting (plus some $) and all it costs me is a couple of blog posts per day. I've even received advice from them about my blogs outside of the b5media network. My blogs outside of the network had about double normal traffic levels this morning due to exposure they proided.

If you already make as much money from blogging as these guys then great, you probably don't need b5media. I, however, feel that I have something to learn from everyone and will learn as much as I can from them. It might not be a good deal for everyone, but it sure is for me.


I remember when Weblogs Inc launched the business model was a) authors owned the content and could start another site with it if they decided WIN was not for them b) there was a 50/50 split, but this was changed quickly to 50/50 *after* the first $1000.

More on that at their corporate site.

This was changed at somepoint and people are making flat fees per post now. Not everyone enjoys that investment/startup feeling and instead just want a paycheck.

So what's your subject

So what's your subject tflight? url?

c'mon now

Nick - you're beating on these guys sayin 40% ain't enough when you don't pay your bloggers at all? Your bloggers agreed to work for free and B5's agreed to work for 40%. A deal's a deal last time I checked ;)

I should also comment

That it's not easy to make money via blogging. Darren, Duncan and Jeremy have the advantage as far as being able to pull this off, to get pubicity, to get traffic, etc...

Sure, you could go ahead and start your own blog, but I think that 99.9% of you will fail horribly in terms of real revenue. It's not easy.

This type of network will give you instant exposure, and a much better/real chance at revenue. The rules are rules in the contract you sign, they are very clear about it. If you don't want to abide by them, don't sign up and do it yourself, but don't complain they are being unfair.

Personally, I think it's a fair deal knowing what I know about the gentlemen who started it. You have to decide for yourself.

So, if I were a blogger on the make...

why should I choose B5Media rather than Weblogs Inc??

Presumably there is little diference in the money?

which network to choose?

cornwall: I think it will ultimately come down to which style you think is best (not just b5 and WIN, there are lots of other ones out there).

You'll make more with WIN, but you'll also face stiffer competition and have to write a lot more (5+ posts per day).

I love the WIN guys, so I'm not going to bad mouth them at all. If you like our style, feel free to drop me a line (jeremy@ensight.org). If you like theirs, choose them. They've done a great job at creating some huge blogging brands :)

I'd like to say we're "different", but the reality is that it's too new for me to tell you for sure what's really different. The best bet is probably to give us a month or so, and then email the bloggers themselves to see what they think :)


>How much do you think it would cost to have Jeremy market your blog and solicit advertisers for you on a daily basis?

I doubt people are soliciting advertisers for EACH blog on a daily basis. Not too far back I bought a sitewide link on Jeremy's website for $75 for 3 months when the link was worth far more than that.

Look at the relevancy of some of the links currently on some of the sites and think to yourself "if I were a search engineer..."

To be clear on this point I also sell ads for some blogs, and I am not calling people every day. Another friend who does the same is not either. Most the blogs seem to primarily rely upon AdSense anyhow.

>How much would you need to pay Duncan to critique your content or hire Peter Flaschner design a beautiful custom blog template for you?

100 blogs in 100 days...you could probably get a free critique if you wanted one.

>How much would it cost to hire Darren to offer AdSense optimization tips for your blog on a daily basis?

Well if you are doing a good job I can't imagine that it would need to be tweaked daily (as that could likely alienate users). Plus AdSense is a fairly open business model. It is not that hard to see how to do what someone else is doing if they are crowing on about how much $$$ they make and are willing to publicly identify all their sites. All you have to do is look at their sites.

Nick - you're beating on

Nick - you're beating on these guys sayin 40% ain't enough when you don't pay your bloggers at all?

It's quite a radically different set of circumstances here oilman. This place acts very much like a forum, although in truth it's probably closer to being a blog.

Everyone posts here and doesn't get paid. The "bloggers" were asked if they'd like their own dedicated sections on TW, on the basis that i really liked what they write here anyway, the only thing they get out of it is exposure, and a ready audience.

TW does not have a contract with any of it's bloggers, or any of it's users.

Different kettle of fish ya know?


Our hope is that we'll either go to a flat-fee model (bloggers like it) or something which is more based on actual value the blogger brings (pageviews + comments received + links=$ or something).

Actually, I think the revenue share model is quite a good model, and that flat fee is even more exploititative and the other pageviews+comments etc model is too complicated to be effectively scalable.

And I will accept that the owners of B5Media have a good reputation, and are likely to honour their contracts.

Also despite what seobook says there is definitely value in having input from people with the skillset of the B5 Owners, not everyone is as clued up on generating revenue out of websites as most of the TW posters - the majority of whom have been at it for years.

Also I like the fact that the guys have openly posted their terms and conditions for potential bloggers to peruse before making a decision on joining the network.

So in general I think the model is right - the only difficulties I foresee are with the level of payment and the lack of a success incentive.


You could go with a hybrid model. Pay a flat rate for posts when the blog is new and under development. Once things get underway a revshare arangement is the way to go. Nick's idea of 80/20 may be a little too far in favor of the blogger IMHO, assuming of course the blog network owner is doing something to add value along the way, and not just covering the hosting.

moderately different kettle

moderately different kettle of fish I suppose but signed contract or not you have several bloggers (regular posters aside) that have agreed to blog on TW and recognize a certain set of benefits that they receive from contributing in that manner

Some of the benefits:

Permenant url and feed
Instant audience
Some kind of signature on your blog - something to link back to your work site (as this would really benefit anyone wanting to get across their expert status to potential clients etc)
I would naturally get ad revenue - that's all.

They give something you give something and you've even outlined the details to some extent. Seems pretty contracttual to me ;) B5's contract is just more formal.

I wouldn't call it

I wouldn't call it contractual, but i don't mind if you or others do. It makes little difference in the end.

It's just my way of giving some of our (and the invitation is still open to all) some of our regular posters a little more recognition.

So far, it's worked really nicely i think.

Nick, TW, vs. Blog networks

From my perspective Nick has always been about frankness. True or not, it sure seems he says what he means. Contrast that to any business where the natural order is "worker bee" vs. "owner". Owners have other agendas and drivers than workers.

Nick says give away 80% NOW and keep 20% instead of thinking long term - I totally agree. And look at his approach to blogging at TW. Start NOW, casual-no-obligation OPPORTUNITY, see how it goes, and evaluate later if there is more commitment to be made. Sounds consistent.

Blog for a network and you have to agree to terms. That has risk, and you need to balance risk/reward. It is an entirely different "kettle of fish". I know Nick will residualize anything I write for years to come, and I know that if I don't blog good stuff now I get no real benefit, and the opportunity will pass. Sounds more like a deal than a contract to me.

btw, I am working on my blog

btw, I am working on my blog network too...

I wish them great success, I've learned a lot from them. :)

Schoolyard vs. Teacher's Lounge

I don't know why my first post had to be that one, but that's how it is. I have been roaming on this site for long enough now and I finally made the untimate step of registering. Why?
I don't know.

Schoolyard and Teacher's Lounge, that's how I would flag those 2 sites: TW and B5M.

Nick is beeing fair I find, he doesn't need to pay anyone for posting in here. As he says it so well, it gives bloggers exposure. But I'd also add that since the users don't really have any obligation or any contract to abide by, since they are on other sites (their own most probably) trying to write good content all day, it transforms this site into a schoolyard, where we have group A of kids challenging (or even sometimes dissing) group B. Why a schoolyard? Because just like in a school, these people come here to unleash their stress, have a break from work. I wished we could call that a constructive discussion, but unfortunately we can't. Whoever thinks that Nick should pay people for posting here or for giving him long-term residual income, just stop beeing jealous and find yourself a brilliant idea like he did and you won't have to cry over the hundred dollar you would have made for posting here (that's if your posts are even interesting).

On the other side, Duncan, Jeremy and Darren are setting some obligations and only giving 40% revenue share. And what? You don't like it, just don't sign-up or give a constructive feedback explaining what could be done better (like the more you generate revenue the more you make money, because honestly, I don't know how this slipped their minds). I don't need to repeat what a lot have already said, so I'll bring in something new. We all know that the internet is so big, with newbies joining by the day, to the point where even Yahoo! is still able to sell domains when there are so many selling for cheaper. B5media will attract a lot of people that have some skills in writing but not in internet marketing or advertising. Again, if you don't want to be crying over the $100 more you would have done if they had a better payment structure (which am sure that business owners like them will end up getting), just go do it yourself!

I honestly don't feel like talking any longer about this because I know that anyways it will only spark some new comments from the same users over and over again, but I just felt the need of saying what personally think about this and what I honestly believe a lot here do realize but don't want to admit.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.