The writer is happy to see the Pilot’s comments feature disappear.
I’m sure Ms. Constant is correct that the comments were doomed from lack of moderation. The Pilot is probably saving money, too, by discontinuing them.
Cost avoidance alone is rarely a sufficient reason to justify a business decision. I suspect that controlling its brand as a shaper of public opinion had more to do with the Pilot’s choice than other factors.
This is perhaps reflected in the intros the editor composes for each letter. In the case of Ms. Constant’s letter, the editor’s intro actually trashes the community of online users.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
Could it have been this phrase from the letter, …” crude social media misbehavior doomed the comments.” the copy editor chose to use as his/her intro to the letter? That seems to make a little more sense than your contention that intro was a slam to those of us who participated in the Comments section.-IMHO, of course.
LikeLike
RE: “ould it have been this phrase from the letter, …?”
I’m sure it was.
LikeLiked by 1 person
By editor’s intro you mean “Opinion: Crude and anonymous online users doomed reader commentary feature in The Pilot”
I take PERSONAL exception to the editor’s inference. They knew who I was. I was never anonymous to them.
LikeLike
In truth, the majority of the comments were far more insightful, witty, and composed more intelligently than anything the VP editorial staff threw together.
LikeLiked by 2 people
A weak defense of a bad decision.
I hope the bean counters at The Pilot are scrambling to explain the downward spike in online hits.
LikeLiked by 1 person