Until recently, AOL offered the appeal option when comments were rejected. Now AOL monitors say the same, your comment has been rejected because it does not meet the community guidelines. It is a discriminatory practice for longtime users of AOL. Please fix it!

I am writing to request a review of each of my comments over the past week. Several that I believe are inoffensive or otherwise out of bounds have been denied, apparently because they refuted comments that were negative toward a conservative viewpoint.

All comments rejected.

I'm unable to open posters' replies to my comments both in email and blue circle with bell icon. For seven days, I reported this via "bug" to AOL and have received no feedback. I'm a paying customer and expect better.

When I get a reply on a comment I have made on a news story and tab reply to that comment it does not take me to the person I am replying to!

My comments are ALWAYS rejected!!! I can type "Have a nice day" AND IT IS REJECTED! i KNOW i HAVE TRIED. What is this? some kind of black list?

Stop your censoring of valid comments. You are a total disgrace and a suppressor of free speech.

I just submitted a reply that contained historical data about deaths from US historical pandemics! I thought I edited what was initially flagged! Your algorithm still rejected it and didn't say why! ! How can I fix or correct what made it be rejected if you don't say! ! ! The tool you use is disgusting for it's lack of immediate feedback so something offensive can be corrected! This is the 4th or 5th time some accurate or historical data caused rejection. Are you all incapable of programming a good algorithm? Some of the grammar and spelling algorithm I use do a better job in understanding context or providing feedback. Plus, I routinely see comments far more abusive in context and merely represents an angry person venting. The context if those comments is far more offensive than any wording I’ve used stating facts and Im not mouthing off! ! !

I will continue to challenge you all to develop an Algorithm that doesn't flag comments that are direct and to the point and are also very factual. With AI, you all ought to be able to prevent some of the personally attacking, malicious, and hateful comments that appear not to be flagged and allowed to be posted. Freedom of speech doesn't mean a person has the right to lie or personally attack others. Somehow this poor political practice is used when others have nothing of merit to say or show. There is a strong need to return to not letting lies enter into any dialogue! ! ! There are so many people who believe conspiracy theories today that they are unable to know reality and therefore subject us all to their distorted view of reality. I understand the value of expression but I hope you are committed to developing business algorithms that protect others from hateful rhetoric. What are you doing to protect the vulnerability of others?????? Suicides are already at an epidemic level! ! !

Hi Guys, there was NOTHING wrong with this comment left about a missing dog returned to her owners. I'm glad she was micro-chipped and was able to be returned to her family....

I realize you are continuing to improve your algorithm so comments entered are not offensive! However, a comment I tried to make today to somehow questioned whether I still wanted to post. First, nothing was noted as to what was found offensive. So I didn’t know what to fix and couldn’t tell. I personally try very hard to keep things positive. Second, once you asked if I really wanted to post it, you gave me no option to have it posted, which I would have. I’m adding my comment to what I wanted to post but was prevented! ! !
Passing to Congress shows SCOTUS's lack of understanding of their role in our government system. If you're familiar with history, situations like this have occurred in the past and the court sometimes got it right and sometimes wrong. In this case, to pass to an ineffective Congress is irresponsible because too much voting is being done by a group of MAGA Congressmen preventing Congress from moving forward in some positive way (remember Prohibition). Making even a bad decision is sometimes meaningful!. SCOTUS’s shows lack of understanding current events, their role in maintaining social stability, and tRUMP’s government interference with a border solution both parties agreed to (how many more frustrating situations for border states or deaths). Today it is the MAGA GOP making Congress ineffective. In many years following the Civil War, it was the Democratic party that made Congress sometimes ineffective. So, what do I not understand. My views are based on research, knowledge and facts. I make every effort to minimize emotional knee-jerk reaction because I know such decisions are usually really bad! ! ! Be to-the-point with what you want me to understand! ! !

I realize you are continuing to improve your algorithm so comments entered are not offensive! However, a comment I tried to make today to somehow questioned whether I still wanted to post. First, nothing was noted as to what was found offensive. So I didn’t know what to fix and couldn’t tell. I personally try very hard to keep things positive. Second, once you asked if I really wanted to post it, you gave me no option to have it posted, which I would have. I’m adding my comment to what I wanted to post but was prevented! ! !
Passing to Congress shows SCOTUS's lack of understanding of their role in our government system. If you're familiar with history, situations like this have occurred in the past and the court sometimes got it right and sometimes wrong. In this case, to pass to an ineffective Congress is irresponsible because too much voting is being done by a group of MAGA Congressmen preventing Congress from moving forward in some positive way (remember Prohibition). Making even a bad decision is sometimes meaningful!. SCOTUS’s shows lack of understanding current events, their role in maintaining social stability, and tRUMP’s government interference with a border solution both parties agreed to (how many more frustrating situations for border states or deaths). Today it is the MAGA GOP making Congress ineffective. In many years following the Civil War, it was the Democratic party that made Congress sometimes ineffective. So, what do I not understand. My views are based on research, knowledge and facts. I make every effort to minimize emotional knee-jerk reaction because I know such decisions are usually really bad! ! ! Be to-the-point with what you want me to understand! ! !

stop censoring our posts and our rights to free speech.

If AOL censors comments posted on the comments board, it must be by a rational human being, NOT by an AI robot, DUH!! It is INEXCUSABLE for your no-brain robot to keep banning me from posting!!!

You need to relax your standards for rejecting comments to your news stories. I can understand rejecting harassing or obscene comments, but some are rejected for no apparent reason. Explain better what criteria you use.

I again entered a comment that got rejected, but provided no info as to why so I could fix it. However, because I still to real facts, not some alternative fact, there was no personal attacks in my comments. Private business or not, I pay for a service that if I do something against what's allowed, I want feedback and a chance to make it right. I also would like to make an appeal if I believe your algorithm is coming up short! ! !

First, I'm an experienced DP person so I know how difficult algorithms can be. Your algorithm flagged a comment for content, but info included is of public record. Second, I use only factual info in my comments and your algorithm can't distinguish accurately this information. I always try to keep my comments positive but when I get a response that is negative and aggressive, I will give an appropriate response. If you haven’t rejected the negative comment and it gets posted, your algorithm needs to let me respond appropriately! !

You keep rejecting my comments on news stories and I have never violated guidelines!

I have asked this before but nothing. Here it goes again. When I read an article on AOL and want to respond to something in it, I put that sentence in quotation marks followed by my one-sentence response that has nothing bad in it. AOL seems to think that whatever I put in quotations isn't good but if that's true, why do they publish the article in the first place?

THE MAJOR NUMBER OF AOL EMPLOYEES CAN'T READ OR RIGHT AND KNOW NOTHING ABOUT CITIZENS RIGHTS TO FREE SPEECH