NYTimes.com is a fertile field for readers to offer comments on news stories, opinion pieces and blogs, as I pointed out in my Sunday, Dec. 12 column. But you might ask: how does the Public Editor himself moderate comments? So I thought I would offer here a bit of information on the comment moderation approach that I take.First off, let me note that moderation of comments on my print columns and blogposts is handled by Joseph Burgess, assistant to the public editor. We have worked closely together to establish an approach that seems suited to the public editor’s function and is consistent with The Times’s policy on comments.

We look for comments that are, above all, on-topic. Sometimes people like to use the public editor’s topic as a jumping-off point for their own topic – but Mr. Burgess and I prefer that commenters keep to the subject at hand.

Here’s an example: recently I wrote a column about The Times’s decision to publish the name of a four-year-old after a state judge ruled that the child could be named in a civil suit. My point was that The Times shouldn’t publish the names of young children in such circumstances. Some commenters wanted to rail against the judge’s ruling itself. Well, I can appreciate that the judge’s ruling was controversial but that wasn’t the point of my column. Unfortunately, we had to reject a number of comments that week because the commenters strayed from the point I was making about the journalistic issue involved.

Other important points about comments on the public editor’s work: no profanity or vulgarity, please; no personal attacks (on me, to be sure, but also on other commenters or anyone else) and no SHOUTING in capital letters. Do try to keep your comment punchy and to-the-point. Finally, we do close comments once we believe there has been a healthy discourse on the subject.

My observation, as a reader of comments on The Times’s web site, is that I most enjoy reading comments that have substance, adopt a civil tone and make a point concisely.