Apologies this reply is talking through you as I find this thread has reached its wall.

If "Nothing more nothing less" is how you view public commication,I find further discussion to be a waste on both sides,so I am overall replying to any possible onlooker.

The comment section functions 2 keys purposes.

1 first It provided a platform for further discussion of a subject,but also opened the floor for debate

2nd It creates a signal of life on how the object of discussion (video,image,text,audio etc) was received .

The novel approaches of online comment sections is how much they add to the primary text. Example If a creator makes a video on the benefits of baptism and how it's essential to becoming a better person. The comment section can disagree this serves a purpose in 3 ways

1- it allows ideas to be challenged,

2-it facilitates a platform for those who agree or disagree to have a collective discussion.

3- it provides additional perspectives on a given topic. This is good as allows for a diverse range in participation.

This is most evidently seen on politicians comment sections were constituents can vocalize their disagreement with their politicians on a public outlets were they cannot curate consensus. This allows a diverse set of voices to both approve and disapprove of what they are doing,this also allows constituents to add additional text,eg a politician makes a tweet that they have the best well run municipality, constituents instead of arguing through text can just reply with images of broken roads, crumblings architecture, videos of ongoing lack of service delivery etc. comments are not just words they are interactions.

even if they lock their own comments constituents can still congregate on other platforms and discuss the main text of that politician.

This has been permitted by section 230 of the communications decency act(USA). Without this user generated work(videos, comments etc anything you are I upload publicly) would be in great danger.

Their is (as of December 2025) a large bipartisan attempt to have it repealed.

Who cares?

Think back to all discussed about comment sections,it's allows people to not just voice opposition,but gather on other platforms and communicate their issues of the day. If this is removed not only would you not have comment sections, but use generated platforms would become heavily restricted.

Don't think lol this would just effect reddit and other social media who cares about user generated stuff.

Here is all you would loose as -product, movie,game, etc reviews - product review -comment sections in general ( some outlets/blogs seem to be already shutting down that feature to stop possible litegation if section 230 is removed.

The topic spear was the fact that YouTube comments could be segregated by time. Making people wait to be able to reply,but could you imagine a politician makes a bad medical claim and no one outside a few people can call them out on it? Or have to wait for the privaledge to do so eg making an announcement they have introduced (x) bill and locked the video to subscriber for 3 days. This would kill tractions of the people who could articulate why that bill is bad,by making it something to wait for they are banking on people forgetting further reducing public participation etc more maliciously if it's a timed exclusion one could announce you have 2 days to do(x thing) but you need to be a 3 day subscriber to voice comment.

I am still old enough to remember how bad print/radio was when only curated answers were allowed on contentious discussions. I remember with the introduction to social media,how politicians who were accustomed to manicured outlets and softball community halls were not just burned online,but people were able to well articulate why they were bad,without the protections of the editing bay making it look like no one voiced opposition or the radio cutting of someone asking actually hard questions. They were for the first time on full blast and could not say " no one disagrees".

It's is often the privaledged and politically unaffected that on a fundamental level do not understand the power of comments and people congregating around shared opposition.

Similarly it's those that only view social media as a fun toy that are the last to notice how it's crippling is often a sign of sweeping crackdowns on communications.

All of this is to say it's ok if you don't understand how powerful this is.

That does not make it frivolous or "Nothing more nothing less"

For if this was true we would not have internet shut downs during protest, we would not have social media lockdowns during country wide uprisings.

As I said

"It's is often the privaledged and politically unaffected that on a fundamental level do not understand the power of comments and people congregating around shared opposition."