I have suggested to SA editors that they institute a more sophisticated system to their blogs and commentaries. I think it could be a lot more useful to all of us and courteous at the same time. I'd like other opinions on this idea.
I've quit reading most of the comments, because they are ignorant and repetitious for a given author. Mainly my idea is to let author state his assumptions at the beginning of the article (say up to 4). Later, allow author to return and delete comments in which the assumptions have not been accepted or are being questioned.
If editors want to (or have been asked to) follow up on deleted comments by an author they should be able to do so and make sure that it's being used properly. But they don't need to do this often, usually it's left to author's discretion.
For example if someone is writing with the assumption that Technical Analysis should guide one's investments (or investments within one particular sector) then they can choose to make that an assumption of the article and delete all the comments questioning this assumption. It is simply too tiresome to always have to wade through numerous comments which don't accept the basic premise.
Anyone can continue to read anyone's post and actually is not excluded from commenting either. But they should not post a comment arguing against any of the stated assumptions. If you read the assumptions and don't like them, you don't have to read the article. Of course, the critic can write their own blog arguing against this set of assumptions.