factor for small sample values. This approach is promising for both modeling and explaining
the power and non-power law behavior of the Godwin length distribution.
The data sources themselves may also deserve more scrutiny in future analyses. The
nature of national news and commentary websites (such as those used here) ensures a diver-
sity of article (and corresponding discussion) topics, though it is expected that the content
of the articles in this study was more political in nature than ”general” online content. It
is possible that the prevalence of Godwin positive comments is higher in politically-themed
discussions than general discussions. If this question were studied, the current research
would be a very useful basis for comparison.
Also not taken into consideration in this study was the effect of a thread’s topology on
the applicability of Godwin’s Law. The Disqus commenting platform employs a ”threaded”
commenting system (cf. [12]), which was entirely ignored in the current analysis in favor of
purely chronological ordering. Many questions could be asked about the incidence of God-
win matches among various other types of thread characteristics than simply length (e.g.,
comment depth, degree, etc.). Studying the distribution of “Godwin time” (the amount of
time passed between a thread’s first comment and its first Godwin match) instead of God-
win length may also be a more accurate representation of the data given the chronological
ordering.
As indicated by the many questions raised above, it is clear that many opportunities
exist for further study on Godwin’s Law. Being the first of its kind, this study will serve
as a basis for future research on the topic for the author and will hopefully be the same for
others.
7 References
1. Anderson, A. A., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Xenos, M. A. and Ladwig, P. (2013),
The “Nasty Effect:” Online Incivility and Risk Perceptions of Emerging Technologies.
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12009
2. LaBarre, Suzanne. “Why We’re Shutting Off Our Comments.” Web log post. Popular
Science. 24 Sept. 2013. Web. http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-09/
why-were-shutting-our-comments.
3. Godwin, Mike. “Meme, Counter-meme.” Wired. Oct. 1994. Web. http://www.
wired.com/wired/archive/2.10/godwin.if_pr.html.
4. Godwin, Mike. “I Seem To Be A Verb: 18 Years of Godwin’s Law.” Jewcy. 30
Apr. 2008. Web. http://www.jewcy.com/arts-and-culture/i_seem_be_verb_18_
years_godwins_law.
5. Brogol. “En Finir Avec Le Point Godwin.” La Politeia. 2 Oct. 2010. Web. http://
lapoliteia.com/en-finir-avec-le-point-godwin-critique-de-la-loi-de-godwin/.
6. Greenwald, Glenn. “The Odiousness of the Distorted Godwin’s Law.” Salon. 1 July
2010. Web. http://www.salon.com/2010/07/01/godwin/.
11