In this paper, I study how comments function as follow-ups in the discussion forums of online newspapers. Follow-ups recontextualize an object of discourse from its prior context to an ongoing context.  A follow-up  involves stancetaking, positioning, and negotiation of meaning. The data for the study were obtained from one major French online newspaper called lemonde.fr. The data consist of ten editorials with political and social topics, along with their subsequent comments. The first objective was to find out how, and by which linguistic means, writers express their stance and evaluate the editorials. They do it through axiological adjectives, explicit positioning, and various communicative acts, as well as by affective, epistemic, and ironic expressions. The second aim was to examine how the posts target the prior discourse, and open up a negotiation, i.e., what types of responsive and initiative properties are used to negotiate the meaning. The comments target either the content or the stance expressed in the editorial. The users imply that they know more about the issue or they share the same view. In sum, disagreement is a distinctive feature of this type of online discussion; by expressing it, writers are revealing their discontent with the information given, and inviting others to share in their dissatisfaction.In this paper, I study how comments function as follow-ups in the discussion forums of online newspapers. Follow-ups recontextualize an object of discourse from its prior context to an ongoing context.  A follow-up  involves stancetaking, positioning, and negotiation of meaning. The data for the study were obtained from one major French online newspaper called lemonde.fr. The data consist of ten editorials with political and social topics, along with their subsequent comments. The first objective was to find out how, and by which linguistic means, writers express their stance and evaluate the editorials. They do it through axiological adjectives, explicit positioning, and various communicative acts, as well as by affective, epistemic, and ironic expressions. The second aim was to examine how the posts target the prior discourse, and open up a negotiation, i.e., what types of responsive and initiative properties are used to negotiate the meaning. The comments target either the content or the stance expressed in the editorial. The users imply that they know more about the issue or they share the same view. In sum, disagreement is a distinctive feature of this type of online discussion; by expressing it, writers are revealing their discontent with the information given, and inviting others to share in their dissatisfaction.