Monday, September 27, 2010

Blogger's Spam Function Deletes Some Things Automatically (Twelve Comments Restored) / "juscot's" Ridiculous Attacks on My Catholicism

After blog contributor Nick informed me of how to access the spam folder in Blogger, in a combox comment today, I went and checked it out. I knew that Blogger did this sometimes, after having read a post about it at the Boors All blog, where there was trouble with missing comments. Anti-Catholic Reformed blogmaster "Turretinfan" (TAO) has also now noted the same thing happening on his site.

Blogger doesn't explain much about the criteria it uses to determine that a comment is worthy of being deemed as spam:

Spam Inbox
Blogger now filters comments that are likely spam comments to a Spam Inbox, much like the spam folder in your email. When someone leaves a comment on your blog, it will be reviewed against our spam detector, and comments that are identified as possible spam will be sent to your blog’s Spam Inbox, found at Comments | Spam.

Alas, I was accused recently by an anti-Catholic Presbyterian severe critic of mine, Peter Pike (comrade of Steve Hays) of deleting a rather critical comment of his; and he regarded this as "proof" of my "dishonesty." I knew that I hadn't done so (I was watching television the entire time during which it would have happened, if it did, and I delete comments only on extremely rare occasions), and so I immediately thought that it might be this spam function of Blogger. I even mentioned it at Cryablogue, where Pike posts:

It was probably one of those things where Blogger deletes comments automatically for some reason. They were talking about it Boors All recently, trying to figure out why comments were disappearing.

And in the same comment I said that it was an "honest mistake . . . no doubt" on Pike's part. But that was of no avail in getting him to remove his hit piece or continuing to regard me as dishonest. He wrote in the same combox:

The sad thing, Dave, is that you might actually be telling the truth. Blogger does weird things. . . . all I have to go by is the fact that you're a dishonorable man. If it were someone else, I'd give them the benefit of the doubt. But you used up all the doubt I could give you long ago. After you cry wolf enough, it's your fault I don't trust you.

God will have to deal with his judgmental cynicism. He's obviously past rational discussion in that regard. I wrote a reply-post, proving that I hadn't done what I was accused of doing.

Now the proof is even more compelling, because I found his missing post in the spam folder. I am now restoring it, as well as eleven other comments. As it is restored in the original sequence of comments now, in the thread, it is seen that his comment occurred at 10:01 PM EST on 9-23-10. Pike then complained at 10:18 and posted his hit piece about my dishonesty. It took him seventeen minutes from a comment that didn't appear, to conclude that I had deleted it and was proved "dishonest." Even my later explanation was futile. Perhaps he will give it up now, but I won't hold my breath.

The breakdown of the "dirty dozen" missing comments is as follows:

Truth Unites.....and Divides (two comments in the Young Earth Creationist [YEC] combox)

Peter Pike (two comments: YEC and "Armstrong is Dishonest" comboxes)

juscot (two comments: YEC combox)

Peter Sean Bradley (one comment: YEC combox)

Adomnan (one comment: YEC combox)

TimMD (one comment: "Rome's Apologists are Dishonest" combox)

Rick DeLano (two comments: "No One's Perfect: Galileo's Errors" combox)

I need people now to let me know if they feel that a comment of theirs has disappeared. Apart from the obvious Viagra-type spammers, I've only deleted two comments from Turretinfan (TAO) in recent days, and I openly stated that I did that, and why. Even he was allowed to rant and rave and lie in other comments that remain. The people above now know what happened in their cases, and they can locate the restored comments in those threads.

Ironically, six of the eight people above (all but the first two) are Catholics, and eight of the twelve comments deleted (two-thirds) came from them, so obviously no "conspiracy" is in play here. Adomnan and Paul Hoffer are longtime regular contributors (and I have met Paul in person; he is a friend in the "real world"). I can't imagine ever deleting their comments.

Finally, even "Truth Unites.....and Divides" noted the Blogger spam thing in a comment of his that (humorously enough) Blogger deemed as spam and didn't allow. He wrote:

I've been informed that Blogger sometimes "eats" comments and because of that some comments don't appear. Here's a comment that did not appear (for watever reason) and it deserves to be on the thread. It's by Juscot . . .

The juscot comment itself was in the spam folder, just as "TUAD" suspected. It was a comment on use of the word "fundamentalist." His comment was fun, too, and it's too bad it was placed in the spam folder, because it contains a gem of a classic clueless remark: juscot saying about me:

I'm embarrassed that Armstrong would stoop to this kind of demonization of creationists. I believe he's creeping toward liberalism, because in my experience, only liberals ever talked this way about creationism, not believers in the biblical text.

juscot is himself a Catholic young earth creationist. I disagree with his position; therefore I must be a liberal. Makes perfect sense, doesn't it? He reasons in that respect exactly as do his Protestant anti-Catholic fellow young earth creationists. In another post that Blogger thought was spam, he lied more about me and denied that I was a Catholic:

. . . those of us who believe what the scriptures say about creation will turn away from "Catholic" commentators who deny the truth God gave us. To me, a "Catholic" blogger who denies the history recorded in Genesis is a bigger anti-Catholic than those "Protestant Fundamentalists."

This is so patently ridiculous and preposterous, that one has some warranted suspicion that "juscot" may be an anti-Catholic Protestant masquerading as a Catholic YEC. Anything's possible online, with all the anonymity, and nicknames often being used unethically (once there was a massively slanderous blog created where the person was pretending to be me writing it). I don't assert this; I merely suspect it.

With these two posts, juscot actually veered into territory that would make his comments delete-worthy. If he had written a third straight post with attacks like this, he could be deleted, according to a rule on "purely slanderous posts" that I have had in place since August 2006. But I also like to see my opponents who have no case, hang themselves with their own ludicrosities. Therefore, these lying remarks will remain posted. If juscot keeps on in this vein, then I'll start deleting his comments, as an inveterate slanderer insofar as his comments on my site are concerned.



juscot said...

I'm not a fundamentalist Protestant passing myself off as a Catholic YEC. I'm a Catholic who supports the Kolbe Center.

You made the silly claim that I have attacked your Catholicism. That is not true. I merely said you were demonizing anyone who believed in YEC as a "fundamentalist" and that people who claim an old earth usally drift toward liberalism. Look at Mark Shea. He just came out of the closet as a believer in evolution. He belives the earth is billions of years old. His statements on other issues, like the death penalty, shows he's a liberal. So I stand by my statements as true. If you felt that my remarks were an "attack" on your Catholicism, you're mistaken. It was an attack on your misuse of the word fundamentalist and your lack of comprehension that old earthism is basically believed in by evolutionists and other non-believers.

Jordanes said...

You certainly did attack Dave's Catholicism, juscot, when you put the word Catholic in scare quotes and referred to Dave as an example of a "Catholic" commentator(s) who deny the truth God gave us (a very, very serious charge), and a a "Catholic" blogger who denies the history recorded in Genesis which you think would make someone like Dave a bigger anti-Catholic than those "Protestant Fundamentalists." You also said you believe he is creeping toward liberalism, because in your opinion orthodox Catholics who agree with Pius XII's Humani Generis apparently are liberals. So don't try and weasel out of your own words. You may say that you did not intend your words as an attack, but it is impossible to classify your words as anything but an attack on Dave's orthodoxy (all for not believing in something the Scriptures do not teach and the Church does not require anyone to believe).

Dave Armstrong said...

Exactly right, and thanks for your support, Jordanes. I may not care much at all for the YEC position or some of the hyper-literalist exegesis connected with it, even in some Catholic circles, yet I would never dream of denying that those who hold the position are Catholics.

Reginald de Piperno said...

Aside from the unfair criticism of Dave, it's no less ridiculous to say that Mark Shea is a "liberal" because he happens to believe what the Church teaches about the death penalty. Such an opinion can only be held by someone who either has read very, very little of what Mark Shea has written, or who identifies political conservatism with Catholicism.


juscot said...

So,I'm being denounced as "attacking" DA's Catholicism, and for calling Mark Shea a liberal. Oh, horse hockey!

I didn't attack yor Catholicism Dave and you know it. I attacked your bad logic and your misuse of the word fundamrentaliswm. You and your defenders hide behind the word(s) Catholic and Catholicism like certain Jews and Jewish groups hide behind the word(s) anti-semite or anti-semeticism when they are criticized for something they did that some people thought was wrong.

Mark Shea is a liberal. He believes in evolution. No one who holds to the traditional view of the creation handed down by the Church fathers is going to be a believer in any form of evolution. His stance on the death penalty is also against the traditions of the Church. God told all mankind that he who sheds the blood of a man must have his own blood shed by man. (Gen 9:5-6) The Church has never taught that was ever revoked. Shea also attacks people with traditional political and religious beliefs. Fr Chris, an Eastern European, Eastern Rite priest from a formerly Communist country, commenting on the Archbold's column on Shea,said MS always attacked conservatives, but not the left. Finally, Mark is always attacking the military. All of these beliefs and actions are screaming 'liberalism at work!'

Dave Armstrong said...

Thanks for your thoughts. They are not worthy of any more of my time than this.