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:
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.