With respect to this Buzzfeed item just posted, my comment via Facebook is no showing up there. I will ask friends to direct readers here.

 

 

There's a lot of misinformation about this already (what a surprise?). Joy-Ann never claimed the archive was "hacked." She simply said it was under investigation and they were examining all possible causes. Pundits and trolls simply transformed that into "I was hacked." Nonsense.

I am the one who found the posts in the archive back in December and brought them to Joy's attention. She was absolutely stunned by every word in them. We read them aloud together. She'd obviously never seen any of them, and had no idea what else there was to see until I pointed each item out. Though she was obviously upset, we were laughing at what a terrible job they had done trying to sound like her. We both felt no one would take such poor forgeries seriously.

Even so, I was in favor of her immediately outing the story herself (as it was shortly after the Crist apology), but she said contractually, NBC would have to make that decision. She could not. 

Since the blog was also the source of the Charlie Crist comments, obviously she would have rushed to expunge anything so toxic if she could. That I had to bring them to her attention is all the proof I needed to know that none of these words were hers. 

But just for my own edification, I spent hours trying to find a single ping-back, reblog, or pull-quote with any part of this material in them. There was nothing. There is still nothing. No a trace of these words anywhere but the Internet Archive.

My own theory is that one of those "other entities" the Wayback machine people discussed was actually the bad actor who had been inside her original blogger.com site all along, and was feeding material through it to her WordPress blog (which was set up to do that for herself but she stopped using it, but never disconnected the pass-thru). She never considered that perhaps she had an unwelcome editor in her blog until I suggested it.

Note:  I do not mean here the Archive.org browser plugin used  to  submit new material to the archive in normal archive usage.  I mean that the bad actor simply insured that their latest changes made into he archive (in case Joy caught on to the errant posts).  Only detailed analysis of a lot of information that neither blogger.com, nor archive.org seems willing to provide.

We may never know the full story, or catch this culprit. But I was there. These words were as new to Joy as they were to everyone else. The person who published these things has been trolling Joy for years. I strongly suspect he's known they were there all along, and was just playing them out over time to inflict maximum damage.

I am confident that Joy's millions of fans will support her, once all these facts are known. Homophobic personalities don't just post a few blog items and call it a day. They have a lifetime of breadcrumbs that can be found. I am quite sure none can or ever will be found that can be credibly—or even plausibly—attributed to her.

This was just a setup from one of her many enemies, most of whom have very good reasons to fear her powerful voice.


Hi friends,

Well, this sucks. I sent a few angry tweets about Left wing reprisals, Joel Pollack and @LindseyGrahamSC, but nothing i haven't said before (but those were much worse).
Evidently,Twitter's new policy won't allow any form of stridency or contempt if there's any way they can be construed as "inciting violence."  Well, warning of reprisals felt more like a public service than inciting violence—but maybe it wasn't that tweet. Either way, I broke their rules, and they have a right to sanction me. I just hope it's not permanent.

I have responded with their login code and they sent me an email to confirm my address, but I still can't get on.  The email said they'd "Review it"

Why so many can get back on almost immediately, after saying far worse things, but I cannot, is just beyond my understanding. But I've always worried about this. The misguided outcry from the Left about anything anyone felt was "abuse" (which Twitter never could  do that much about) was bound to backlash against almost any kind of strident speech. 

I suppose since the account is only "suspended," and not terminated, there's hope they will cut a 10 year veteran of Twitter (and a Twitter developer) some slack.

I don't mind your asking @Twitter about this, but please don't insult them. I should have realized that even my "edgier" tweets might be out of bounds, these days, with their latest, continually evolving guidelines.

I sure hope I will see you soon.

Shoq

 

 

I've been suspended from tweeting for 12 hours. Here's why:

This  malignant troll, @mechtwintailed and his alter-ego accounts (and probably 10 more of them in this list) has been selling his moronic thread about how Hilter was a liberal atheist for years. 

No matter how many of his dopey reply-suckers I block, I get notified by this thread about 25 times a day, and people just keep joining it.  Twitter refuses to give us the ability to escape such reply threads. And blocking or muting them is pointless, as there's always some new person responding to the stupid bullshit (because Twitter users love stupid bullshit), so I get hit again and again and again. Sometimes my notifies will literally be overrun by this imbecilic noise, usually by people who think they're going to tell this festering ass pimple how misguided he is (not knowing he's just doing this to troll people).

So despite how much this asshole harasses many of us, I'd finally reach my limit. And the result? Twitter suspends me for 12 hours, for THIS TWEET:


So, evidently, Twitter now considers that merely someone "was dead" to be unacceptable speech (eyeroll). 

I wish @Jack @ev and @delbius would finally understand how offensive these reply threads are, and GIVE US A WAY TO GET OUT OF THEM. It's just not hard to develop an "untagging" algorithm that would remove our @handles from any thread that we BLOCK.  This, and my handle mask idea would help prevent a LOT of Twitter abuse.

I will try to appeal this, but I doubt it will do much good.  See you after midnight.