Moderation Reminders
Cidu Bill on Mar 14th 2010
If your comment contains the word “suck” in any context, it automatically gets held for moderation. No big deal, I’ll usually spot it within an hour or so and push it through, but you should know. As a rule, if your comment is held for moderation, there’s nothing gained by e-mailing me to let me know: I get a message from WordPress when a comment is being held, and I’ll probably get that message before I get your e-mail.
And resending the same message several times only illustrates Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity.
Filed in Bill Bickel, CIDU | 23 responses so far
Sili Mar 14th 2010 at 02:46 pm 1
Whatever do you mean?
Sili Mar 14th 2010 at 02:48 pm 2
Whatever do you mean?
(Bugger. So much for trying to be snarky. The system caught me at my attempt to submit three identical messages. Of course, I coulda inserted invisible characters, but I’m not that desperate to feign ignorance.)
Kamino Neko Mar 14th 2010 at 03:08 pm 3
I wonder how many replies to this post Bill will have to fish out of moderation, because they include variants on su…er…that word.
Bob in Nashville Mar 14th 2010 at 03:10 pm 4
Not sure about Einstein, but I guess it would fit the 12-steppers’ definition of insanity.
Heather D Mar 14th 2010 at 03:19 pm 5
I think Bill’s moderation plugin sucks…
Nyuk nyuk nyuk
Cidu Bill Mar 14th 2010 at 03:26 pm 6
You know what really… um… sucks? When I post a comic containing a vampire. I’m basically spending the rest of the day pulling comments out of the moderation folder.
Moi Mar 14th 2010 at 03:27 pm 7
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
or did the rest of you know that already?
Rainey Mar 14th 2010 at 03:50 pm 8
Sili, you just demonstrated the difference between ignorance and stupidity. Please don’t do it again. Anyway, sometimes you do get different results after trying the same thing over and over again. For instance, if you roll dice, you get different numbers. If you walk down the street, you may or may not be struck by a falling power line or bitten by a dog.
Moi Mar 14th 2010 at 03:58 pm 9
I thought Sili was an LOL — at least once I Googled the definition. Feel free to do it again.
Detcord Mar 14th 2010 at 06:30 pm 10
I’ll own up to the “s” word. Didn’t know it was a naughty one - like that other “s” word. I think the rest of CIDU Bill’s message was boilerplate as I was careful not to rile or pester him with emails and Einstein (et al) has no qualms with me. Least ways, I hope not!
mitch4 Mar 14th 2010 at 06:42 pm 11
Agreeing with Rainey — Sometimes when I’m doing tech support “Let’s just try that again, maybe it’ll work this time” is really quite sensible. (And sometimes not, okay.)
Jay Mar 14th 2010 at 07:22 pm 12
Yeah, I never knew that the s-word was naughty, either. Live and learn.
The Einstein reference is particularly appropriate, of course, since today is Einstein’s birthday. Happy Pi Day everyone!
Mark in Boston Mar 14th 2010 at 07:34 pm 13
Oddly enough, to call someone a “sucker” has a completely different etymology. According to my dictionary, it is “one who is sucked or bled dry, i.e. one who is easily duped.” I would think the word for that definition should be “suckee” and the “sucker” would be the one who bleeds the suckee dry, but then what do I know.
Cidu Bill Mar 14th 2010 at 08:09 pm 14
It’s not that the word “suck” is so terrible, but rather because it’s a red-flag for spam.
Pirk Mar 15th 2010 at 12:17 pm 15
isn’t the S-word pretty terrible though? I mean, it is referring to fellatio, right? I always thought it was weird that it was so acceptable in semi-polite conversation.
not that I have anything against cusses.
Elyrest Mar 15th 2010 at 01:38 pm 16
Pirk (15) - When I use suck I don’t think of fellatio which, I am told, is a very pleasant experience. I always think of something going down the drain or taking something good away. There are many positive attributes to sucking. A lollipop can be sucked. Air can be sucked in or out. You can suck on many things (sweets/sours).
“it’s a red-flag for spam” - Why is it a re-flag for spam? Am I too naive?
Pinny Mar 15th 2010 at 04:49 pm 17
Sometimes I post a 2nd time (if my post does not appear) simply because I’m not sure if I got to the next page by pressing the “Submit Comment” button or if I inadvertently did something else.
Kamino Neko Mar 15th 2010 at 07:20 pm 18
Elyrest - it’s a red flag for spam, specifically, porn spam, because it means fellatio.
jjmcgaffey Mar 16th 2010 at 03:24 am 19
I fix home computers - it’s my business. I have often told a client that, in any other context, doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome is madness - but in computers, it’s what works at least half the time. Ridiculous, but true.
Matthew Mar 16th 2010 at 09:21 am 20
Small bit of pedantry: This definition of insanity–doing the same thing repeatedly but expecting a different result–is not Einstein’s. I sought its author, and it was probably someone writing an old Alcoholics Anonymous manual, but that author mentioned it as if it had been around for a while. I suspect that the definition’s originator merely spoke it in a meeting as an insight, and it became a catchphrase. We may never know the originator, but it weren’t Einstein.
Is it possible that the censor is triggered by the “-uck”? A description of a duck that bucks while in the muck, and, in one tuck, finds a puck and says, “Yuck! I will never have good luck!”–will that go right through?
Cidu Bill Mar 16th 2010 at 12:26 pm 21
Matthew, I was aware that Einstein didn’t actually say it; but it’s so widely attributed to him that I knew I could write “Einstein’s definition of insanity” and be immediately understood.
Of course this begs the question of whether it’s cheating to use a well-known historical reference even though you know it isn’t correct.
Matthew Mar 16th 2010 at 01:08 pm 22
I don’t know about cheating, Bill, and I respect your desire for shorthand, but I can’t stand misinformation. I am not even crazy about using terms like “sunrise” & “sunset”, as they imply that the sun is doing the moving, not that the earth is doing the turning. I like to describe the horizon rising to block the sun at day’s end, as that makes me more aware of how stunning it is to be standing still & constantly turning.
These misattributions–Twain, Einstein, Vonnegut, Lincoln–are interesting in a literary & sociological nature: why these figures? In addition, it’s particularly apt–or inapt–to have Einstein in this band, considering how he was trying to change our perceptions of the universe.
Hey, did my rhyming words slow down my comment’s approval with the automatic censor? Thanks, as always, Bill for your hosting this site.
Elyrest Mar 16th 2010 at 01:09 pm 23
“whether it’s cheating to use a well-known historical reference even though you know it isn’t correct.”
Cidu Bill (21) - The problem with this is that when so many people assume something to be correct the person who disagrees, although correct, appears to be the ignorant one. I would say that context is everything in this matter.