Friday, 13 March 2015

With Red Cardigan on Abusive Filtering of her Blog

Me to Red Cardigan
09/03/15 à 10h17
On the message "Destroying the family is good for business" ....
... which seems no longer to exist, did you by any chance show some poster for a pron mag to illustrate a point?

Because, the message and your entire blog got filtered on the giant library Bpi:

New blog on the kid : Et la Bpi alors ...
http://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2015/03/et-la-bpi-alors.html


You do not need to answer, if you do, it will be visible on my blogs (you know the famous Wellborn protocol):

Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl : If you wish to correspond with me
http://correspondentia-ioannis-georgii.blogspot.com/p/if-you-wish-to-correspond-with-me.html


Hans Georg Lundahl

Red Cardigan to me
10/03/15 à 22h41
Re: On the message "Destroying the family is good for business" ....
Dear Mr. Lundahl,

I have no idea why the library you link to filtered my post. There is nothing pornographic in it, and the links in it are to a news article and to Rod Dreher’s blog at The American Conservative. There are some links in the quote from Rod Dreher’s piece as well, but those are his links and do not go anywhere other than to reference materials and sources he is citing.

I find it interesting that my post is being censored. The most charitable assumption is that certain words used in discussing the topic triggered a “keyword” alert, but one would think that the post would actually be read before someone would decide it was inappropriate.

I appreciate your bringing this to my attention!

Sincerely,

[signed real name of Red Cardigan]

Me to Red Cardigan
11/03/15 à 09h42
Re: On the message "Destroying the family is good for business" ....
Dear [Red Cardigan],

My hunch is that "redcardigan" contains the letter sequence "redcard".

Which in its usual football or sports connotation is not used in French sites, since they use "carte rouge" instead.

I did alert a librarian, and even if we are right about origin of mistake it is his duty to have corrected it by now.

All the best!

Hans Georg Lundahl

2 comments:

  1. Thank you so much for looking in to this!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Now, at long last, today, it has been rectified!

    ReplyDelete