Update: Test 2 Fail! See below.
Apparently Anthony Watts has a new system of moderation for his blog, WUWT.
I'm not quite sure what to make of this:
@petergleick @michaelemann Funny, if its blacklisting how come we let you comment there? Entire system is far more open now, less moderationI think Anthony is saying that if he was going to blacklist people, Professors Mann and Gleick would be at the top of his list.
— Watts Up With That (@wattsupwiththat) May 5, 2013
Why, you may ask? If Anthony wanted to run a science blog with a focus on climate science, wouldn't he want to attract the top scientists in the field? No?
Update: It's obviously Wattsonian doublespeak. Anthony means that Dr Gleick at least is still banned (click here to read then scroll down) and I seriously doubt that Dr Mann would be welcomed there.
WUWT Moderation Test
Since Anthony has blocked me from his twitter feed and told me I'm not welcome to post on WUWT, I thought I'd test out the new WUWT moderation system and see if he really has opened it to all and sundry. I'm posing a question that's occurred to me every time Dr Spencer posts his UAH charts. I don't know why WUWT-ers aren't calling for the data, or even the 'raw data', if any of them knew what to do with raw data from satellites. (WUWT commenters seem to call for 'links to data' a lot but give Dr Spencer a free pass for some reason.)Test Result 1: Pass
Indeed Anthony has opened up moderation. My post didn't disappear without trace as in the past. It didn't even go to a moderation queue. It looks as if Anthony's now allowing any ratbag scum to make a comment!
Test result 2: Fail!
This next comment lasted a whole hour before Tony got things back in order...
...and decided his new "open policy" is not quite all it was cracked up to be after all.
Click here to see what my comment was all about.
Attention-seeker banned from WUWT
There's more, way down the bottom after Anthony's ad hom dogwhistle got all his lynch mob piling on. Any excuse to trash a real scientist (Peter Gleick):Skiphil says:
May 7, 2013 at 4:08 pm Sou, you must be a special kind of ignorant if you imagine that the “Union of Concerned Scientists” is a “scientific organisation.” No qualifications for membership, specializes in bleating and whining for political activism…. obviously, a renowned “scientific organisation” to be sure. Sou, are you mendacious or merely ignorant?
[note: don't engage this person - she's a persona non grata attention seeker - mod]
It's not that attention seekers aren't welcome at WUWT. The blog wouldn't have survived this long but for attention seekers. After all, look at Anthony himself and who he promotes. There's 'Wondering' Willis E who throws a hissy fit if he senses the least bit of criticism. And Backward Bob who cannot tolerate anyone disagreeing. Anyway freedom of speech is considered sacred on WUWT, provided you say what Anthony and his mob want to hear.
It's just that attention seekers must be of the right ideological persuasion and fully paid up members of the scientific illiterati. Anthony and his mods don't want any competition for him or his plebs <:o
Who is Sou?
Wait, there's still more (and we haven't got to the free steak knives yet). How's this for conspiracy ideation. Apologies to Dr Gleick. (But I have to say I'm deeply flattered)...Jimbo says:
May 7, 2013 at 5:51 pm Is Sou Peter Gleick?
[Reply: Not sure. But he/she also posts as "A. Crowe". — mod.]You'll notice that the mod's response puts the lie to this!
A bit under your comments, we have this pearl of wisdom.
ReplyDelete"So temperatures are back to where they were in 1983.
This is not what Hansen predicted five years ago. However this is what Bastardi predicted five years ago."
Yes, deniers are a very odd bunch.
DeleteWUWT has plunged into a ravine since Tony removed moderation. It's even got some 'alarmists' infiltrating, though not quite drowning out richardscourtney's incoherent shouting; the word 'denier' is no longer automatically rejected; the potty peer Monckton reigns supreme with a plethora of articles; Tisdale is still crying ENSO ENSO but willis is nowhere to be seen; they still haven't got over the Lewandowsky findings; and the occasional tip of the hat to an actual scientific paper seems to have gone by the way.
It's turning into another JoNova or stevengoddard mess.
Has Anthony given up I wonder or is he saving himself for a final tilt at the windmills?
I spoke too soon. Willis is back with questions in "all innocence" mode. As with other deniers he tries to make out that if he 'doesn't know' it means 'nobody knows'.
DeleteRichard in trying something new,
ReplyDelete-----------------
Yes, the ultra-right does oppose AGW because that opposition fits their agenda. Indeed, if you review the files of WUWT you can find more examples of it in their posts which e.g. claim H1tler was “left wing”!
---------------------
while trying to save the bathwater
--------------------
But those nutters are not relevant to the real debate about AGW except that – as you say – those nutters enable people such as Lewandowsky to assert ‘guilt by association’ upon all climate realists.
---------------------
He forgot Chris:)
but more seriously there appears to be a movement away from the Monckton and John O'Ss who are making their brand ridiculous. Roy Spencer is having the devil's old time with the hard core.
This is the first time this has happened and a good reason to keep pushing them.
" It looks as if Anthony's now allowing any ratbag scum to make a comment!"
ReplyDeleteFar from it- you'll find the exclusion clause quoted here :
http://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2013/04/doubleplus-ungood.html
Love it, Russell.
ReplyDeleteEli - Richard is such a sweet guy. So open to new ideas. Tolerant to a fault and never a harsh word or keyboard bashed in anger. Butter wouldn't melt in his mouth. /s
Wow, recognition from Eli and now mistaken for Peter Gleick! (Who's currently busy here, I might add.)
ReplyDeleteLast time I commented at Willard Tony's he signalled my 'fair game' status (seems I'm an 'anonymous coward', unlike, say, Smokey) by complaining in situ that the email address I was using contained the word 'green'! For the record I used to run a native landscaping business called 'Green Heritage', but I suppose that would only confirm my perniciousness...