Listening to Ian and Rejoining Rantwick

When I started this blog, I didn't allow anonymous posts, but did not require posts be moderated. No word verification. It was simple and direct. Then, I slipped into the notion that word verification would keep spam away. It didn't. So I went to moderation without the irritating words. Well, Ian caused me to rethink and here is the new, new approach. Like Rantwick, I will allow comments without moderation and without captchas. Actually, I WILL moderate comments on any post over seven days old so spam can only slip in on new posts. I will manually delete spam posts, as I have done anyway so the comment list won't get filled with ads for beach cruisers or questionable pharmaceuticals. Well, some may appear - before I make them disappear. If real problems appear, I will see how to make them go away, but robot proof doesn't do anything as far as I can tell and moderating merely screens the spam differently than wiping it out shortly after it appears. I will also probably turn on the defenses if I'll be away from the blog for a while. I'd hate to be gone for a week only to have to delete a thousand spam comments. Stay tuned and we shall see how this Rantwickian approach works. Perhaps we Yanks can be as civil as our neighbors up in the great, frozen north...

Alternative Universe

For a long time, I let comments to posts show immediately, but there appeared the "prove you aren't a robot" dialog. Today, I switched to "moderated," but without (I hope), the irritating captchas. Feedback from my loyal reader is welcome. Doubly welcome if it turns out that the robot nonsense still remains, contrary to my expectations. As usual, I expect the only stuff culled will be the typical product link spam that you all know, if not love.

Blogger Has a Spam Filter

I never knew that Blogger has a spam filter. Wordsmith has one that aggressively filters out the most innocuous comments. Today, I discovered that Blogger's filter intercepted a very appropriate comment. It is contained within this post.

In response to my November 30th post about High Gas Prices - Better as a Barista, in which I claim that if one doesn't like cycling, it is far more attractive simply to take on extra, Moopheus commented on December 1st, and the Blogger Spam Filter snagged it:

That's the correct theoretical argument, though as practical matter for most people, life doesn't really work that way. Are you salaried or paid hourly? If you decided to work that extra hour of the day instead of riding, would you get paid for it? For a lot of people, the answer is no, at least not directly. They may have no control over their hours, and may only get comp time for overtime. If that. Picking up that one extra hour of work per day is a nontrivial exercise for most. Workers who do get paid hourly and have variable hours (like tradesmen) are probably already working, or trying to work, as many paid hours as they can. For instance, I could get myself some extra freelance work, but each hour of paid work requires some nonpaid effort to get it. (Also, my own commute is short, in a dense area--meaning it takes no longer to ride than to drive).

This is not to say that your argument is completely invalid--it is surely true for some--just to point out that arguments from economic theory usually gloss over the complexities of actual life.


To which, I would have noted:

Well, since there is actually a Starbucks AND a Walmart directly on the way home from work, it'd be a matter of getting a second job (avoiding added travel mileage and time) which is certainly a practical option. However, since I enjoy riding my bike, I'd rather just ride to work than spend time working to ride it less. Bicycle commuting reduces my time cost of riding my bike. Which really says that the complexities of actual life lead people to all sorts of different choices. So Moopheus and I more or less agree. Of course, Moopheus didn't comment on my later post in which I examined the cost of a short commute such as he/she makes. THAT would also be an interesting comment to read.

In closing, can anyone suggest WHY ON EARTH would Blogger consider such a thoughtful comment as spam? I guess it's just one of those mysteries of life. Now I guess I need to look occasionally to see if Blogger thinks it has caught some scofflaw.