My wife had to work the latter part of the yesterday (usually beginning at 4 p.m.), so she left here to catch a bus well before it was yet 3 p.m. She is still on a three-month driving suspension.
However, she also left for somewhere around midday today, catching a ride with someone who showed up and stopped their car streetside out front. I have no idea what that was about, though. If she works a full day, her start time at the Thai restaurant where she is employed part-time is 11 a.m.
Something like this happened last Thursday, and she was brought back home very early in the evening so drunk that she just went directly upstairs to bed. As a result, she was unable to go to work the next day ─ she does not recover well from excess drinking.
Since her friend who is also her employer knows this and is a notorious partier herself, that lady can hold herself responsible, for I do not in the least doubt that she had a hand in my wife's disablement on that occasion.
Is the same carrying-on happening today? As I said, I do not know.
But enough of that topic.
I had hoped to perk up enough to get our early this evening for the four-mile round trip hike to the nearest government liquor store, but the spunk just ain't a-happening, I'm afraid.
I could have sat out in the backyard this afternoon to benefit from some sunshine, but I would have needed to have been fully clothed. It was too chilly to be just sitting out there. Sure, I could have been barefooted, but I prefer being able to wear naught but shorts or even a swimsuit.
Besides, I was still nurturing hope that I would be making that four-mile hike, which would have exposed my shaven head to the daylight anyway.
I don't dig why I'm so depleted ─ I've even had two afternoon naps, for Pete's sake.
Another topic now. This time it concerns this very blog.
A few days ago I posted how Blogger notified me that it had deleted two of my posts because of some complaint ─ as they put it, the posts had been "flagged to us for review. We have determined that [they violate] our guidelines and deleted [them]."
They also added the following absolutely useless information:
Why was your blog post deleted?
Your content has violated our malware and viruses policy. Please follow the community guidelines link in this email to learn more.
We encourage you to review the full content of your blog posts to make sure that they are in line with our standards as additional violations could result in the termination of your blog.
Nothing there explained what was actually amiss. I certainly am not offering up "malware and viruses" to any visitors who may access a post. I'm just a 71-year-old blogger deep in debt who has struggled to resist suicide for his entire adult life since his late teens in the latter 1960s, and who marvels that he is still in existence.
It was useless to refer to Blogger's stupid "community guidelines" to try and understand precisely why my posts were deleted when nothing was told me other than that the posts had something to do with "malware and viruses".
Is there actually something in those "community guidelines" that uselessly declares, "Thou shalt not infest thine posts with malware and viruses!" ─ or something along that line?
Great ─ if that was what I had actually done. I would now know better.
But since I had done no such thing, then what was actually wrong?
Well, guess what? Around 13 hours later, I was notified that both posts had been reinstated after they had been "re-evaluated ... against community guidelines" and apparently found to be innocent.
If there were either malware or viruses involved, this would of course not have happened ─ so that infection claim was sheer and obvious rot. Something else was afoot. I was actually being censored.
It was sufficiently disturbing that I decided thence to always download a full copy of my blog after each post. After all, once a post has been deleted, it is gone forever. And since my blog is largely a personal journal, I do not want to have my history deleted.
And I then looked into maybe setting up a website with an actual webhost such as Porkbun ─ I already have two websites on a shared account with them.
But if I happened to post content (as I definitely do in this blog) that is contrary to the mainstream narrative concerning the phony plandemic / casedemic / scamdemic, and the ineffective and even harmful push for face-masking and experimental 'vaccines', would Porkbun take it upon themselves to terminate my blog website should this be demanded of them by one of the enforcement arms of whatever force is behind the evil that is inexorably taking hold of the entire world?
And so on Saturday I sent off this enquiry to Porkbun:
This is a question concerning censorship.I have had a free blog with Blogger / Blogspot since 2008, and started up another in January 2019 after I made my original blog private.My newer public blog ─ which is a personal, albeit anonymous, journal ─ sometimes voices my opinions on controversial issues such as the COVID-19 'pandemic', mandatory face-masking, and experimental 'vaccines'. After all, I am 71 years old, and I have no intention of ever being forced to get 'vaccinated' against any flu, including COVID-19.I live in a highly urban part of the world and see absolutely no evidence of any pandemic ─ I only hear of it on the news and in the newspapers. I don't know of anyone who has definitely ever been sick with COVID-19, let alone died from it. And unlike the fake acting that went on in the original scare videos back in early 2019 at the so-called outbreak when we saw news-bites of people in China collapsing and dying in the streets from COVID-19, that has not been how the virus works ─ it was fake, and intended to get the worldwide scare going.This is the sort of thing I sometimes say in my blog posts.Well, yesterday I received notification from Blogger that two of my recent posts had been deleted, and the only reason given was "Your content has violated our malware and viruses policy."What malware or viruses? This is of course nonsense, for the entire blog would be infected ─ not just a couple of posts that are surgically removed and the malware or virus has been safely eradicated!I know why the posts were deleted ─ Google didn't like them due to their non-compliant rhetoric. One of the posts was titled "'I Was a Victim of Facebook's "Fact Checkers"' wherein I detailed how one of my Facebook posts had been flagged as a result of including anti-COVID-19 'vaccine' material.My question to you is if I decided to migrate my public blog to a new website hosted at Porkbun, if you were approached by anyone or any entity who did not want something in this controversial area to be online, would you submit in lockstep with this rampant mainstream censorship and tell me to delete it or face having the website shut down?Thanks.
Hi, thanks for reaching out.
We can't make any promises about types of content that might trigger a suspension, since we're required by our contract with ICANN to evaluate complaints on a case-by-case basis.
That said, generally, if the domain activity/content is legal in your jurisdiction and ours, and doesn't constitute DNS abuse, we would be loath to suspend.
Sorry I can't provide a more-specific answer than that, but hopefully that helps some.
I won't call that an inspiring response.
What I would truly love to be able to do is have a website set up on the so-called decentralized Web, but I have absolutely no understanding of how to do this. I get the impression that a domain for a website can be bought for a one-time fee that would make the domain the owner's forever ─ in the internet that we live with, a domain name has to be 'leased' and can only belong to the owner for as long as he or she keeps maintaining payment for it.
Likewise with a website using that domain name ─ a webhost company will only keep the website online for as long as the customer maintains payments.
But I think that in the decentralized Web, once a domain and website have been set up, it would virtually last forever. Or, I would reckon, for as long as there ever is a decentralized Web.
However, everything involved with the decentralized Web seems to spin around cryptocurrencies. I have no interest in cryptocurrencies ─ I don't have the money to experiment with that sort of thing. My monthly pension is inadequate for my current situation, and I am at the mercies of my wife and her two working sons to meet the monthly mortgage and related costs.
Oh, Lord, it's already after 8 p.m. ─ I must stop blogging for today.
I want to link to two very interesting videos that my younger brother and I watched relating to that earlier censorable topic I was harping about. Both videos ─ interviews ─ were hosted by Vaccine Choice Canada's Ted Kuntz.
We watched the first video late yesterday morning: Chris Sky is on FIRE! We MUST Rise Against Tyranny NOW.
The second video was watched by us late this morning: Fantastic Interview with James Corbett of The Corbett Report.
Anyone who is any kind of fan of either interviewee ought to enjoy those two features.
By the way, my brother and I were both struck by how much Ted Kuntz reminds us of fictional Cincinnati radio station WKRP's Les Nessman.
No comments:
Post a Comment