Comments on: Letter to NAS on Panel Composition and Balance

By: Tim Lambert

Tim Lambert — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 13:53:34 +0000

Readers who are unfamiliar with Spam Karma might be interested in the fact that the control panel for Spam Karma lets you see the reasons that SK classifies any particular comment as spam, so it would have been trivial for Steve to find out that my trackbacks were marked as spam by John A. Instead he jumped to a false conclusion, something that seems to be a bit of a habit with Steve.

Note that neither Steve nor John A have responded to the substrance of my criticism. Instead, they have tried to hide it.

Steve: Tim. I’ve geting reading for the NAS Panel and have got many other things to do than to argue with you about Spam Karma. Maybe I’ll look at it in a week or two.

By: John A

John A — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 08:52:01 +0000

Tim Lambert:

Yes, I marked your trackback as spam since I have no interest in allowing you to redirect posters from this site to your troll weblog. Since you also linked the same lies to two different posts by Steve it makes it that much easier to justify it as spam, being as its designed to increase your traffic by attaching yourself to this one.

By: ET SidViscous

ET SidViscous — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 07:43:22 +0000

Not true.

I’ve been retroactively Karmad a time or two.

By: Tim Lambert

Tim Lambert — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 07:05:15 +0000

Steve, I already pointed out that the two trackbacks appeared in comments. Sidvicous noticed them. So they weren’t picked as spam by Spam Karma because it doesn’t operate that way. Yes, it sometimes retroactively classifies things as spam, but only when it gets another comment from the same source. Which it didn’t, since I only left two trackbacks and you only found two trackbacks.

If you didn’t mark it as spam, then John A did. This, by the way, is what he did lsst time I linked to your blog.

By: Steve McIntyre

Steve McIntyre — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 04:12:09 +0000

One of the ongoing difficulties with the inventor of the Fourier theory of hockey sticks is his claims to knowledge when he is merely speculating. It is of course “possible” that Spam Karma was not involved and that John A was involved, but it is not “obvious” especially when there are two posts with identical language and with webpage links. In fact, the two posts were picked up and were treated as spam by Spam Karma daily report. Some people might view Spam Karma’s decision as being very insightful.

Report on comment number 11 (id=15130)
Comment Author: Deltoid
Comment Type: trackback
Comment Content:
—————————————–

NAS Panel deja vu

I wrote earlier about McIntyre’s attack on the NAS Panel on temperature reconstructions. McIntyre objected to two panelists because they were co-authors of co-authors of Mann, but not to the panelist who was a co-author of a co-author of…

etc. etc….

By: ET SidViscous

ET SidViscous — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 02:56:54 +0000

If you post a third time and hit sparm Karma, it retroactively delets previous posts.

Happend to me, and has happened to others. Screws with the post numbering.

But then you know that. And I’m sure John explained why, and there was a reason. Your just manufacturing something to have sour grapes over, and well know it.

By: Tim Lambert

Tim Lambert — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 02:40:59 +0000

SidVicous, I linked to two posts here so there were two trackbacks. You seem to have actually seen the trackbacks, so obviously Spam Karma didn’t block them. If Steve didn’t delete them, it would seem that it was John A, who last time I linked here, boasted that he had deleted my trackback.

By: kim

kim — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 02:28:09 +0000

Tim, Cuffey isn’t on the same time scale as the hockey stick. I’m a fool and I can see that.
========================================================

By: nanny_govt_sucks

nanny_govt_sucks — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 02:14:38 +0000

#88 Tim, the comments at your recent blog entry seem to be running pretty heavily against you right now. Are you sure you want people from this site to visit there? You might want to circle your wagons.

By: ET SidViscous

ET SidViscous — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 02:10:57 +0000

There is of course the posibility too that since he posted the same trackback post twice (exact same wording copy/paste) he did so a third time and thus triggered spam karma.

There is also the possibility he did this intentionally so that he could complain about it since post 88 came up almost immediately after the previous disapeared.

When the evidence to prove a point you want proven doesn’t exist, manufacture it.