Public Secrets banned from Facebook? UPDATE — ban lifted

Posted by: Phineas on April 11, 2011 at 1:01 pm

**Posted by Phineas

Apparently so. A reader wrote to tell me he was blocked from linking one of my posts there because of “abusive or spamming content.” So, I fired up the seldom-used Public Secrets account and, sure enough, I was blocked from linking a post from my own blog.

Hmmm…..

It had to have happened within the last week or so, since I recall seeing recent hits from Facebook. It’s no great loss, but I am curious which post outraged someone so much that he or she felt a need to complain. Was it one pointing out the inherent aggressiveness, misogyny, and Jew-hatred in Islam? That’s not being abusive, just honest. My contentions that Eric Holder should be impeached, Barack Obama is a stealth Socialist, and this entire administration a bunch of bumblers out to weaken the United States? Strong opinions, yes, but “abusive?”

And I wonder if it takes one complaint or several?

As for “spamming,” when did I ever try to sell any of you the “Secret Way To Make Money Fast?”

Well, recently, at any rate.

Anyone know how one goes about getting the ban lifted? Not so much for me, but I’d like others to be able to link, if they want to.

UPDATE: It looks like the ban has been lifted.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

RSS feed for comments on this post.

9 Responses to “Public Secrets banned from Facebook? UPDATE — ban lifted”

Comments

  1. Geo says:

    ST:

    Not quite sure how the procedure on abuse works on Facebook but, I’m very familiar with a “dopey lib” technique that is used on participant news forums.

    Whenever they [dopey libs] get their collective brains beat in or are loosing a argument they “resort” to hitting the “abuse” button on forums. Then they either coordinate this with other “dopey libs” or they sign in under “sock puppet” accounts and continue to hit abuse.

    After numerous “reports” are collected [not sure what number it takes to complete]at the servers a “automatic” “review” is made of the account [in theory, at least]. What really happens is the “account” being reported in “locked” and prevented from adding additional postings and previous posts are “hiddened”.

    This has been a continuing problem that libs have taken advantage of for a couple of years now. The Gannett “Pluck” Forum is famous for this problem and Gannett operates hundreds of Newpapers and Forums with this problem.

    Complaints to the Editors generates little response, if any. People usually have to resort to signing up for a “new account” under a different name.

    When they cordinate this, they are hard to keep up with or to stop. It becomes a very serious and frustrating problem, which usually results in valuable participants just throwing up the ole keyboard and moving on.

    I’m not exactly sure that this is the Facebook problem that you have, but I have my suspicions and personal experiences.

    Just so we don’t spread the word to anyone not familiar with it, you may want to remove this post. If I can be of any further help contact me by email.

    Good Luck,
    Geo

  2. Carlos says:

    There are two paths to “free speech”: The first is to be ever-vigilant against unreasonable government interference.

    The second, the one used by liberal/leftist/statist mindsets, is to be ever-vigilant against anyone with a reasonable, factual argument and to demand retraction/censureship for a variety of reasons, most commonly a charge of “racism” today.

  3. ST says:

    Geo – my co-blogger wrote this post about his blog. Looks like the ban was lifted. Great to hear, but why the heck was the page banned in the first place?!

  4. Jason says:

    Adding to Geo. If Facebook gets enough “hits” saying a site is spamming, they will block it. The liberals love to post Facebook pages on their internal areas and then have all their people come and vote on Facebook that the page is spam.

    Of course, FB is very quick to block conservative pages and very slow to block liberal pages.

    I experienced this on Digg.com as well. I was able to infiltrate a liberal group on Digg and I saw first hand how they would use a Yahoo group to “offsite” share which Digg stories to bury. They do the same thing with the Facebook pages.

    I hope this helps.

  5. Phineas says:

    I had a feeling it might be something like that, Jason. There’s also an active campaign by jihadi backers and Lefties to go after those who are critical of Islam, particularly when we complain about Islamist and antisemitic pages.

  6. Helen says:

    Don’t take it personally. FB spent a day being difficult with everybody’s blogs, including mine. Clearly another stupid hitch. *-:)

  7. Geo says:

    Phineas:
    Sorry I didn’t realize that you authored the article and not ST when I posted my response. It wasn’t intentional. I’ll pay closer attention in the future.

    Jason:
    Thanks for your input, you seemed to explain it more clearly than my attempt.

    Glad to hear I got straightened out.

  8. Noelegy says:

    Yet Facebook apparently has no problem with a page openly calling for Sarah Palin’s assassination.

  9. Phineas says:

    Noelegy: Yeah, I’ve complained about that page myself, yet it stays. :-w

    Geo: No problems, it’s ST’s site, after all. :)