Encore un billet de blog = encore un France Loto?

Non. Imagine que je viens d'acheter un France Loto, et hier je n'ai pas eu

les chiffres
2 7 13 34 44
ni le Bonus
8

Bon, aujourd'hui, l'achat n'est d'aucune utilité de tout. Je le jette.

Imagine par contre que j'écris un billet hier, encore un aujourd'hui, ils ne seront pas inutiles demain.

Ceci est une somme d'un blog très bien rempli, pas le mien:

230 + 566 + 595 + 568 + 653 + 611 + 645 + 595 + 518 + 575 + 469 + 664 + 726 + 807 + 587 = 8809 Siris

Je le découvre avec ce billet:

Çatalhöyük and Other Complications
http://branemrys.blogspot.com/2018/03/catalhoyuk-and-other-complications.html

Il est du "jour de π" (les Américains écrivent 14/3[/année] comme [année.]3.14 et ils écrivent 3,14 comme 3.14) et il est toujours lu, par moi mais aussi par le bloggueur d'où je l'ai:

The TOF Spot : Keeping Tabs on Things
http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2018/06/keeping-tabs-on-things.html

que donc, à son tour, je viens de découvrir à partir de "Catholic and Enjoying It" parce que Mark Shea lit depuis longtemps Mike Flynn:

Mike Flynn has far too much fun…
October 12, 2017 by Mark Shea
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2017/10/mike-flynn-far-much-fun.html

Notons Mark Shea qui bloggue sur Catholic and Enjoying It et Mike Flynn qui le fait sur The TOF Spot sont, les deux, déjà publiés sur papier : Mike Flynn étant auteur de sci fi et Mark Shea étant apologète catholique. Malheureusement un peu moderniste à propos les thématiques de créationnisme et géocentrisme.

Je crois que je viens de faire mon point : un billet de blog n'est pas sans valeur parce qu'il est vieux, donc, en écrire une foultitude diffère vachement du fait d'acheter une foultitude sur France Loto. Les tirages de Loto ne se cumulent pas, ils sont juste encore une chance pour la même possibilité assez éloignée. Les billets de blog peuvent constituer avec le temps une œuvre littéraire. Pour l'exploiter, il faut juste trouver un éditeur, et, là aussi les chances se cumulent, plus on est connu.

Regardons donc mon lectorat (les blogs confondus) la semaine passée:

12 juin 2018 15:00 – 19 juin 2018 14:00 fut 3378 en total:

Italie 796, Russie 592, France 499, États-Unis 392, Espagne 204, et moins que 200 :
Canada 177, Suède 137, Brésil 121, Émirats arabes unis 110, Allemagne 69, Ukraine 63, et moins que 50 :
Pays-Bas 44, Chypre 26, Irlande 22, Royaume-Uni 14, Chine 14, Vietnam 14, Nigéria 13, Indonésie 12, et moins que dix:
Portugal 8, Pakistan 6, Australie 5, Cambodge 5, Inde 4, Autriche-Hongrie 3, Bangladesh 3, Roumanie 3.
8*2 pages-vues: Moldavie, Singapour, Pérou, Colombie, Belgique, Philippines, Équateur, Argentine.
6*1 seul: Thaïlande, Corée du Sud, Pologne, Maroc, Lettonie, Taïwan.

Et sur la longueur:

Historique global des pages vues, tous les blogs ensemble: 1 670 386

Médiane entre 14 710 et 15 053 (14 882).

Quartiles
inférieure entre 2 940 et 3 268 (3 104)
supérieure entre 44 316 et 51 938 (48 127)

Minimum, le petit dernier : 65 vues
Maximum, Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : 271 045 vues

Comme dit, avoir des blogs est une valeur cumulative. Par contre, pour les valoriser comme il faut, vaudra mieux avoir un éditeur qui ne demande pas un format non-blog en avance d'accepter une soumission, qui respecte que le blog est la première publication, et donc un peu en dehors de sentiers bien battus de l'édition. Je m'y mettrais moi-même, pour des blogs catholiques en dehors du mien, si j'avais les moyens d'un début.

Pour ma musique, mes compositions, vaudra aussi mieux un musicien prêt à sortir des sentiers battus de nos jours. Mais je ne suis pas pour autant un atonaliste ... non, c'est plutôt une combinaison des facteurs qui est peu usuelle .../HGL

PS : s'il y a des catholiques qui rechignent au créationnisme jeune terre et pas mal, la "régle" n'est pas sans exception et je viens de diriger le suivant vers ma prduction au sujet:

Mahound's Paradise : Slumming with the Creationists
http://mahoundsparadise.blogspot.com/2018/05/slumming-with-creationists.html

Some are Spamming Where I Comment?

That some spam my own posts is indirectly documented by the collection of posts which I have called Spammer's choice. My point is not that my own posts are spam, it is that they have attracted spammers.

So have from time to time the posts under which I have commented, here is one such post:

The TOF Spot : 1. The Great Ptolemaic Smackdown
http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-great-ptolemaic-smackdown.html

And here is the spam I saw under it - and under my own, non-spam, comment:

[Click to enlarge before reading]



And just so you know it is spam, nothing to do with the actual post and its content, well, for one it is in Arabic, while the post is in English and all other comments (including mine) are in English, for another here is a translation of what it means:



I am not saying the translation is perfect, but it is fairly clear that the content is related to a company dealing in sewers, not to the astronomy of Ptolemy, Tycho Brahe and later. Which content is the object of the post. A more general subject is the Galileo case (in fact, TOF Spot was placing the Galileo case in a logically more general subject as history of astronomy, but the Galileo case is more generally accessed and often run parallel to ...) an even more general subject therefore relation of religion and science. My own comment above that Arabic spammer is the second of two.

I'll give a transscript of both comments, so their relevance to original post by TOF Spot can be shown:

Hans Georg Lundahl

October 24, 2017 at 5:38 AM

It seems your friend Mark Shea is rerunning this on his blog today.

As to its being 6021:st anniversary of the Universe, like he says, in the times of Father Martino Martini, SJ, the Ussher chronology was considered an innovation. It was popular among Catholics because it agrees with the Vulgate, while the Roman Martyrology does not. But as it was an innovation and in conflict with Roman Martyrology, it could not be canonised.

He took a cue from Chinese history as saying it worked totally well with LXX (supposing the Chinese came there before Babel), and not too bad with Roman Martyrology (indeed, if the 2952 BC for Fu Xi beginning his reign is taken as in Roman Martyrology, rather than either preferring Syncellus' version of LXX or considering that Chinese chronology inflated, then Fu Xi would need to be a son or grandson of Noah - like Ham setting up a "summer house" in China or some grandson of Noah getting born).

If you have any desire to see my own take on this (close enough to Father Martini's, Jesuit friend as I am, previous to Settele or so), [click - > ] here is my own post [ < - click]

Hans Georg Lundahl

October 24, 2017 at 5:44 AM

[This is the one you see on the image:]

Oh, btw, since Mark Shea also finished the rerun by a diatribe against "greatest Catholics of all times" "anointed to defend the Church from Pope and Magisterium", I made [click - > ] another post [ < - click] with some comments on how Bergoglio's words from 2014 fare if compared to Pius XII supposing he was Pope and Humani Generis, supposing it was Magisterium.

I see only a slight grammar check to modify on these comments.

I wrote

... with some comments on how Bergoglio's words from 2014 fare if compared to Pius XII supposing he was Pope and Humani Generis, supposing it was Magisterium.

I should have written

... with some comments on how Bergoglio's words from 2014 fare if compared to Pius XII, supposing he was Pope, and to Humani Generis, supposing it was Magisterium.

The general outline is "if compared to Pius XII and Humani Generis" and the inserted reservations should have been both, not just the latter one, separated by commas. Also when Humani Generis is coming after such an insertion, one should add a "to" in order to remind we are dealing with "compared to".

I write things on topics I like, spammers spam off topic and sometimes in Arabic. Someone else writes on a topic I like, I comment, and in comes a spammer commenting off topic. It would seem some are trying to degrade what I am doing. And if you think of that, it would seem to imply that what I am doing is not sufficiently low to please those who want me to be low ... since companies dealing with sewers have been recurrent, they might try to imply I should take a job working with sewers. I have a preference for writing.

Now, one can wonder whether the reason for their ire is, yesterday, when I dealt with the result of the referendum, I also suggested that the idea of allowing foreigners to vote to the Dáil Eireann was a bad one. And that idea is a bit nationalistic, right, for a nation in the West, right?

I am in fact less well disposed to Muslim immigrants in the West than I was in 2005 when I arrived in France as a homeless man (I am still homeless). This does not mean my ideas on how to deal with the issue has changed. I thought reducing immigration and removing from key posts was a good idea then, I think it is a good idea now. I thought foisting Western modernity galore (by forbidding the veil or forcing public school with teachers that are sometimes anti-Muslim and even when not anti-Fundamentalist) was a bad idea then, and I think it is a bad idea now.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre University Library
Pope St. Felix I, Martyr
30.V.2018

Tertio Kalendas Junii. Sancti Felicis Primi, Papae et Martyris, cujus dies natalis tertio Kalendas Januarii recensetur. Tertio Kalendas Januarii. Romae natalis sancti Felicis Primi, Papae et Martyris, qui sub Aureliano Principe Ecclesiam rexit. Ipsius tamen festum tertio Kalendas Junii celebratur. (Pope Felix I (died 30 December 274) was the Bishop of Rome or Pope from 5 January 269 to his death in 274.)

PS, since I promoted one by TOF Spot from 2013, I can promote another one from this year:

The TOF Spot : Hillbilly Thomism
http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2018/04/hillbilly-thomism.html

A Modernist Catholic Not so Bright on Almsgiving Gets a Refutation

He [Chen] had announced the event in a full-page advertisement in The New York Times on June 16. “Leading Chinese philanthropist teams up with famous American charities to host charity luncheon for 1,000 poor and destitute Americans,” the ad said. “Each will receive 300 dollars.”
***
On Sunday he met with officials from the New York City Rescue Mission and asked them to supply the homeless people as guests. They said they would participate in the event as long as he did not hand out any cash, said Craig Mayes, the group’s executive director. Mr. Mayes said he was concerned that some of the clients might use the cash to buy alcohol and drugs. In return, Mr. Chen agreed to donate $90,000 to the organization, and the two parties signed a contract.
***
Mr. Chen addressed the audience and then uncorked the news the crowd had been waiting for: “I will give $300 for every participant today.”

The homeless men and women shot to their feet, whooping and applauding.

“No he won’t,” Michelle Tolson, the mission’s director of public relations, said. “The police will shut him down.”

Officials from the Rescue Mission quickly brokered a deal with Mr. Chen’s assistants, allowing him to hand $300 to several chosen homeless clients in a symbolic gesture. The clients, however, would have to return the money.

Quote attributed to:
NYTimes : Gifts of $300 to Homeless Are Reduced to a Lunch
By KIRK SEMPLE, JUNE 25, 2014
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/nyregion/300-gifts-to-homeless-by-magnate-are-canceled.html
Given on:
The TOF Spot : Homelessness and Freedom of the Will
http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2014/06/homelessness-and-freedom-of-will.html

Under which these comments:

Xena Catolica
June 28, 2014 at 9:15 AM

Is it illegal to give cash to the homeless in NYC? Because police enforcement of a private "contract" without a judicial review looks really sketchy to me, unless there's an immediate threat to public order & safety....

Looking forward to the eventual arrival of Brennan's "Thomist Psychology" via Interlibrary Loan. Mr. Chen looks like he'd be someone's entertaining case study.

Hans Georg Lundahl
July 18, 2014 at 2:29 PM

Chen served as a prop in a piece of paedagogy.

You know the story when a widow asked Buddha to raise her son? He did no miracle. He asked her to find something from a house where nobody had died and bring it back to him. She found no such house and got the point: everyone is missing someone, request impossible.

Chen very possibly wanted to do an offer that he knew and had arranged in advance it should be impossible.

Anonymous
June 28, 2014 at 7:03 PM

Newt Gingrich used to tell the story of how the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program of the Social Security Administration used to — quite literally — kill people.

The problem was that it could take years for the Social Security bureaucracy to process a claim for SSI. If the claim was allowed, the claimant would immediately get a lump-sum payment of benefits, back to the date of the claim.

Drunks were taking those big SSI checks to liquor stores, cashing them and immediately buying enough booze to drink themselves to death.

Maiki
June 30, 2014 at 1:28 PM

Whether is it "good" to give money directly or indirectly, it is definitely wrong to lie about who you are giving money for a publicity stunt. Either give money directly to a charity or give money directly to the homeless, but don't stage a dog an pony show. The homeless are not props for a philanthropic dinner.

Sophia's Favorite
June 30, 2014 at 1:36 PM

It wasn't a lie when he said it. He was made a liar by those who wouldn't let him do what he said he would. It may not have been a good idea, but it was not a lie until he was prevented from acting on his promise.

Maiki
July 1, 2014 at 4:17 PM

If you "broker a deal" to hand out money and then take it back, it is not the law forcing you to do this. If the charity org is not letting him do it, say... oh well, I can't do it, legally i need to do X. But he brokered a deal to allow him to "symbolically" give away money and get cheers but take it back. Nobody is going to stop him from privately going up to panhandlers and giving them 300$ each.

Sophia's Favorite
July 2, 2014 at 10:46 PM

Given the ad appeared on Monday, it is quite likely it was placed before the final negotiations had been conducted on Sunday. If he "brokered the deal" after the initial promise was made, then, I reiterate, the promise was not a lie, at the time he made it. To qualify as a lie, a statement must be known to be untrue, at the time it is made. You must prove that, at the time the initial promise of $300 was made—in an ad that, again, was probably placed before the negotiations were concluded—he knew he wouldn't be allowed to act on it.

You are making an accusation based on assumptions RE: "facts not in evidence". (Also, I wouldn't be so sure New York City wouldn't stop someone from going up to panhandlers and giving them large amounts of money, if they were doing it systematically rather than sporadically. That might be the kind of thing many cities not run by psychotic totalitarians like De Blasio or Bloomberg would prefer you didn't do, it being likely to cause a riot if anything goes even slightly wrong.)

Also, we put currency symbols before numbers, in English.

Hans Georg Lundahl
July 18, 2014 at 1:01 PM

But the Mission people, who work every day with the homeless and perhaps know something of the reasons for their homelessness, may well be right.

They may well be wrong and God damned Calvinistic heretics too.

Hans Georg Lundahl
July 18, 2014 at 1:31 PM

Most of the homeless are in that state because of mental illness and/or drug/alcohol addiction.

Homelessness is not a state, it is a situation.

It is a situation which is not only dependent on the homeless persons' own efforts to improve his situation to remedy (insofar as it is felt as a burden), but also on the perception other people have of that homeless person.

Now, if it were admitted that most homeless are neither addicts nor insane, then it would follow one had a certain problem about people getting the opportunities they deserve.

Some people do not like that conclusion being even possible. Some of such people have donated very heavily to medical and academic institutions.

Some such institutions and some such people themselves have a very great influence over the volunteers, at least on the level of their leadership. The ones enjoy that influence as benefactors and therefore obviously honest and well meaning people, the others as medical and psychological expertise.

Therefore such volunteers are very likely to give the account that "most" homeless are either addicts of mad. My own experience among homeless is that the least part are so. But some are heavily Stockholmised by psychiatry and perceive themselves as insane, though in fact they are not. Or as addicts, when in fact their consumption is normal.

Hans Georg Lundahl
July 18, 2014 at 1:39 PM

That would be $300 of booze and crack. The homeless individuals would be no better off — indeed, in many cases, worse off — whereas the Mission would spend the money on food, clothing, and such.

300 dollars on booze and crack?

Not my experience even with those who are in fact addicts (though, to be fair, I have not yet seen them handle 300 dollars, and known they were doing so).

Still less with those who are stamped as mad without being so, or even with those who are in fact mad. There are a few, not very many of those too.

Regard a bit this piece of information from an anonymous commenter:

Newt Gingrich used to tell the story of how the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program of the Social Security Administration used to — quite literally — kill people.

The problem was that it could take years for the Social Security bureaucracy to process a claim for SSI. If the claim was allowed, the claimant would immediately get a lump-sum payment of benefits, back to the date of the claim.

Drunks were taking those big SSI checks to liquor stores, cashing them and immediately buying enough booze to drink themselves to death.

Since he is anonymous, we cannot be sure it was in fact Newt Gingrich who told such a story. Or, if it was, we cannot be sure he is not Newt Gingrich or a very good friend of his himself.

But supposing Newt Gingrich had told such a story - would you take Newt Gingrich's authority for it?

And supposing this were true. The story does not tell how many of the drunks who would do this, and how many of them who would in fact die when having done it.

If a few did, is that a reason to cut the freedoms of the many to save a few who would otherwise ruin themselves?

As if people were not equally ruined by such as try to save them from themselves without any real warrant this is needed!

Hans Georg Lundahl
July 18, 2014 at 1:57 PM

One of the reasons why the freedom of the will is a manifest observation is that although the will is determined to the good, it is not always possible to know what the good it, and therefore not always possible to know what means are best to achieve it.

• a) it is usually well knowable what is good either in the realm of reason (like good behaviour) or in the realm of the flesh (like gratification); BUT man is not predetermined to prefer one of the goods over the other so as not to be able to do the opposite (what St Thomas means on a similar note, verbally, is that it is not always immediately easy to know where the TRUE good is);
• b) given what kind of good one decides for - grace, flesh, or flesh insofar as one can also have grace (the choice of most married Christians who bear thirtyfold fruit), it is not always but most often obvious what leads to it: obvious how to please God, obvious what one wants for one's flesh, obvious what kind of compromise between grace and flesh one can go for;
• c) and there are also a few cases where there is reasonable doubt of what is the best means.

When one knows how one's chances have been circumscribed by people judging one as charitably as NYPD (New York Police Department or perhaps Nouveau-York Pé-Dés) judged their city's homeless, it can however be a question of what means is least unlikely to take one out of trouble.

As for those guys, I am so sadly reminded of the story of one Christmas enemy, that NYC police corps was originally founded to deal with Christmas rioting.

And I suppose the Christmas rioting originally arose out of Calvinists protesting against Catholic Christmas festivities (sometimes taken too far) in ways reminiscent of Belfast Catholics protesting against Orangist Battle of The Boyne Memories. I e by interrupting the feasting. Then a Catholic would hit back ... you get the picture?

And the Calvinist would have been thinking he was doing a work pleasing to God while in fact they were killing the Catholics' and their own freedoms, hear the video associated with my comment:

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... against Yet Another Puritan as in Stupid Attack on Christmas
http://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2014/07/against-yet-another-puritan-as-in.html

As for yourself, you started out your article nominally as a defense of the dogma of free will. You ended it with an attack on the freewill of the homeless. You are saying they are mostly anyway slaves to their flesh and therefore no worse off if also treated as slaves.

How can any Irishman not be ashamed of you? Ulster Scots excepted, if you call them Irish, and even CSL (though rather Anglo-Irish than Ulster Scots) was hardly as uncharitable to the poor as you.

Recall the occasion when Tolkien had asked him why he gave a pound or five pounds or whatever to a homeless? "He is going to spend it all on booze" said JRRT (with some shade of his Methodist stepfamily). "So? That is what I was going to spend it on," answered CSL.

Hans Georg Lundahl
July 18, 2014 at 2:40 PM

I wonder how many times that I have asked people at homeless missions to find musicians for my compositions and once or twice I specifically offered what is anyway included in my general licence - they could keep money raised on a concert for them. In that specific case, the money they would have kept would have been kind of a payment for the coffee I had had there.

musicalia : What's the deal? C'est quoi ce truc?
http://hglundahlsmusik.blogspot.com/2008/11/whats-deal-cest-quoi-ce-truc.html

Or when I gave the blog to a young female unmarried volunteer. Instead of this starting a relation and giving her some money for playing piano and me some for composing for it - here are the piano pieces, btw:

musicalia : Guitar, Piano, Lute, Bouzouki
http://hglundahlsmusik.blogspot.com/2008/11/guitar-piano-lute-bouzouki.html

... or most of them, as well as earlier half or so of guitar compositions - she was sent away or it was at least somehow arranged that she left the day shelter where I was having breakfasts.

As a result my homelessness and obscurity and poverty has continued a few years more.

PROBABLY because there were jerks among those leading that day shelter (including a Novus Ordo parish priest or two, and the black one - whether he led or only attended "my" breakfasts - probably considering me an anti-black racist, though I am not) who thought this solution would be as useless to me as 300 dollars were deemed by those other jerks according to story for the homeless who might otherwise have had some days better off thanks to Chen.

TheOFloinn
(author of multicited article)
July 18, 2014 at 5:13 PM

Hans, you're spamming a post again.

Hans Georg Lundahl
July 19, 2014 at 11:43 AM

I am refuting in detail.

Thereby adding value to your original post.

If you are too cowardly an intellectual to take debate with people who REALLY disagree with some of your principles, why have a blog at all?

I am debating with Modernist "Catholics" like you, with Atheists, with Protestants (both on minor details of Creationism, such as if - ok that is not so minor - Geocentrism solves the Distant Starlight Problem, and on real hard and tragic issues, as which of e-LL-en go-VLD VV-h-I-te and Vicarius Christi adds up to the number of the Beast).

I have never ever called any commenter a spammer simply because he contradicted me, nor for such a matter as if his comments in answer to my post were longer than my post itself.

What a sad state of affairs when a man like you can pass for representing Catholicism in the Intellectual world!

HGL
July 20, 2014 at 12:31 PM

Besides, you might want to look up what the word spam means.

SPAM used to be portmanteau for SPI-ced h-AM.

Hence, spam for ubiquitous, unwelcome and obviously irrelevant to watched programme or movie, commercial.

If under a post on Heliocentrism I state Geocentrism is true, I am not spamming. If under this post I say there is superstition against freewill and Communism against the freedom of alms going on in New York and that you are Calvinist for supporting it, I am not spamming either.

I would be spamming if, under either of the posts, I posted links to "payday loans", "grow your virility", "UGG boots" or diverse medications, to name things I have come across.

I suppose what you mean is filibustering. But that word has less sense on the internet, where the debates are not limited in time beforehand, and where therefore using much time oneself is not stealing time from another.

Hans Georg Lundahl
July 24, 2014 at 1:57 PM

By the way, since you did after all use the word "spam" about my action under this post, might you perhaps know of others who consider my commenting as such?

And who might just possibly, theoretically, be prepared to "spam me back" (but with things that are really spam!) for my so-called spamming?

I mentioned the guestbook spamming, it is not the only type I have to live with.

[No answer, so far, from TheTOFSpot/TheOFloinn]

[This one seems to have remained unpublished due to stress while I was draughting it. Now's as good a time as any to publish it. Notification was given under blog post.]