This comment is meant to be administrative and corrective. I apologize in advance for its length. The website has recently recieved several comments that appear to be, what is commonly, in the world of blogs, called, `flames' or comments from a `troll'. These terms have a quite negative connotation, and that's for a reason. These sorts of comments are quite negative in tone and do not attmept to actually engage the issue. When it is permitted, the poster tends to post anonymously and just tries to stir up controversy. For more information about the terms, check the Wikipedia listings I referenced. These messages have been coming from a reader who, to be fair, has not been posting completely anonymously (we will call her Joan to preserve her anonymity) but rather has been complaining that opposing views to those of our contributors and posters have not been aired or respected on this blog, and that the emails she has been receiving from Mr. William Dempsey have been coming to her in his own name and without any acknowledgment of his being associated with Project Sycamore. Also, Joan complains that she has not been removed from the email list and has not been allowed to post in the past. She asks explicitly, ``Am I being screened?'' I would like to respond to these allegations in reverse order, because my responses will build upon one another. To answer Joan's last question. The answer is a firm yes. Every comment on this website is reviewed before it is allowed to be posted, and if it is not acceptable, then it is not allowed to be posted, it is as simple as that. To be completely honest, this instance is, as far as I can remember, the first time I have needed to exercise this power, but a similar scenario is exactly why the founders of the Project and I decided that we would moderate our comments. As to not being removed from the mailing list, I do not know why Joan has not been removed. If you'd like to be removed from the list, I'd suggest you email comments@projectsycamore.com. (However, I don't know why you'd want to be removed from the list, if you wanted to contribute to the discussion on this blog.) This is the address that is listed on our website on the "Contact Us" page for general questions about Project Sycamore. I would assume this is also the address for taking care of problems with email distribution. If it isn't, I'm sure that whoever handles this address is competent to find out where to go to fix any problems. In order to make clear why Joan has not been allowed to post, I would like to call to mind a few points of the code of conduct, some of which have been violated by more than one person on this blog. The first reason is that she made what seemed to be "harassing, abusive, threatening, libelous, deceptive, inaccurate, plagiaristic and otherwise unacceptable comments." Of course, not all of these descriptions apply, such as plagiaristic; however, at the very least, the tone of the comments fits into the rest of the categories. I find it very hard to believe that Mr. Dempsey has been sending emails to Joan, almost daily, about his own personal political convictions. That he has been sending some emails is something known by all members of the Project, and the reason why should be obvious from what he has written about. There have been some serious events at the University that could use being addressed in a calm, rational forum. Joan's comments did not in any way address the posts she was commenting on, but rather complained that there were no contrary opinions being posted, and that she was getting nearly daily emails from Mr. Dempsey's private email address. This is just inaccurate, or at the very least, libelous, and should have been taken up privately with people in Project Sycamore who could have taken care of the problem. It did not deserve to be posted on a website that could be viewed by absolutely anyone in the world. Unless Joan has been receiving different emails from the rest of us, she has been receiving messages from the address news@projectsycamore.com. Granted, this address has the name "William H Dempsey, Class of 52", but it is not Mr. Dempsey's private email address. By the very user name, it should have been quite obvious that these are official messages of the Project. If this is not the case. I invite you to send the Comments address an email, or you could even send me a message. I won't be able to do anything, but I'll send the message on to people who could. Perhaps if Joan's posts had addressed what had been written, I would have allowed them, but even then, the tone would have had to have been respectful, and Joan would have needed to take credit for what she was saying. I do admit that some of this was my fault. I'd thought that it was required that anyone who was to post needed to sign into the blog with a user account before posting. Because of this incident, I realized that anonymous posting had been formerly permitted, a permission I have since revoked. I'm sure some of you have noticed this change. I think that it will lead to an overall improvement in the quality of posts here. It is a bit of a pain, but the website that sponsors this blog doesn't send any junk mail, so there's no real disadvantage besides taking the time to take credit for what you are broadcasting to the world. I really would like to see some genuine discussion happening on this blog. So far the posts we have had on the blog have been pretty one sided, and this is not because I've been screening out comments I disagree with. Joan, if you'd like to discuss why you disagree with the emails of Mr. Dempsey, please post your comments, but do keep in mind the the rules listed in the Code of Conduct. Like I said earlier, I apologize for the length of this message, but because of this incident, I thought that a corrective message was needed. I hope it helps. I hope you all have a blessed Easter Octave. Please keep the University in your prayers this week, as the Monologues will be performed this Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. God Bless. Pax Christi, Joseph Caudle Webmaster, Project Sycamore Blog