Counterpunch dives deep into Noam Chomsky apology-speak

Gotta "love" Counterpunch running a Noam Chomsky apologist over the Epstein files all while ignoring Chomsky is a lifelong member of the left hand of the duopoly who hates the Green Party and doesn't even talk about parties to his left. 

This all happened LONG before his stroke but long AFTER Epstein's 2008 conviction. The Guardian has more. 

And, the being in the tank for the duopoly has been ardent. 

Meanwhile, yeah, I still hold a bit of a grudge that Counterpunch never ran my Jim Stiles snark, here on Substack. St. Clair may have forgotten. Or he didn't like it. Perhaps like him at High Country News, I didn't fit the site's editorial needs. 

On the duopoly and other issues?

Chomsky signed that infamous Harper's letter. 

Chomsky signed another letter, just months earlier, along with other pseudoleftists, asking Howie Hawkins not to run for the presidency on the Green Party ticket. 

Chomsky was a sheepdogger long before. 

Is it any wonder I dropped Counterpunch from my blogroll, after it sheepdogged for both him, and sheepdogger-redux Ralph Nader? (St. Clair is still, I think, butthurt over Nader vs GP 2004. The GP wasn't totally in the right, but it was no more wrong than Nader, who is himself a pseudoleftist.)

People I've blocked on Reddit and why, Jan 2026 version

Even more than Substack, I wish I had started this long ago.

Better late than never.

A few things are guaranteed to get you blocked. 

One is being a wingnut. Sometimes that's pre-emptive after my first comment.

Usually not pre-emptive, but being a BlueAnon tribalist can cause the same.

Being long-winded in the service of refusing to admit wrongness will get this more and more, since Reddit, like Facebook, has just one tool.

Being not just an idiot, but a smug and condescending one, will also get the same

Ghost commenting? Absolutely. It's cowardly weaselshit, especially when used to make a comment you don't think mods will let stand.

That leads to LaridaeLover, who did that on r/birding.

The day before, Aug. 16, Boris_Godunov was the condescending idiot on r/classicalmusic.

Not blocked, certainly, but?

Surely I had posted — not just commented, but posted — enough on r/Secularism for this piece about "Saint Acutis" to be recognized as snark. I guess not. (I not only started commenting way some time back, but even joined, because it's called "secularism" and not "atheism.")

LibertarianMeme is Mises Mice. Unfortunately, the mods aren't listed. Because, of course, they're chickenshit. And boy is that place a swill-hole. 

Glad Fig and SituationExciting137 for both being fucking morons about baseball in general, sabermetrics in particular, and Cal Raleigh vs Aaron Judge for MVP in precision. Plus, "Situation" was pulling this "you whippersnappers, get off my lawn, you've never seen baseball" bullshit, which I called him out on, before blocking him.

Texas Progressives say belated happy new year

The Texas Progressive Alliance has got its cup of kindness yet ready as it brings you this week's year-ending roundup.

Off the Kuff learned something new about whooping cough and its case levels in Texas.

SocraticGadfly looked at discussion of the TikTok "selloff" and called bullshit 

Neil at Houston Democracy Project thanked excellent Houstonians quick to reply to Patriot Front morons on Montrose overpasses.

Texas Monthly presents the annual Bum Steer awards.

Your Local Epidemiologist reports that we narrowly dodged a vaccine disaster, for now.

The Fort Worth Report confirms that Texas is in fact ranked among the lowest nationwide in women's health care.

The Waco Bridge previews the Connally ISD takeover by the TEA.

The San Antonio Report introduces us to Leah Meyer and the Mermaid Cafe, whose mission is to employ people with disabilities. 

 

A Cornell prof unethically asked my opinions on R/AskHistorians

And boy, did they get it.

The survey, led by Stanford prof Sarah Gilbert, asked a number of questions about people who had recently been banned. 

It took me 2/3 of the screens to get to that part, and I told them straightforwardly.

That said, I did NOT notice at first in the chat message that this was being shared with mods at r/askhistorians.

I am going to quote the full chat message:

CivilServantBot 12:30 PM  Participate in a Cornell survey to study community norms and participation in AskHistorians 

Hi TheSocraticGadfly, 

We are a group of researchers at Cornell University who are working with the mods of r/AskHistorians on a survey that will help us understand the relationship between community rules, norms and participation. 

You have been randomly selected to participate in the survey because you were either temporarily or permanently banned in r/AskHistorians in the last six months and we are interested in learning your perspective. 

The survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete and will ask questions about your participation patterns in r/AskHistorians, why you participate(d), your perception of its community norms, your experience with algorithmically generated content and recommender systems, and demographic questions. We will not ask you for personally identifiable information. The survey has been approved by Cornell’s IRB: IRB0149466 and will be open until January 4 2026. 

If you would like to proceed with the survey, click on the following link: https://cornell.ca1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_7OqguxY50t1Ed2S 

If you have any questions or concerns, please reach out to the lead researcher, Dr. Sarah Gilbert on Reddit via DM to u/SarahAGilbert or email sarah.gilbert@cornell.edu. Or, you can contact Cornell’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) for Human Participants at 607-255-6182 or access their website at https://researchservices.cornell.edu/offices/IRB. 

We will share survey results on r/AskHistorians and our website at citizensandtech.org 

Thank you for your consideration! 

Note: this message was sent by a bot. To receive a timely response, please do not respond to this message and instead reach out to Dr. Gilbert or Cornell’s IRB.

Back to where I was.

Not noticing the sharing with mods? 

That's on me.

I also did NOT notice — BECAUSE it wasn't listed — that Gilbert herself is a mod there. In fact, earning some Reddit scrolling bananas, it appears that, per her profile, that's the ONLY place she has any real activity. I went back six months ago, and that's the ONLY sub she was active on. AND, her only activity there, even, was as a mod dropping the banhammer.

That's on them, and per the chat, IMO, that nondisclosure is academically unethical.

It also means the research isn't blinded. 

I did indeed contact the IRB. On Dec. 9, right after realizing this. They replied, saying that they would review the issue and decide if further action were warranted. I responded, asking to be informed if further action were taken and what it was, OR if no further action were taken and if so, why not. Stay tuned.

And, if they don't respond to me by Jan. 4? Given the animus from the current presidential administration to higher education in America, I'm sure I can find the appropriate agency within the current Department of Education to contact. 

Update: I emailed back again on Jan. 4 my original respondent, and said:

Dear. Mr. Gideon: 

Today is Jan. 4, the cutoff date for the Reddit research project. I've heard nothing further from you or the IRB chair to learn what, if any, additional action may be warranted. Even if "none," I don't like being left in the dark. 

Assuming that further "no answer" = "none," I will take possible further steps on my own as I deem warranted.

And, I already know what my possible next steps will be.