Saturday, March 16, 2013

Sunday Housekeeping - Volume 12

I don't like to criticize readers, they are the lifeblood of this blog, but there are a few who forget that this is not a professional blog.
There is no staff to correct spelling mistakes other than my wife.
There are no fact-checkers and there is no editor and writing coach.

I not only research my pieces fastidiously, I try to write interesting and provocative pieces that the mainstream media cannot or will not touch.
In this respect, I believe I have a small measure of success considering the number of people from all over the world who drop by each day.

 I put the final piece through a bunch of proofreaders available online, but we all know the reliability of Google translate and most other software do about as good as a job.

In my last piece I presented a clause from the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which all three proofreaders tagged as badly written.
I'm not really prepared to pay a professional proofreader/editor $50-$100 per blog piece, so readers will have to accept my missives as they are. I do my best.

Like you I have good days and bad days, some pieces get finished right up to the deadline which I try to adhere to because many of you accustomed to a fixed schedule.

I cannot monitor the comments section on an hourly basis, I too have a life outside this blog. PLEASE remember that when you are about to click up that flaming mouse.

Last year I opened up the comments section without prior moderation and I know from feedback most of you like to see your comment up ASAP.

I've asked for trust and have been largely rewarded, but listening to readers of late complain of the one-liners and insults, I again will tighten what is allowed.

These are general modifications which I'd like to share with you.

No inane or insulting one-liners. You all know what that is.
Vicious personal attacks will no longer be tolerated, even if attached to an acceptable comment.
No mention of any reader's real name as long as they are using an alias, outing people is forbidden.
Any comment that references a reader's name other than their screen alias will be redacted, regardless of the quality of the comment.

Sometime I allow an Anonymous comment when it is clear that the reader hasn't read the rules. It is rare and if that same person continues, I'll remind him/her of the rule under their comment.

There is no more wiggle room based on the overall quality of the comment. Break any of the above rule and the comment will redacted without a trace.

No multiple screen names and no more foreign screen names. The comments just won't be printed and you will not even see "This comment has been removed by a blog administrator'  The comment will just disappear.

Argue with other readers over issues or opinions but leave out the insults. Again, a good comment with a personal insult will no longer be tolerated.

Let me reiterate that rage is part of our Anglo/Ethnic experience and this blog won't censor legitimate grievances peppered with fiery language.
All public figures however remain fair game as for insults.

Remember that I am not monitoring the board 24/7 and will delete stuff when I get to it, so please try not to take advantage to sneak stuff in. We don't want to return to moderating.

Sometimes this blog gets more comments than important stories in mainstream newspapers, so I know many feel that they can say here what is not tolerated there.
But that doesn't mean anything goes.
If you see a troll message, just let it go or add this underneath;  "TROLL ALERT"
I'll look at these comments carefully and apply the rules firmly.
And remember the rules apply to all equally.
French comments continue to be allowed for those without English. For bilinguals, I'd ask that you write in English because much more people will understand your comment.

As for traffic, I happy to report that Google Analytics tracking software shows that we have crossed a million pageviews per year, but that number is seriously understated because the blog loads five pages at a time and people who just scroll down and read post after post, but who don't click on the actual title are not counted.

Thank you for making this blog a part of your day, I appreciate your time and effort because I would never have soldiered on without your support.


  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    1. This is unbelievable. The VERY FIRST comment to a post about the rules breaks the rules. If this reading this blog really were part of your weekly routine, you would already know that the Editor doesn’t want people to post as Anonymous. He even repeated himself right above that anonymous comments will be completely deleted, regardless of content, so you couldn’t possibly have bothered reading his post.

      I can only assume that this is actually a sly way of testing to see how to get around the posting rules. Let’s see if our two comments actually get deleted. I wonder whether completely deleting a comment also deletes replies to it. Let's hope so.

    2. TO Anonymous
      Comments under ANONYMOUS are no longer accepted. Please read the section on the green bar at the top of the page "How to comment on this blog"

      For reader's information, I will not 'disappear' ANONYMOUS comments that seem to be honest mistakes, so that the author can be advised to re-post following the rules.
      Other inappropriate comments will redacted without a trace.

  2. Well, this is good news. If these rules turn out to actually be applied, it will be worthwhile to come back here more frequently now. The Editor has been putting extra effort into making well-researched and thoughtful posts, only to have this almost brought to nought by people who are purposefully trying to derail the conversation and lower the tone with deliberate stupidity and without ever making legitimate comments about the Editor’s actual posts.

    No one who wants to follow this blog needs to be exposed to a daily overdose of mocking and insults from someone who has a giant chip on his shoulder and way too much time on his hands. As someone previously wrote here, excessive exposure to his mentality corrodes the soul. That the Editor, in the name of open-mindedness, was blatantly giving preferential treatment to someone who chose to take advantage of his open-mindedness by flouting all the rules on purpose and as much as possible never made any sense.

    Completely zapping inane comments and one-liners and one-word comments or those that end in a smiley face is a good idea and can only help to boost the quality of the blog. For someone who only ever comes here to get a little “high” by making a pest of himself, as S.R candidly admitted to Apparatchik in the last post, having partially deleted comments that say “This comment has been deleted by a blog administrator” is seen as a badge of honour. As opposed to with earnest contributors, for a nuisance poster, a partially deleted comment is positive reinforcement for bad behaviour. It shows that he’s successfully pushing the limits to the extreme and then he simply moves onto his next junk comment with a little chuckle that he gets from this “high”. It has *NOTHING* to do with censoring ideas because there are none. It has even been demonstrated that he often didn’t bother reading his own multitude of newspaper articles that he linked to, since they often served to contradict his opinions. The only reason to post them was to make French more visible on someone else’s personal English blog about anglophones by diluting it with as many French words as possible, as if we weren’t already surrounded by French in daily life as it is.

    I never understood why Apparatchik bothered giving him thoughtful replies in French either. There is no evidence that he had ever even bothered reading any of his replies, nor that he has any interest whatsoever in engaging in constructive debate with him nor anyone at all, making replying to him a completely pointless activity.

    1. I never understood why Apparatchik bothered giving him thoughtful replies in French either.

      To reprise the comment I made on this very point yesterday:
      "[...] Or those of us who take your blog seriously enough to respond to such missives, not so much out of an primal desire to perpetuate such cancerous behavior but by considering how leaving such comments unanswered fuels the tacit perception among many on the opposing side that we are collectively unable to concretely acknowledge such provocations, or worse, that we are unable to articulate both the broad strokes and details inherent to our opposing points of view. "

      There is no evidence that he had ever even bothered reading any of his replies
      I can argue or otherwise defend a point of view; I don't exactly control whether my interlocutors choose to forfeit by, among others, letting the conversation degenerate or ignoring my responses altogether. More power to me, I say, if I can genuinely and seriously respond even to some of the more absurd replies and still remain mostly on topic.

      [...]nor that he has any interest whatsoever in engaging in constructive debate with him nor anyone at all
      True. But one thing S.R and any of his ilk genuinely can't affirm is that ALL of the "anglouilles" on this site are as inarticulate as he is. And more importantly, the fact that more often than not I zero in on the underlying points in such allegations and take them on speaks to my wish to read and participate on this blog as a committed member.

      [...]making replying to him a completely pointless activity.
      Again, while I see why you say this, I can't agree. Many trolls and others who read this blog will interpret leaving certain gaping allegations unanswered (however ludicrously advanced) as our collective inability to reflect and respond.

      My problem isn't separatists or francophones posting on this blog; I'm a francophone myself and have shown time and again a willingness and ability to engage in both official languages both those I agree and disagree with. My issue is with people who either can't or won't develop an idea from start to finish being allowed to "express" themselves on a platform that is dedicated to examining precisely why a short-sighted view on language tensions is hurting my city, province, and country. See, Cat, this goes beyond the superficialities of social media. If we're going to have a serious debate, then let's have it, I say. And let's start having it right here. Let's have separatists eloquently attack and defend ideas. And let's drill down and argue the ideas and not the people advancing them. But by god, let's have some eloquent and well-articulated ideas to begin with.

      That's my issue with the comments section of this blog... and perhaps with the wider national unity debate as a whole.

  3. L'arrestation de Mouna Diab étonne à Hérouxville

    Mouna Diab, cette jeune femme musulmane qu'on a vue débarquer le 11 février 2007, à Hérouxville, avec un groupe de femmes pour une visite amicale dans le but de combattre les préjugés négatifs contre les musulmans, a comparu la semaine dernière au palais de justice de Montréal.

    Elle est accusée d'avoir tenté, le 19 mai dernier, d'exporter des pièces d'armes d'assaut (AR-15), alors qu'elle se rendait au Liban, et ce, en violation de l'embargo des Nations-Unis.

    Elle a été arrêtée à l'aéroport Pierre-Trudeau sans avoir pu s'embarquer. La jeune femme a plaidé non coupable. Elle doit comparaître à nouveau le 10 novembre. Elle n'a fait aucune déclaration et sa famille vivant à Laval a refusé de commenter l'affaire.

    Qu'en pensez-vous?

    1. Pour les sceptiques:

    2. I think that this is completely unrelated to anglophones in Quebec, nor to the Editor's post, and therefore has no reason to remain posted here.

      In other words, TROLL ALERT.

    3. I can't agree.
      Many links are provided by readers in support of their opinion, mostly pro-Anglophone and many anti-Quebec.
      Links that are interesting will always be allowed, even if they come from people taking an opposite view to myself and the majority of readers this blog.

      If the link led to a story about basket-weaving it would be disallowed.
      I actually found the story interesting and clicked on the link.
      However I do agree with TRUE MONTREALER that the story is entirely besides the point.

      If a prominent sovereigntist was arrested for shoplifting, I would certainly run the link, but once again, the story would be entirely beside the point.

    4. I think the same thing I did over a year ago, when she was actually arrested and this story would have been a tad more relevant. I think that there are nutters in every group and to try and paint everyone in that group with the same brush based on the actions of one person in thousand upon thousands just smacks of a desperately motivated attack against a group pf people.

      Now if the Muslims, lets say formed a political party, and at their party's convention delegates gave a standing ovation to a convicted terrorist, that would be more indicative of the group's lack of values. Extra points to whoever guesses what party/event I'm referring to! (Hint: A Rose by any other name is still a scumbag.)

    5. formed a political party, and at their party's convention delegates gave a standing ovation to a convicted terrorist, that would be more indicative of the group's lack of values.

      Certainly not Paul Rose. He was a freedom fighter. And certainly not a Muslim fundamentalist. There's no proof he was anything but the fall guy. And besides, he's an ethnic French Canadian and not some turbaned psycho from Asia, so he's allowed. Quebec is HIS country. (feeling slightly sickened at even feigning sarcastic argument, but tell me that's not what the opposing side would effectively argue).

      But indeed the Mouna Diab story is worthy of some consideration. In a similar vein, I did find it interesting to read the following, the other day, from CIJA, with regard to the protest to be held this weekend:
      The Jewish community speaks for itself and will not accept to be co-opted or manipulated by the dubious objectives of some of the organizers of the demonstration, who include religious radical fundamentalists with whom the Jewish community will never make common cause.

    6. Very good! However the PQ gave a standing ovation to Paul's brother Jacques Rose when he was released from prison, though it's a very common mistake, one I've probably made in the past as well. To René Lévesque's credit he was incredulous that the PQ members did so.

      I wonder if the CIJA issued the "co-opted or manipulated" part of quote because they think (or know) that it was the rally organizers who were telling the media erroneously that the Jewish community would be participating?

    7. "French comments continue to be allowed for those without English. For bilinguals, I'd ask that you write in English because much more people will understand your comment."

      There are plenty of links to the Mouna Diab story available in English. Since S.R is perfectly bilingual, as evidenced by his ability to read every single post and comment on this blog in English perfectly well, every single day for years now, he could easily have posted any one of them. Instead, he chose to deliberately flout the Editor's rules.

      Or is this simply going to be yet another one of the Editor's rules that immediately go out the window?

    8. I'm sure CIJA took one look at the demographic spearheading the protest - a demographic that on a different front is understandably a main ideological adversary - and took the stance they took.

      And while I think the poor timing of the protest (I should sarcastically ask, how could anybody NOT know it was Yom Kippur?!) was certainly regrettable, I have to wonder whether it isn't in the best interest of the groups concerned to actually reflect on how this particular issue affects them collectively. Perhaps we won't see the seeds of Middle Eastern peace sewn over the dying twitches of French-Canadian ethnic nationalism, but I think it stands to reason that fanatics and moderates alike state their own disapproval of this proposed ban, which itself doesn't bother discriminating between fanatic and moderate.

      However questionable the credentials of this Collectif québécois contre l'islamophobie might be, I was extremely amused to hear the following delicious sound bite from none other than Charkaoui himself:
      Au Collectif, nous allons entreprendre une série d'actions avec nos partenaires de la communauté sikhe, juive, musulmane, avec les groupes féministes, autochtones et pourquoi pas la communauté anglophone qui est aussi conviée à se joindre à nous.

      Say what you want about some of these Maghrebi newcomers' questionable dabbling with various separatist political affiliations; Adil's quote above is called knowing what side your bread is buttered on. May they all see clearly now why generations of immigrants before them overwhelmingly rejected this fraudulent "national affirmation" hokum, all while eventually integrating into the fabric of Canadian life without issue.

    9. I agree with the Editor. In this case, S.R., at least the way I see it, was at least attempting to legitimize the Hérouxville Code of Conduct, or whatever you want to call it. As far as I'm concerned, and I reckon most readers share my sentiment, it's an isolated incident.

      Indubitably there are troublemakers in the Muslim community, but I like to think the vast majority, certainly at least 95% (most likely more) who came to Canada to escape the tyranny and political instability of their homelands. They don't come for our climate!

      Sadly, Quebec is Canada's fly in the ointment, and if the imbeciles governing it are left alone, the chances of creating civil hostilities increase. Sadly, Quebec has a collective police force tantamount to, as the Editor previously stated, Keystone Cops. Too, the supporters of this racist values charter are ignorant country bumpkins tantamount to the KKK movement in the Southern U.S.

      Sadly, the bumpkins may win because too many constituencies in the regions of the ignorant are small. Montreal has huge populations in its ridings, so representation is not proportional. I blame that one squarely on the so-called federalist Charest government. He had three glorious opportunities to change the electoral map to balance the constituencies based on balance populations, but he chose to ignore the opportunity. Hiring 26 language police under his tutelage didn't help a lick either.

  4. (FR)

    It begins... Québec's Finest Xenophobia, racism and intolerance... hide everything that isn't White French of Catholic descent...

    1. Que penses-tu du commentaire de "ex Kaybecer" (juste en dessous) Vincent?

    2. I think everyone needs to take a chill pill and stop labelling opinions you don't like as the product of TROLLS.

      The criteria apply to opinions on both side of the fence. Ask yourself honestly if the comment violates the rules before complaining..
      ex Kaybecer offered an opinion, which was cogently and respectfully written.
      No personal insult, Not a one-liner. Not off topic and not rude or disrespectful.
      I am begging readers not to pull the trigger loosely. You are all smarter than that.

    3. Je suis parfaitement d'accord avec vous Editor mais comme Vincent semble sensible au phénomène de l'intolérance,j'ai cru bon souligner que certains anglophones le sont également et ouvertement,rien de plus.

    4. I think there's a pretty big difference between telling someone, who you have never met before, in person on the street to change your religion and someone saying they won't respond to posts in French on an English blog. It's not like said he won't respond to posts from francophones.

  5. I am not happy with French-only comments being allowed, but I will try to remember that this is not MY blog, but a very necessary and well-written one, so I will try to hold my anglophone tongue when I see a French comment. I will, of course, ignore it.

    1. Naturally I support your right to hold your opinion, but don't you think that enforcing an English-only policy would turn away potential francophone participants? Not that many of S.R's interventions (so far the only francophone having availed himself of this privilege) have been for the general betterment of this blog... but in the event that by some miracle we were to have an English-impaired participant who actually composed and developed his own thoughts, don't you think we'd be missing out?

      Just my two cents.

      If I were Editor, I'd maintain the blog's current language policy, but exceptionally demand that S.R post complete and original comments in English as a precondition to remaining on this blog, if only as retribution for years of abusive invective. But it's Editor's blog and obviously he's unable or unwilling to call the likes of S.R and Y.L out.

    2. Michel has availed himself of it quite a few time as well.

    3. I happily support francophone participants being a part of this blog and bringing their opinions here. I think the rules should be changed to allow French or English to be posted as people want so that we can have honest discussion with people of different viewpoints, whether anglophone of francophone, federalist or separatist. I personally like to post in French sometimes just to practice my French a bit since I do come to this blog from time to time and I feel if it bothers someone that I post something in French, they can just close their eyes or skip over my post. I don't think the goal of this blog should be to become an echo-chamber or an English speaking equivalent of I think that honest discussion and debate should be welcome without some of the trolling that has been going on.

      And to the Editor: You don't have to pay 50$ to 100$ to translate your blog. I'll gladly take 40$ per translation piece as long as I am not asked to contribute more than 1 hour a week. Of course, I can't guarantee a professional job, but in that regard, this is Quebec, right? lol

    4. “I think the rules should be changed to allow French or English to be posted as people want so that we can have honest discussion with people of different viewpoints, whether anglophone of francophone, federalist or separatist.”

      It has been amply demonstrated that this is an idealistic pipe dream which has not and will not happen in the forum of an anonymous blog, and that it doesn’t address flagrant abuse by a toxic, bitter, vindictive individual. The Editor goes out of his way to discuss all sorts of current events in Quebec that are not normally discussed in the mainstream press. This blog is not dedicated to discussing separatism and yet separatists are hellbent on twisting it to become so.

      Personally, I’d normally be only too happy to read replies in French but perversely, it is precisely because there is someone on here who is so ardently determined to wrest control from the Editor and warp the blog to his own liking that I’d just as soon not. It makes it feel like we’re falling for his ruse rather than it being something natural, as it should. Of course, that is a shame… but that is the sad result of the “contribution” that this abusive nuisance poster has made to this blog.

      Have you ever given any thought to practicing your French at, say, a French blog or website?

      Also, this is not the United Nations General Assembly. Respecting that a blog is about a given topic doesn’t make it an “echo chamber”. Otherwise, you might as well say that Le Devoir is an echo chamber, the National Post is an echo chamber, The Gazette is an echo chamber, La Presse is an echo chamber, Le Journal de Montréal is an... well, I think you get the point.

    5. "Personally, I’d normally be only too happy to read replies in French but perversely, it is precisely because there is someone on here who is so ardently determined to wrest control from the Editor and..."

      As I am not the blog editor, I cannot choose who gets banned but I think the simple solution is to ban the one liner-troll and the one that uses "mate" in almost all his posts. I don't those two should mess it up for other francophones who have something to contribute.

      "Have you ever given any thought to practicing your French at, say, a French blog or website? "

      You are probably right. I might be a little self-centred or guilty of putting the want of practicing my French ahead of what would work best for the blog. I have thought of posting on the Journal de Montreal website but when I see the number of anti-English and anti-immigrant sentiment in the comments section, I think better of it.

      That being said, I am still willing to write to a francophone (for example Yannick) or anyone who is respectful, in French or English.

      "Also, this is not the United Nations General Assembly. Respecting that a blog is about a given topic doesn’t make it an “echo chamber”. Otherwise, you might as well say that Le Devoir is an echo chamber, the National Post is an echo chamber, The Gazette is an echo chamber, La Presse is an ..."

      I would, in fact say, that those places are for the most part echo chambers. The National Post mostly has comments from Conservatives, Le Devoir from anti-English separatists, the Gazette is for anglophone federalists, and La Presse is for francophone nationalists. I kind of like the idea of a diversity of opinions. If we all agree on everything, it starts to get uninteresting.

      I'm glad that I don't have to talk to a troll to disagree on something, though :)

    6. I'd like to take a second to say that the people on this thread, as moderates, are the people I most enjoy reading and replying to on this blog. It is you guys who make this blog more than an echo chamber filled with angry individuals agreeing with one another.

      I would agree with R.S. in that openness to French comments shouldn't be a free-for-all for those who are deliberately and obviously trying to derail the threads, either by random spam or by pointless non-sequitors and questions which are never satisfied. It's been my policy, if sadly broken in the last thread, to ignore those people.

      I used to say that to suppress them would be censorship but, well, to suppress a point of view, one must first have one to begin with.

    7. Yep, I gotta admit, this is a pretty good thread, lol.

  6. LD

    I comment on this blog using my iPhone or iPad. The Name/URL option does not seem to work when I use my iPhone. That's why I select Anonymous and then write my alias at the start of my comment.

    1. FROM Ed
      EDITOR, I congratulate your heroism. I know this means alot more work for you and hope you have omeone to help. If it's possible I woulddbe willing to take certain hours appointed by yourself to watch the blog and delete any totally anonymous comments. Ed

    2. "...I woulddbe willing to take certain hours appointed by yourself to watch the blog..."

      i must admit you made me laugh this time ed. keep it up.

    3. FROM ED
      Relax Studennt, I would not be deleting anything you post. That would be left to the Editor. However the Editor could appoint people with instructions to delete only those who do not identify themselves. Ed

    4. @ed

      right. well with all due respect i still think the editor should pick someone trustworthy if he needs help in deleting posts.

  7. So far all letters reached their destination. Unfortunately, I have no way of knowing if they were published. Ed

  8. Oh, good. Silly me, here I was thinking that this blog actually had a specific purpose. For some reason, I mistakenly thought that by making this post, it implied that the Editor was going to be making a renewed effort to have the comment section focus on the purpose of this blog. Especially when the diversions come from someone who has an extended history of deliberately trying to sidetrack discussions away from the current topic and toward his own personal interests instead. Especially when they come from a fluent English-speaker and former Ontario resident who insists on displaying his contempt for the readers of this blog by deliberately choosing to flood the comments section with random questions and links in French on a daily basis, again flouting the rules and taking advantage of the Editor’s good graces.

    By disingenuously pretending to invite discussion when it has clearly been established that he has no interest whatsoever in engaging in discussion and never replies to questions that are directed at him, S.R is merely making yet another test of what he can get away with in his constant efforts to hijack the Editor’s blog, and he has passed with flying colours.

    Great! Let the parade of endless, insincere questions by the self-appointed blog police and links to random, unrelated but interesting newspaper stories begin (or continue, rather).

    1. I think I get it now. Even though the Editor specifically wrote in the “How to comment on this blog” section that “we are a blog about the English and Anglo experience in Quebec”, now he says that it’s going to be perfectly A-OK for people who want to make nuisances of themselves to flood the comment section with any number of unrelated, random links and multiple insincere questions on a daily basis.

      Good thing there’s no policy concerning repetitive postings. I think everybody has cottoned on by now that Cutie favours partition and the sooner the better, Un Gars is glad to have left Quebecistan but still feeds the need to keep checking in daily to provide a dose of mockery and that fluent English-speaker S.R has a strategy of flooding the comments section with insincere comments in French only in order to make a vague statement about his contempt for his fellow citizens. Daily repetition of the same thing is tiresome, accomplishes nothing and certainly doesn’t enhance the quality of the blog in any way, but I suppose this is all going to be perfectly acceptable and A-OK as well.

      Basically, it seems pretty much like the same old, same old as before. Oh well.

    2. FROM ED
      I've noticed if the trolls are ignored they don't cut in but when some of our people dialogue with them they practically take over. If the Editor doesn't want to banish trolls it's OK with me, but thepeople who lmow better should at least be admonished for wasting our time and space. The biggest problem I have with it, is that the silly on-liners use up all the reply buttons so that someone with a prtinent point can't get in. If one has to put their comment at the end, by then the tone of the discussion is lost. So we miss good points for the sake of a few who feel they must post something at least every three comments. Ed

    3. Thank you Editor for doing the best you can to rid the blog of non-responsive and inane comments made by trolls that would like to put this blog out of existence. I'm sure that is their main purpose. As you noted you've had over a million hits from people all over the world that read the blog and that is a great feat and a chance for the world to see how the politics in this province are affecting the residents. The separatists would like all this turmoil to remain hidden from the world as they don't like the embarrassment that these policies (Bill 14, Quebec Charter of Values) bring to their political agenda. I realize you and your wife are the only two people that monitor the blog and that you do have a life outside of this. This must be taken into account when people criticize the way in which it is monitored. I hope that the blog will continue and that the common sense of the federalist commentators will overtake and stand out over and above those that are out to destroy it.

      Thought the readers would be interested in the following letter concerning the Charter of Quebec Values. When I post these items I do it to keep people informed about action being taken by others that are concerned where this province and it's politics are taking us. I'm sure if you object to this type of thing I will be informed by you or your wife. Thank you again for all your hard work and research to keep this blog going.

    4. I think that some tangentially related links are fine on "grab bag day" posts, however when the post is about one topic in particular they are very much out of place.

      What really gets me is when SR posts internet forum posts from other websites, written by absolute nobodies, on here with no context and points to it and says see this one inconsequential poster (who is probably 13) said something stupid, see all anglos are stupid. I just kind of have to laugh, shake my head and wonder how many hours going through random websites did he have to waste to find this one internet forum quote, in order to bound back here like an overly excitable puppy thinking he found something precious, but it really just being inane garbage.

    5. I wholeheartedly agree with you, R.S.

      There is something definitely the matter with play-flexing one's editorial muscle and then going on to accept the same abuse as before.

      The fact that Editor has no time to police or moderate each individual comment is one thing. The fact that he doesn't point each of us out (myself included) and explicitly ask that we stop one or more specific practices is another. Singling each of us out in turn if need be. After over two years of this sort of participatory abuse, I should hope that he reins us in once and for all. No, this isn't a beat-up-on-S.R thing alone -- although I certainly am dumbfounded by Editor's continued largesse toward that participant in particular -- it's the fact that I've just about stopped finding the interactive part of this blog a worthy place to share ideas. "Outing" people might be in poor taste, but so is letting manifest radicals abuse your good nature and poison your project. Staying above the fray by continuing to articulate lofty ideals and policies just won't cut it - certainly not when some in the audience don't share that same maturity, loftiness, or idealism. In the face of such open contempt for decent posting skills and practice, it is shocking that we haven't seen Editor formulate targeted demands - to individual participants if need be - when one or more of us sullies his otherwise excellent project.

      Forbearance has its limits, and I'm very well near my own.

    6. "I just kind of have to laugh, shake my head and wonder how many hours going through random websites did he have to waste to find this one internet forum quote"

      Malheureusement pour vous et votre communauté,nous ne parlons pas d'heures mais de minutes afin de trouver des centaines d'exemples d'absurdités,de mépris et de haîne de la part d'anglophones vis-à-vis ma Nation.En passant ces intervenants ont entre 13 et 80 ans.

      Aussi,ma langue est comparable au voile de certains musulmans :Vous n'arriverez pas à me convaincre de m'en départir aussi facilement surtout sur un blogue concernant principalement les conflits linguistiques de ma province.

    7. The Editor keeps talking about his not wanting to delete opposing points of view when in fact, to the best of my recollection, nobody has ever requested that.

      Rather, people are talking about being tired of the detrimental effects of his tolerating long-term (really loooooooooong-term) abusive behaviour on the willingness of people to participate intelligently on his project. Yet, he never addresses this question and prefers to cite the latest pageviews instead. “Quantity over quality” seems to be his guiding motto.

    8. Apparatchik: "There is something definitely the matter with play-flexing one's editorial muscle and then going on to accept the same abuse as before.
      The fact that Editor has no time to police or moderate each individual comment is one thing"

      If you're wondering while despite all this flexing by Editor nothing changes, and after a day or two it's back to normal (the normal being the comments section hijacked by SR and student), you will continue scratching your heads until you realize the obvious: it's because it's what Editor wants.

      See, he will flex his muscles occasionally, but in the end he prefers a widely commented blog with 200-250 comments per post (even if 100 of these comments are one-liners generated by SR or student and the next 50 entries are emotional responses to them), than a less-widely commented blog with 25-50 higher quality posts.

      So here is is folks. If you want to comment on No Dogs, get used to SR. And don't ever thing there will be any moderation here.

      And forget these "housekeeping" posts. I never bother with these. Just skip to the next one.

    9. @SR
      First let me congratulate you on your first real post worth reading and commenting on.

      "Vous n'arriverez pas à me convaincre de m'en départir aussi facilement surtout..."

      Nobody wants you to lose or give up your language. It has been said many times on this blog that we appreciate living in a predominately French society. Perhaps if you would just back off and cease trying to suppress English in Quebec then we could get along just fine. Just look at this March Against English in Montreal nonsense.

      Marois and her stinky "Quebec pour tous", is more like "Quebec pour tous les francophones catholiques de souche seulement", everyone else is asked to please shut up or leave. She says Quebec is a tolerant and open society. How is this tolerant and open society making its minorities feel lately?

    10. Oh boy… so on the one hand, he supports the government telling people to put away their religious symbols from 9 to 5, then on the other hand, he acknowledges that it can’t be done. He probably doesn’t even realize how confused his thinking is.

      If he doesn’t want to participate in an English blog in English, then he doesn’t have to. That’s precisely the reason why French blogs exist. His bitterness doesn’t give him the right to hijack someone else’s blog, or to arbitrarily modify the purpose of this blog to reflect his own personal preferences.

    11. @adski

      I've had several suspicions in the past regarding the rationale behind Editor's broad tolerance of S.R's posting habits, among others. While yours is certainly one of the more salient scenarios I have independently formulated in some of my more cynical (realistic?) moments, the quantity-over-quality theory hellbent on maximizing pageviews at the expense of quality feedback doesn't really help this blog in terms of content or desirability.

      So there must be some motivation over and above the simple mechanics of narcissism and exposure that keep Editor from singling us out individually and demanding that we effectively end certain practices. He is certainly within his right to do so, and even S.R rightly claims that he will comply with all Editorial demands made of him and that he acts with Editor's blessing. This is either an endorsement or a humiliation; I'm not quite sure. Whatever the underlying rationale, I have to wonder whether whatever meager AdSense revenue generated as a result is actually worth it. I believe many of the better posters here (of which I respectfully place you on the very short list) provide insightful comments that make this section worth reading and are light years ahead of many of our so-called "counterparts" on the Journal de Montréal, Le Devoir, and Radio-Canada comment pages. Besides, most of us have read the many "controversial" links long before they're ever epiphanically "contributed" here and served up with the requisite self-congratulatory interjections.

      And by the way, the quality of posting has nothing to do language of commenting. I accept and endorse the English-has-a-wider-audience argument and as such post and respond in English by default. But I don't think French posts per se are the reason this comments section has been going to the dogs (no pun intended) for a while now. Exhibit A: the various French-language exchanges between Yannick, Michel, me, and others — often very much diverse in viewpoint but almost every last one of them respectful if not entirely collegial. Perhaps not-so-ironically, and consistent with the wider debate this blog focuses on, language isn't really the problem here. Specific types of attitudes are.

      So which is it, Editor? Is S.R to remain this blog's convenient traffic generator and foil extraordinaire all while turning off your otherwise interested and engaged regulars, or will you once and for all demand thorough, thoughtful, and articulate participation from him and others going forward, being ready to go so far as to request that anyone unprepared to commit to doing so permanently refrain from participating otherwise?

      So say it Editor. In plain language.

      Either you condone it and in so doing are complicit in the fouling up of these comments pages for lack of a developed mass of nationalist commenters committed to serious, articulate, and regular rebuttals, or you put your foot down now and demand quality participation from everybody, going so far as to request our self-dismissal until and unless we are able to comply.

      Assez, c'est assez.

    12. @Apparatchick

      I cannot fail to respond to an egregious attack on my integrity.

      "whether whatever meager AdSense revenue generated as a result is actually worth it."

      Shame on you.

      After devoting thousands of hours to this blog gratis, to be accused of of running it for profit is more hurtful than anything SR has has ever said.

      There is no revenue stream attached to this blog.
      Have you ever seen an advertisement?
      The total amount of money I have made over three years === $0.00

      Shame on you for making a gratuitous accusation, ill researched and malicious of forethought.
      I expect an apology to myself and this blog community,

    13. My genuine apologies if you read that comment as an ad hominem attack on your underlying motivations to keep this blog going. That sentence - and indeed that entire passage - was deliberately formulated to highlight how very valueless such a hypothetical payoff would be, were one even to be had.

      (Since you've fairly challenged me to answer the question, the disable AdSense tag is currently set to false in your page's source code, and there is an advertisement underneath the Feedjit widget, though frankly I'd be surprised that it generates much of anything).

      Know this, though. You have a following of readers, including myself, who take your work seriously and avidly await each new post. Know also that that word, "meager", was carefully chosen and is there for a reason: I've dealt with the system and gave up altogether because the margins were so low that even with your traffic numbers I know it's not really worth it.

      Suck it up, mister, and don't you dare be hurt by one very hypothetical and off the cuff remark I've made -- and that I duly qualified as such.

      You've got bigger problems you haven't adequately dealt with on this site, Editor, and I am demonstrably not alone in feeling this way. The responses seen in the last day or so on this very theme speak volumes about how those of us who are truly loyal readers of yours feel about the mockery that is made daily of your efforts and good nature by others who don't give a rat's ass about what you think, feel, or write.

      So while I wholeheartedly apologize to you, with a mutual understanding of the caveat above, I do not and will not apologize to this wider blog community for any slight, real or apprehended, because I have not hurt it. Years of permissiveness, and variously hurtful or nuisance postings from certain "contributors" have indeed been hurtful to many of us, yet you've never so much as asked for genuine apology, contrition, or sought to exact a subsequent "shape up or ship out" from S.R, student, Chénier, Haïti chérie, Press 9, Y.L, and the other countless one-hit-wonders that haven't graced these pages over the years.

      Notwithstanding my genuine regret, letting those other abuses go for years but clamping down on me within minutes demanding a public apology seems a bit rich, methinks. Especially considering that I make no negative judgment regarding your overall devotion to your blog project, but rather the contrary, all while decrying excesses not originating from but tacitly enabled by you. Considering that like many, I too have devoted hundreds if not thousands of hours here while balancing a full-time job, duties for two political parties, a young family, and more, I -- rightly or wrongly -- have come to think of myself as one of many stakeholders in this blog. You might not know all our real names, Editor, but you sure as hell must know who we are. I think our interventions over the years bear witness to this as much as the interventions of certain other parties bear witness to their desire to contribute nothing but rather take away from this blog.

      Again, you're more than first among equals. I'm sure I'm not the only one here who thinks you owe, to those of us whom you have thanked time and again for reciprocally investing our own time and energy into this blog, one very important answer.

      Why do you let content-deprived participants degrade your blog with such continued impunity?

    14. Oooookkaaaaayyyy… something is seriously out of whack here when the Editor gets so incensed over an innocuous comment from an intelligent commenter about meager AdSense revenue (as opposed to none at all) and demands apologies, meanwhile he literally spends years bizarrely defending someone who is committed to destroying his blog and is very likely mentally ill, offering no justification for that whatsoever…

    15. Editor, you have no intention of cleaning up. Just admit it and let's move on.

      These housekeeping announcements are by now almost insulting to people's intelligence.

      SR will be here tomorrow. Apparatchick might not. You're trading quality for quantity. We'll miss a few good quality posts, all for 100 one liners about peggy, trouilles, and toto. And that is a real shame.

    16. It's probably because the Editor has high expectations of Apparatchik, and no expectations for S.R.

    17. It has now gotten to the point of being downright weird that the Editor allows “content-deprived participants [to] degrade [his] blog with such continued impunity” and yet blows up at a diligent contributor over essentially nothing.

      I hope this is not an indication that his “free-for-all” policy to commenting has gotten the better of him, otherwise “the terrorists will have won” and we will have lost a valuable resource. Countless other blogs over the years have learned to their detriment that such a policy is self-destructive and simply not worth it, yet the Editor stubbornly clings to the notion that his will be the first to successfully manage trolling behaviour. The logic behind this escapes me.

    18. Pourquoi ne pas mettre sur pied votre propre blogue?

      Pourquoi les 12 insatisfaits qui critiquent Editor ne pourraient pas créer leur prope "blogue-ghetto"?Rien que des anglophones intelligents qui font du Québec-bashing.

      No dogs or francophones.

      Succès assuré!

    19. FROM ED
      Apparatchik, you're wrong. Paul Rose was alone with Laporte at the end. Jacques stated at the time that when he returned to the apartment Laporte was dead. Paul Rose later confirmed that. I watched the story unfold day by day in papers and TV. You are going by a separatist made up story to make Rose look like a hero. He was no freedom fighter. Heros do not plant bombs that kill other people. The 16 yr old that died in the shoe factory was an innocent kid. Walking down the street, a car pulls up and someone tells him, "I'm in a hurry. here's twenty bucks take my shoes to the receptionist. Just hand it to her, my information is inside the box." The boy and the lady receptionist were never seen by their families again. The man was identified as Paul Rose.
      Your disagreement with the EDITOR does not affect me but keep in mind one thought, it is his blog. To those of you who oppose his tactics, did you ever think of offering to pay the costs for a month.
      Really Apparatchik, I've always admired your keen thinking but your lofty discourses are boring. Spit out the thesaurus and talk plain English. Ed

  9. FROM ED
    EDITOR, I've left the email addresses of the newspapers up in case someone wants to help inform the rest of Canada about our situation.Instead of sitting here complaining to each other with links and stories of impending doom, get your message to the people who need to know, we've already heard it. Preaching to the choir helps one feel useful but accomplishes nothing. Please let me know, am I right or wrong? Ed

  10. We don't have enough protests going with the Charter of Quebec Values, the separatists are going to start protesting the use of English in Montreal:
    I really have to wonder just how much these people are paid by the PQ.

    1. It's the same PQ and BQ members and other bums that always show up at these "rallies" whether it is about a Canadiens coach who is an anglophone or that there is a GAP clothing store instead of a "Écart" (French word for GAP) store.

      I wonder if Maria Mourani will show up to the rally. I suppose she is for religious freedom but she is still against lingusitic freedom, right?

    2. Mulcair was asked if he would be interested in taking her into his organization today on Question Period and he said he has not been approached but that his whole organization is dedicated to federalism so there are fundamental differences in their political views. We shall see what we shall see but as far as I'm concerned, the NDP is loaded with separatists! She'll jump at the first offer that comes her way, I'm sure. These people change parties like we change socks.

    3. Well, you know, I used to have a high regard for politicians and I still think a few of them (eg Irwin Cotler, Marc Garneau) are in it for the right reasons but I've come to realize that alot of them do it for the money. I remember when it was said that in order to attract high quality politicians, you have to pay them. I don't think we have the quality that we are supposed with the money they get, though.

      Look at the NDP. They had an 18 year old separatist boy elected under their banner: an opportunist. Right now, if he was working full time as a normal kid (forget that 18 yr olds are considered adult), he would probably be making 20 000$ a year. Instead, he is making over 150 000$. Do you really think he is making a valuable contribution to Canadian politics? No, I don't think so, but the money must be good. Just shut your mouth and collect the cash.

      Then, who else do they have? Oh yeah, a bartender from Ottawa who couldn't be bothered to be in Canada during the election and who was running in Quebec. Showing her respect for the political process, she was too busy celebrating her birthday in Las Vegas to campaign. So, from being a bartender who maybe made a maximum of 30 000$, she also is making more than
      150 000$.

      Next, Maria Mourani was a prison Guard for Canada, and I looked online and I guess she might have been making 50 000$. Need more money? Join the PQ and campaign against the English and for sovereignty and let them parade you around as an ethnic and you can make 150 000$? She must have jumped at the opportunity, coming from another country to become one of the best paid people in Quebec.

      Trust me, some of these politicians aren't exactly altruistic and I think the NDP would be a great pick for someone like her. Maybe she will choose Quebec Solidaire. She can't resign, you know, because she has become accustomed to the money, and she will want to be able to make that kind of money for years to come.

    4. Roger, remember that most of those NDP candidates were only accepted, and only volonteered, because they had no chance to win. No one could have predicted how Quebec decided suddenly and on-masse to vote NDP.

      All that 18 year old kid wanted was to put a line on his CV as to being a candidate. But winning must have been a dream come true- and I'd like to think, for more than simply a paycheck.

  11. FROM ED
    Cutie, I recall at one time you and I were w0rking in harmony to get the word out of Quebec and infom others of our situation. Do you still think it's a good idea. If you do perhas some of your link information could be turned into letters and sent to the ROC. By informing the ROC we are
    1. Letting Canadians know that we are no all bums here in Canada. We must raise the image people have of us here.
    2. We remind the MP's in Ottawa we sent them to speak for us and their silence is not helping. They should do the job they're getting paid for..
    3. If people in other cities start questioning why the PM sits on his hands, others will ask the same question. It could mushroom.
    Incidentally, I wrote to Maggie Bloom suggesting that Doctors in other provinces be asked to go along with it. They could wear blue Kippahs witha fleur de Lys. Ed

  12. FROM ED
    Correction on the emails above. The Toronto Star is (one word singular) Ed

    1. I took out your post with your contact information.
      I am not comfortable with you publishing your particulars on a blog that has thousands of visitors, many of whom are not your friends.
      Please re-post that letter without your address.

    2. @Editor - Just my response to Ed - these things happen.

      Ed - I have never stopped being an activist and have written to newspapers and politicians since I started posting on this blog last year. Some get published, some don't - that's the way it is at the newspapers. I do not publish these letters on this blog any longer as I have found that there are few activists that participate to this blog. There are many intelligent people with cogent comments but very few (that I know of) ever participate in trying to get the message "out there" which is what I've been trying to do since the beginning. The other thing to take into consideration is, unlike you, I'm not willing to put my name and address out there for all the world to see. There are others besides myself to consider in this decision and I don't jeopardize them for any reason.

      I know that I learn from a lot from some of the posts on here (from the federalists and once in a blue moon from Michele) but I am no longer interested in how and why we are where we are with the politics in this province. Re-hashing the Plains of Abraham over and over does not interest me at all. I want all this nonsense to end with action - no more of another 40 years of being hung out to dry by these separatists and their hate against the ROC for no good reason. I wish more of the people on this blog were activists but that is their decision and only they can make it. Keep doing what you are doing as I will with the groups I have joined and perhaps some of your activity will rub off on some of the other readers that contribute to the blog. If the Editor doesn't mind, I will still post what I think would be of general interest to our federalist readers and I too will hope that some will pick up the gauntlet and start participating in the same way that you and I do. One thing about all this is that we can do no more harm to this province than they are doing to themselves.

    3. Well this is new and interesting:
      Could it be that the francophones are catching on as to what the PQ are up to? Let's hope so!

  13. I just deleted a comment by accident. I don't know from who, but it was just posted.
    If you can, please re-post. Apologies

  14. FROM ED

    tHANK YOU eDITOR, I just posted it as I sent it out. no thimking.

    People are asking, how does the Parti Quebecois Government get away with the horrific things it does in a Democratic country like Canada?
    Simply put It's because we have a Prime Minister who is a coward. All this could be ended by him doing his job. Instead of facing Quebec Premier Pauline Marois he hands her eighteen billion per year to go on torturing us. She has declared English use criminal and is attacking freedom of Religion. This is being done with money that comes from all areas of Canada.
    I blame the Canadian government directly for our pain. We elected Federal representatives from four parties to Ottawa who say and do nothing. We have No one in Ottawa that cares about a million suffering Canadians here in Quebec. Let me remind Canadians across the country that one million English Federalist Canadians are being silenced, subdued and humiliated by the Parti Quebecois government with the approval of the Harper Government. For an overall picture of the feelings of Federalists in Quebec, check the blog, NO DOGS OR ANGLOPHONES.
    Quebec has the resources to be a contributing member of the Canadian economy but Marois prefers welfare paid for by the people of Canada to keep Francophones happy. 80% of Francophones here are on welfare or working for the Quebec government.
    Threatening to oppose the Quebec Government in court is like laughing into the hollow carcass of a cow. It would take years and accomplish nothing. Just mentioning that he might cut off equalization payments would make Francophones sit up and pay attention. He could with hold payments until human rights are met. They know it's equalization that pays their welfare. A word from the Prime Minister would stop her forced annihilation of Anglos. She wants Anglos to leave the Province. These are our homes. We English built this Province with hard work and devotion. I feel like we are involved in a 'Scorched Earth Policy' like Stalin used on the people of the Ukraine.

    1. @ Ed

      I think the inaccuracy in the statement that 80% of francophones are on welfare or working for the Quebec goverment should be removed by you from your post to make it more factual. You know as well as I do that this is an exaggeration.

      As well, you should know, as much as you believe that the rights of anglophones should be respected, I don't think it is exactly lawful that equalization payments could be cut at the will of the Prime Minister, no matter how undemocratic Stephen Harper is. Equalization payments are coming up for renewal and I believe at that time, changes can be made.

      Finally, I don't believe it is only the English that built this province but I do acknowledge that they definitely made a good contribution to building the economy.

      Even though you are exasperated, as am I, about the treatment of anglophones, I think your post is a little over the top and it is my opinion that we should try to work with francophones and not act like they are the enemy.

  15. I think the Province of quebec is now getting what it deserves.....It is so worried about the English language that it made it extremely easy for immigrants from francophone countries to immigrate here. ( Yes votes at any cost) It came up with it's lame brain CSQ (certificate of selection) for immigrants coming to quebec..(of course it was designed to easily attract anything that spoke some form of french) and what did it reap ?.... Look around quebec....the English are not a threat to's not English that you really hear in Montreal these's Arabic and Spanish ! Too late quebec....u screwed up trying to get rid of the English and now you've created a situation that you find's English looking to you now ? ;)

    1. Just to clarify, this comment is meant only to point out that comments like ..Montreal is too English etc... are inaccurate. Clearly when one walks in town one can hear a multitude of languages other than English. Hardliners have a problem with this...I intend to brush up on my Spanish ! Wake up hardliners...there's a great big new world out there...and you're going to miss out on it !

  16. Editor,

    I presume that the readers of this blog are adults with maturity to engage in meaningful debate. One thing that I would like you to pay attention is the childish behavior of calling out other posters with childish name. For example ToTo, peggy, Tchiko, trouille. Other than that, keep rocking this blog.

  17. Readers, I'm starting to feel like a Sunday school teacher, rapping knuckles. I am uncomfortable in the role.
    It is necessary, but just the same..

  18. YES!
    I completely agree and I shall dub it the TROY rule.

    No derogatory or pejorative or cloying nicknames.
    Readers must refer to other readers by their screen name ....period.

  19. Incidentally readers,
    I caught the BBC world news television service tonight, the international broadcast that is aired around the world, and yep, the demonstration against the charter was a featured story..,

    1. Yeah, start picking on cultural minorities in one province and it's on world news but pick on linguistic minorities we don't get a sniff in the papers let alone world attention. Somehow it all seems rather unfair and biased.

    2. FROM ED
      That's why I wrote letters to major Canadian newspapers. It.s no use complaining about lack of attention from people who don't know our situation. telling each other here how bad things are is only known to those who read our blog. Do they tell others? At least in the newspaper everyone can read it. I'm hoping to hear something about the letters, I haven't heard anything from the folks here. Ed

  20. Re: Housekeeping post.

    The times I drop by the blog, there is ALWAYS something interesting to read and mostly that is why I venture in. True, there is also a lot of trash as well in comments section, but we do our best to skip over it whenever possible. In an ideal world things would run how many of you have suggested BUT this blog belongs to Editor and his infinate wisdom runs it how he sees fit, for better or worst. I hope those of you who have voiced a grievance or two in regards, continue to post regardless of troll presence/commentary, it would be a pity to lose you over something like this. Trolls shouldn't win over intelligent people. Please keep posting.

    1. FROM ED
      ANECTOTE, right. Trolls shouldn't win over intelligent people. They won't win at all if certain people will stop conversing with them. Ed

    2. Please, AnceTOTE is correct. All of you are so much more important than shit disturbers SR and student! We are all interested in your comments and analysis of the situation. Don't let the trolls (separatists) win anymore than you would at the polls when you go to vote.

  21. You know what? All of this controversy regarding Quebec Charter of Values is actually nothing more than an manipulation by English Canada and the Federal Government of Canada. Do not believe me? Imperatif-francais says so.

    1. Hilarious! Jean-Paul Perreault prepares press releases about himself while referring to himself in the third person. Talk about a self-important twat!

  22. FROM ED
    Roger, thank you for pointing out my error, the line should have read 80% of nationalist Francophones. I can't remove it from the blog, I don't control that.
    Youi're wrong about equalization. The Prime Minister does have the power to cut funding to any government not abiding by human rights. The same way they have done to countries like Iraq, Afiganistan etc.
    By the way, when someone attacks my language, my religion and my freedom, they are my enemy. Ed

    1. I understand how you feel about how your freedom is under attack. I would even say that with the language laws, anglophone's ability to make a decent living are under attack as well. I just am hoping that we don't go attack all francophones. Not all francophones think the same way, which is why they have never been able to win a sovereignty referendum.

      As for equalization, I am not wrong. It is a written agreement that is given to have-not provinces with no conditions attached. You mention about cutting funding to foreign countries but Quebec is not a foreign country - not yet anyway.

      Equalization us up for renewal in 2014. At that time, it can be changed.

      Here are a couple of links about equalization: