Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Pest control

Since a commenter is complaining about the alleged inscrutability of our rules for banning trolls, I shall, in the interests of blogospheric transparency, declassify the computus by which we calculate when a troll has crossed the line of no return.

Definition: A troll shall be banned if and only if his comment falls on or before the leap-day of an embolismic month, between an ecclesiastical new moon and a nominal full moon (which ever comes first) of a 28-day lunation, on the vernal equinox of the 3rd tropical year of the Metonic cycle of the saltus lunae of the calendarium—provided that the Golden Number is larger than 11 (unless, of course, said sequence happens to fall on a synodic month with a Dominical Letter, in which case one must subtract the tithi from the Lilian epact).


  1. wow, I didn't know it was so systematic.

  2. I thought this was the standard formula used on pretty much any Christian blog. It's disappointing that you have to spell it out—anyone presuming to comment here should know this.

  3. Wait a minute doesn't this make Greeks measure time by calends?

  4. Frankly, P.D. Nelson, you ought to be more concerned with the Rosicrucian aspects of the veneration liturgy. Your objection was dealt with by our Latin imprecations. Unfortunately, because of your harum-scarum interrogative the anathematic imprecatations will be enforced with you too.

    No offense.

  5. P.S. Pointing out that I mispelled "imprecations" the second time will result in an exponential increase of aforementioned anathemas.

  6. P.P.S. Any other errors can be pointed out with impugnity. This offer is only good for P.D. Nelson. Offer cannot be combined with any other offer or discount. Subject to change. See dealer for details.

  7. What happened to the blog posted by Steve Monday the 8th titled "Is God's will bifurcated?" ( It no longer appears on the normal weekly mainpage of Triablogue. It just disappeared. Is this a glitch, or is this part of doing "Pest control"? I hope that it's not the latter. I'm not trying to be a troll. I posed questions that I thought were legitimate.


    It's a technical problem which has since been fixed.

  9. In short:

    Steve: "It's my blog and I can block anyone I want."

    This is a legitimate reason and it's fallacious to argue that it's because arguments couldn't be refuted, which many trolls do. Many times in scripture we read something of the effect:

    Isrealites: "grumble grumble."
    God: "You will do this. I am God."

    Translation into my family life:

    Me: "You will do this."
    Kids: "But why?"
    Me: "I said so and I'm your dad."

    End of story. Works for me. You don't have to explain everything.