grumpy

mascara trauma

Probably pointless dramaramal(l)amadingdong nonsense, but hey, you never know, it might amuse someone out there. In a bored at work kind of way.

My favourite Irish beauty blog (and one of my favourite ones anywhere, come to that) had an item on favourite mascaras. Now, as you know, I love mascara and would like to think that decades’ experience poking myself in the eye with several hundred different short pointy brushes on sticks means I might know a thing or two about it. So I added a comment. I’ve commented on this blog before, indeed over many years.

This comment did not appear.

I was quite astonished.

Here’s what I said (third revised version, also not allowed…):

For volume without clumpy craziness–each lash is still distinct as a lash–and no smudging, fab stuff: currently loving Stila Glamoureyes.

For lasting through anything: tubing mascara (currently/recently: Mirenesse or Blinc).

I used some ace ones from Boots Natural Collection and 17 way back, loved them dearly and miss them here in Canada!

I liked the Clinique and Bobbi Brown tubers (plus the lovely BB No Smudge), but am no longer buying them as they and Estee Lauder and the others in the EL group are no longer cruelty-free. So that’s also no more Origins, Aveda, or MAC for me 😦

What happened: The EL group reinstated animal testing for those of their products that are sold in China, as a condition for sale. There was a fair amount in the news about this back in February, and at the beginning of March when a class action lawsuit was brought against them (and Avon and Mary Kay) in the US, for fraud and misrepresentation.

A shame…

(not sure why this was blocked when I tried to post it before???)

So I had a look at their rules:

Terms and Conditions

If you’re not happy with the way readers commented on a post, there’s not a lot we can do about that. Beaut.ie isn’t moderated as a rule. Your first comment will be subject to moderation and after that, readers are free to post what they like. But we do keep an eye on our comments and we do moderate if we spot something profane or racist; blatantly advertising a service; an obvious attempt to influence a discussion based on a vested interest, or trolling.

We are not responsible for anonymous comments from members of the public, so please don’t ask us to remove them.

By submitting content to this site you automatically grant Beaut.ie, http://www.beaut.ie, the royalty-free, non-exclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate and distribute the content (in whole or in part) worldwide and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or hereafter developed for the full term of any copyright that may exist in such content.

I’d love to know where the line is drawn between “chat” and “an obvious attempt to influence a discussion based on a vested interest.” Given (a) the tone of the daily blather discussions and opinions expressed therein, and (b) discussion on another post knocking (I think justifiably) a rather unpleasant PETA campaign. I’m guessing that an opinion that doesn’t fit with those of the editors, or with Irish general public opinion, is out of order? So does that mean not allowed to say anything about animal cruelty and vegetarianism, given the farming demographic?  (Ireland, by the way, is a very meat-eating kind of place; though it’s also home to one of the best vegetarian restaurants in the world, Dennis Cotter’s Café Paradiso in Cork.)

I do hope the following don’t now count as “trolling,” then:

  • having an opinion that doesn’t fit with the mainstream;
  • expressing a view or argument or stating a fact that is demonstrably TRUE, but which is then (erroneously) lumped together with views/opinions and/or beliefs and/or other unprovables (which can, in some systems of thought, not technically be T/F) and outright falsehoods.

Too easily done in a Catholic country, by all but theologians and higher clergy: from having lived there and had dealings with theological scholars in my work there, there’s a huge division between sophisticated Catholic intellectuals and the general population. Yes, that’s elitist: it also happens to be a true fact, and a prime example of “elite.” This is one of the ways in which, English conquest and colonisation notwithstanding, not much has changed in social structures and their intimiate connection with knowledge and power in Ireland over the last couple of thousand years or so. You don’t get any more elitist than having a druidic / priestly caste at the top of the food chain, with exclusive control over knowledge, information, and indeed (in the druidic case) literacy itself.

My other guess is that (as doesn’t happen infrequently) the eds completely missed the boat on this story, back in February-March. And would maybe rather not have that pointed out. Cassandra complexes aside, much as I hate feeling smug [no: that’s acually a lie, sorry!] all too often blog writing feels a bit like this:

Anyway, I emailed to see what the response is:

[…] I’ve been a keen follower of Beaut.ie and have commented there from time to time over the years. I was disappointed to see that a comment I made yesterday was held in moderation then did not appear, and the same today (revised version). I’ve also just tried to post a third time, with no links in it at all, and that’s not been allowed either.

The post: http://beaut.ie/blog/2012/lash-stash-four-mascaras-to-make-your-peepers-pop/

I’d really like to know why, because as far as I can see from the Beaut.ie Terms of Conduct, I’ve not broken any rules. Do bear in mind that I’ve been doing this sort of thing for ten years and have written rules of conduct and terms of service myself! Unless Beaut.ie has some sort of anti-cruelty-free agenda (which would surprise me: you’ve seemed very fair and tolerant in your moderation, even of extreme views). I should add that my blog (in case the worry was re. one of your rules on businesses) is an independent amateur one: not professional, not promoting a business, simply a hobby/leisure thing. As is very clear on the blog itself.

Here’s the offending comments: […]

I’d be very grateful if you could let me know where I went off-course with regard to your rules, so I know what not to do in future! […]

Will update as needed. IMHO, the Beaut.ies are lovely people, so I’d be astonished if I didn’t get a reply, and who knows, there might be a simple explanation!

UPDATE: as often happens, there’s a simple explanation (and beaut.ie are sweeties!!!)

Hello
Apologies for that, we’ve had a lot of problems with spam lately so it was
probably the amount of links in your post that triggered an automatic
rejection of the comment.  We wouldn’t have even seen it.  Feel free to
post again but keep the links to a minimum or else the same problem will
occur.
Cheers
Beaut.ie

Poorly-constructed anti-spam bots.

Yep, blame the poor old robots. When they develop consciousness, free will and autonomy: when AIs rule the world: they’ll be laughing. I’d almost bet that a first sign of AI passing the Turing test and going beyond it will be when they start playing around jokingly with comment-control. Which will also demonstrate the key element of humour-capability at the same time. It would be even more amusing if our benighted neighbours south of the border were under an (un-)fundamentalist right-wing nutjob godbaggy super-patriarchal anti-thought totalitarian régime by then: makes you rethink the Terminator movies (and other fictions of that ilk) and put you over to what seemed previously like the bad guys’ side.

Alternatively…

I thought I’d keep this post up anyway, as there’s no harm in some variation in tone, timbre, texture; and no harm in a bit of self-criticism in a critical blog. Especially if that coincides with FOLLY. In this case, my own.

[Though my comment’s still not appeared…]

So here’s the rest of the original draft of this post, before I updated it:

“Will update as needed” might mean “not,” if instead I move on to sunnier climes. In which case, expect an UPDATE around about here [just above, actually] saying that I am a fool: worse, a fool who wastes her own time on her own folly. Maybe I’m getting into meta-follies, here, being foolish about my own folly. Aaaargh.

In other words: “for fuck’s sake, put on your big girl panties.” To quote the wit and wisdom of the BBB, who are, as ever, acute and incisive… though I’m not sure they’d approve of my getting a LOL from their attempts at LULZ:

alas, that concentration of attention only led to another 30-odd hits on this blog that day, which doesn’t speak volumes for BBB readership figures; in comparison, whenever the blog’s been mentioned on MUA, my viewing figures have increased by at least 300-350. Still, there’s more to life than stats; and quality over quantity.

4 comments

    • gingerama

      me too 🙂
      though some are more pleasant than others; makeupalley I’ve found to be mainly lovely, some boards (the ones where I’m a regular) more than others (where I only dare to peek, not even properly lurk).
      love your blog, by the way!

  1. Melissia Hollars

    Its wonderful as your other posts : D, thanks for putting up. “Reason is the substance of the universe. The design of the world is absolutely rational.” by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

Care to reply?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s