Yesterday, Instapundit linked to a post about Rep. David Dreier's social security card proposal. That post is at a group blog known as Liberty & Power which is part of the "History News Network", which doesn't appear to be a cable TV network, just a web site spun off from George Mason University.

I left a comment suggesting that Dreier was just proposing this bill expecting it would fail but that it would show to his constituents that he was trying to do something. I also left a comment on this thread. However, both comments have now been deleted, but thankfully I saved a copy of the first:

Dreier probably intends this to fail.

From "Dreier race illustrates cautionary tale on immigration policy":

Tucked into last week's otherwise predictable California election results lay a cautionary tale about the election year's most uncovered issue: illegal immigration. Republican Rep. David Dreier, the 24-year Los Angeles-area veteran who chairs the powerful House Rules committee, won re-election to his House seat with just under 54 percent of the vote, down from 64 percent in 2002. His Democratic opponent, Cynthia Matthews, won almost 43 percent of the vote, despite spending just over $31,000 in her campaign, compared to more than $900,000 spent by Dreier. A Libertarian candidate won 3.5 percent of the vote.

The close result - his closest since 1980 - was because of Political Human Sacrifice.

The other comment was on this thread and noted that even someone as far gone as Badnarik didn't support physical open borders.

Not only have both comments been deleted but when I try to login I get the message "You could not be logged in because you have been blocked."

Three questions:

1. Did I violate History News Network's policy by using the pseudonym 'Lonewacko DotCom'?

2. If so, why wasn't the comment from 'Tom Anon' on the same thread deleted too?

3. And, is there any reason to believe the version of history provided by the History News Network?

UPDATE: I changed the links above to use that nifty new "nofollow" tag.

And, I received an email too:

Your account was blocked because you used a pseudonym.
We are checking into Tom Anon's identity. If this is a pseudonym, as seems
likely, his account will be deactivated as well.

Rick Shenkman
Editor
editor [atsign] historynewsnetwork.org

History News Network at George Mason University http://HNN.us

Man, and I thought the guys at KoolAidCentral were funny. (See also They can't ban all of us, about DailyKos doing an HNN.)

Let's look at HNN's FAQ entry:

...Only readers who register with HNN are able to post comments. They are required to post under their real names. To make sure they are who they say they are they have to provide their email address. Once a reader registers the system dispatches an email to their registered email address. They then have to respond in order to be able to post. Once a reader registers in this manner they can post as often as they like without reregistering. Email addresses are hidden, but the readers' names appear on the site...

It is our hope that by holding people responsible for their posts we will be able to discourage irresponsibility on the boards...

I certainly complied with the spirit of their rules. I took responsibility for my comments by including a very easy way for people to understand where they were coming from: Lonewacko DotCom. And, they've got my IP address and my real email address. What more do they want, a notarized copy of my driver's license?

Whether I complied with the exact letter of their rules is still an open question. "Lonewacko DotCom" is certainly the real name of my site. There are probably a large number of "John Smiths" posting at HNN, so my name is probably more real than many they already have there. Perhaps for the ultimate in Principal Skinneritis they should ask for a mailing address and double-check it with the Post Office.

And, in case you were laughing too hard before, here it is again:

"We are checking into Tom Anon's identity."

Once again, is there any reason to believe the version of history provided by the History News Network?