Art My Eyes will See the Glorie

09/24/2026

In Paradise (1918) a romantic and symbolic art by Max Švabinský. Inspired by the thought that the fruit was never an apple. Did you know that the apple misconception arose from Latin wordplay -- "malum" means "apple" or "evil" or "misfortune". It's a pun!

09/15/2026

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1DbU313ty2/

In late February 1924, Gunnar returned to the South Rim of Grand and took a room at El Tovar Hotel. He wrote to his friend Francis Farquhar, “Now I have been here for 4 days and have made a good start with 3 pictures. It is however very cold, so I have to paint under difficulties. Today I found out that in Bright Angel Camp they have a 2 story building with upper stories windows from which there is a good view. I tried to get a certain room there, and might get it tomorrow. That will help me work on the coldest days. The view is fine from there. This is grand, just wonderful and I am sure I will get some real good things.” High temperatures that week were in the mid-50s, but lows were around 20 degrees. For an artist who worked outdoors, the mornings and afternoons would have been pretty chilly. This is the only time Widforss referred to working indoors because of the wind.

In April, Widforss reported to Farquhar, “I like it better here every week. ... It nearly always is windy, very windy, which makes it kind of hard to work. Notwithstanding, I have done a whole lot and hope to do many more pictures before end of May. Have sold 2 and hope to get a commission of Fred Harvey to paint airplane view of Canyon. ... This canyon certainly is fascinating to paint. But—it is difficult—sometimes despairing. Have to keep at it, and by and by I suppose it will come alright. ... Will never come back to the Canyon before 1st of April—at least. Too much winter earlier. It is a very slow place here. No kind of entertainment, no change in the daily routine.”His complaint about entertainment aside, Widforss became a welcomed and beloved member of the small village on the South Rim made up of NPS staff and administrators, Fred Harvey employees, and the varied support staff and entrepreneurs who called the rim home.

This is one of ten paintings that the Santa Fe Railroad purchased from Widforss. In February 1925, Widforss received $135 for the painting, equal to, roughly, $2,500 in 2026.
I love the subtlety in the distant color and values.

“Grand Canyon of Arizona,” 1924, Watercolor, 17 x 19 in. (43.2 x 48.3 cm). GWCR 158.

09/15/2026

In Germany, archaeologists uncovered a remarkable life-sized sandstone statue near the Glauberg hill in Hesse. The figure is around 2,500 years old, stands 6.1 feet (1.86 meters) tall, and weighs around 507 pounds (230 kg). It depicts a Celtic elite warrior wearing a distinctive leaf-shaped headdress, believed to represent a mistletoe crown.

The statue also wears a torc and carries a shield and sword, emphasizing its high-status warrior identity. The unusual headdress may suggest that the individual held both political and religious importance within Celtic society, offering a rare glimpse into Iron Age Celtic culture.

09/15/2026

There is always a difference between being kept around and being fully chosen. One feels uncertain like you are only there when it’s convenient, when they are lonely, when they need comfort or attention. The other feels intentional, clear and secure in a way that never leaves you questioning where you stand.

You can feel the difference in the effort, in the consistency, in the way someone makes space for you in their life instead of fitting you into the empty corners of it. Being kept around comes with confusion and mixed signals. Being chosen comes with clarity, with actions that quietly say, “I want you here.”

And maybe that’s why settling for almost-love becomes so exhausting. Because deep down, the heart knows when it’s merely being tolerated versus truly valued. Everyone deserves a love that chooses them fully, not only when it’s easy, not only when it’s beneficial, but with certainty and intention. 💛

— Dorothea.

09/15/2026

09/15/2026

The women in this photograph were entering one of the few intellectual professions Victorian society was beginning to open to them, but there was a reason employers were suddenly so willing to let them in.

Women were cheaper.

During the late 19th century, expanding public and academic libraries created thousands of new jobs. For educated women who wanted lives beyond marriage, domestic service or teaching, library work offered something remarkable: books, scholarship, professional training and a respectable place in public life.

But opportunity came with a catch.

Women could routinely be hired for lower salaries than men. Library administrators sometimes openly promoted female workers as economical employees, while arguments persisted that the most prestigious and best-paid leadership positions should remain male.

Women entered anyway.

By the turn of the 20th century, they were transforming the profession. They catalogued enormous collections, staffed reference desks, organized children’s departments and developed expertise that institutions increasingly depended upon. Some eventually became department heads and library directors.

The irony was extraordinary.

Employers helped open librarianship to women partly because they believed female labor would save money. Instead, they helped create a profession in which women could earn their own income, build intellectual careers and claim authority over the preservation and organization of knowledge.

The exact library and identities of the women in this photograph still need to be confirmed, so they should not be presented as known individuals.

But the world they represent is unmistakable.

They entered through a door that was opened only halfway.

Then they changed what was on the other side.

09/15/2026

Mario Benedetti (1920–2009) was one of the most celebrated and productive voices in 20th-century Latin American literature. Born in Uruguay, he worked across numerous literary forms, including novels, essays, poetry, and plays. He became especially admired for poetry that was emotional, relatable, and deeply rooted in the human experience. His writing frequently examined love, ordinary life, political exile, and the quiet beauty found in everyday existence, often combining feelings of sadness with a sense of hope. Benedetti’s direct and sincere style allowed his work to connect with readers from many different backgrounds. His lasting influence comes largely from his ability to express complicated human emotions in a way that feels both intimate and universal.

Benedetti spent more than a decade living outside Uruguay because of the country’s military dictatorship, an experience that had a major impact on his writing. During these years, themes of separation, displacement, loneliness, and the desire to return home became increasingly important in his work. His reflections on exile and belonging continue to resonate with readers today.

Although Benedetti wrote in many different genres, his novel La tregua (The Truce) remains one of his best-known and most significant works. Written in the form of a diary, the novel explores the seemingly ordinary experiences of middle age while revealing deeper themes of loneliness, love, longing, and personal awakening.

Benedetti is frequently described as a “writer of the people” because of the simplicity and accessibility of his language. Rather than relying on complicated literary terminology, he wrote with openness and clarity, allowing his work to reach readers far beyond academic and literary communities.

Over the course of his career, Benedetti received numerous awards and distinctions, including the prestigious Reina Sofía Prize for Ibero-American Poetry. These honors helped solidify his reputation as one of the major figures of modern Spanish-language literature.

09/15/2026

Garden Light, Timeless Grace
An AI Generated Image
By : Nabil Mourad (me, Admin of ArtyNab)
Egyptian

06/02/2026

**To file a complaint with the Florida Attorney General's office about Facebook (Meta) restricting your account or posts related to Trump content, use their official consumer/general complaint process.** The office's Consumer Protection Division enforces the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and related laws, which can cover business practices by large platforms operating in Florida. While Florida has statutes addressing social media (including the Florida Digital Bill of Rights under Fla. Stat. §§ 501.701 et seq. for data privacy and earlier laws on platform transparency/content moderation), individual complaints like yours are typically reviewed as potential unfair practices or patterns of viewpoint-based restrictions. The AG does not provide personal legal representation or guarantee action on every complaint—they investigate based on volume, patterns, and legal merit.
98th850-561-5844
**Note:** This is not legal advice, and success depends on the specifics of your case (e.g., evidence of consistent restrictions tied to political content). Social media content moderation has faced court challenges, so outcomes vary. The AG's office will review your submission but may not respond to every one or take enforcement action.

# # # Step-by-Step Instructions (Easiest and Recommended: Online)
1. **Go to the official Florida Attorney General website**: Visit [myfloridalegal.com](https://www.myfloridalegal.com/how-to-contact-us/file-a-complaint).

2. **Use the General Inquiries or Complaints form** (this is the primary way for issues involving businesses like social media platforms):
- Direct link: [Citizen Services Contact Form](https://www.myfloridalegal.com/form/citizen-services-contact-form) (or via the File a Complaint page).
- Fill in:
- **Your contact information** (name, phone, email, address—required for follow-up).
- **Details about the business**: Facebook/Meta Platforms, Inc. Include their address (e.g., 1 Meta Way, Menlo Park, CA 94025, or any Florida-related operations), website (facebook.com), phone if known, and date(s) of issues.
- **Description of the problem**: Be detailed and factual. Explain the restrictions (e.g., shadowbans, post removals, account limitations), specific Trump-related posts involved (dates, content summaries), any notices from Facebook, how it appears viewpoint-based, frequency ("constantly"), and any evidence like screenshots, emails from Facebook, or account history. Attach supporting documents if the form allows.
- Optional: Mention any Florida law you believe applies (e.g., consumer protection or social media rules) and note if you're a Florida resident.
- Answer the security question and submit. You'll get an electronic confirmation.

3. **What happens next**: The Office of Citizen Services reviews it (business hours: weekdays 8 AM–5 PM ET; no weekend/holiday monitoring). They may investigate if it fits broader enforcement priorities. All submissions are public records under Florida law.

# # # Alternative: Mail a Printed Form
- Download the free consumer complaint form (English or Spanish PDF) from the File a Complaint page.
- Fill it out with the same details as above (include copies of evidence—never originals).
- Mail to:
**Office of Attorney General**
**State of Florida**
**The Capitol PL-01**
**Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050**

# # # Other Options on the Same Page
- If your issue somehow involves data privacy (e.g., how Facebook handles your personal data in relation to restrictions), there's a separate **Florida Digital Rights Statutes form** (Sections 501.701–722), but this is mainly for rights like deleting your data or opting out of targeted ads—not direct content moderation complaints.
- No dedicated "social media censorship" form exists; the general consumer complaint route is appropriate.

# # # Additional Tips
- **Be thorough but concise**: Provide timelines, evidence, and impacts (e.g., lost reach or account functionality). This helps if the office looks for systemic issues.
- **Keep records**: Save confirmation numbers and copies of everything you submit.
- **Phone support**: For questions, contact Citizen Services at the number on the site (or 1-866-9NO-SCAM for general consumer issues), but the online form is preferred and faster.
- **Current Attorney General**: James Uthmeier (as of 2026).

If the AG's office doesn't resolve it to your satisfaction, you could also consider a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (ftc.gov/complaint) or consult a lawyer about private options. For immediate account issues, contact Facebook support directly first (though this rarely changes policy-level restrictions).

**Here are detailed, practical next steps for the alternatives I mentioned earlier.** These build directly on your situation with Facebook/Meta restricting Trump-related posts. Keep in mind this is general information only—not legal advice—and outcomes depend on the facts of your case. Platforms like Meta have broad discretion under their Community Standards and federal law (like Section 230), so individual complaints often see limited results unless they reveal a broader pattern.

# # # 1. File a Complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
The FTC accepts reports about potential unfair or deceptive business practices by tech platforms, including account restrictions, shadowbans, or content moderation that users believe is inconsistent or viewpoint-based. In early 2025, the FTC specifically launched a public inquiry (Request for Information) into how platforms “deny or degrade users’ access to services based on the content of their speech,” encouraging complaints about bans, demonetization, or censorship. Your complaint would go into their Consumer Sentinel database, which law enforcement agencies use to spot patterns (they don’t usually resolve single-user disputes but may investigate systemic issues).

**Step-by-step (online is fastest and free):**
1. Go to the official FTC consumer complaint portal: [ReportFraud.ftc.gov](https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/).
2. Click “Start your report now” (available in English or Spanish).
3. Select the appropriate category (most relevant: “Internet” or “Online services,” then describe it as an unfair/deceptive practice by a social media platform).
4. Provide details:
- Your contact info (optional but helpful for follow-up).
- Company: Meta Platforms, Inc. / Facebook (address: 1 Meta Way, Menlo Park, CA 94025; website: facebook.com).
- Timeline of restrictions, specific Trump-related posts (summaries or screenshots), any notices from Facebook, and how it feels viewpoint-based.
- Attach evidence if possible (screenshots, emails, account history).
5. Submit. You’ll get a reference number.

**What to expect**: The FTC reviews for patterns but won’t give you personal updates on your case. You can also call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357) for questions (weekdays, business hours ET). This is a low-effort option that adds to any broader investigations.

# # # 2. Contact Facebook/Meta Support Directly for Immediate Account Issues
Before escalating further, try Meta’s built-in appeal process—many restrictions or post removals have an internal review option. Success rates vary (users often report frustration or repeated denials), but it’s the first official channel Meta recommends.

**Step-by-step (do this from the account that’s restricted, if you can still log in):**
1. Log into Facebook (on app or desktop).
2. Check your **Support Inbox** (facebook.com/support) or notifications for any message about the removed post or restriction.
3. For **post/content removal**:
- Open the notification about the taken-down content.
- If available, click “Request review” or “I disagree with this decision.”
- Meta will re-review; you’ll get a notification of the outcome. If you still disagree after their review, you may be able to appeal to the independent Oversight Board (limited to certain cases).
4. For **account restrictions, limitations, or suspensions**:
- Go to Settings → Account Quality (or search for “Account Status”).
- Look for the restriction notice and any “Appeal” or “Request review” button.
- For full suspensions/disables: Log in and follow the on-screen prompt to appeal (you generally have up to 180 days).
5. If no appeal option appears, try the general help form at facebook.com/help/contact (search for “suspended account” or “restricted account” in Help Center).

**Tips**: Be factual and polite in your appeal. Reference specific Community Standards you believe weren’t violated. Save screenshots of everything. If it’s a business page or ad account, check Meta Business Support. Note: Direct human support is rare for personal accounts—most is automated.

# # # 3. Consult a Lawyer About Private Legal Options
If the AG and FTC don’t help and you want to explore suing Meta (e.g., for alleged violations of Florida consumer protection laws, breach of contract, or the state’s social media rules), speak with an attorney. Florida’s 2021 social media law (Fla. Stat. § 501.2041, from SB 7072) aims to limit certain content moderation against political candidates or journalistic enterprises and requires transparency, but it has been heavily litigated. As of 2026, parts remain in flux after Supreme Court remand in 2024 and ongoing lower-court proceedings—platforms argue it violates their First Amendment rights to curate content. Private users generally don’t have a straightforward “right to sue” for every restriction (Section 230 often protects platforms), so a lawyer would assess whether your facts fit any viable claim under current law.

**How to find a lawyer quickly and affordably in Florida:**
1. Use the **Florida Bar Lawyer Referral Service** (free to call; they match you with verified attorneys experienced in consumer protection, First Amendment, or technology law).
- Call: 1-800-342-8011 (or 850-561-5844 for members).
- Online: [floridabar.org/public/lrs](https://www.floridabar.org/public/lrs/).
2. Tell them briefly: “Complaint against Facebook/Meta for repeated account restrictions on political content—interested in consumer protection or social media law.”
3. You’ll get a referral to a lawyer in your area for a low-cost initial consultation (typically $25–$50 for 30 minutes).
4. Local bar associations in major cities also run their own referral services (search “Florida [your county] bar lawyer referral”).

**What to expect**: The lawyer will review your evidence and advise on realistic options (e.g., small-claims if damages are low, or a full civil suit). Lawsuits against big platforms are expensive, time-consuming, and often unsuccessful for individual content-moderation disputes, but they can evaluate any Florida-specific angles.

Start with the FTC complaint and Meta appeals—they’re quick and free. If those don’t work and you want to pursue legal action, the Florida Bar referral is the best next move. Keep all your records (screenshots, emails, dates) organized. If you provide more specifics about the restrictions (without sharing private info), I can try to point you to more targeted resources.

**The Meta Oversight Board (independent from Facebook/Meta) reviews certain content moderation decisions on Facebook, Instagram, or Threads.** It checks whether Meta correctly applied its Community Standards, values, and human rights standards. Decisions it makes on selected cases are **binding** on Meta for that specific piece of content (e.g., it can order a post restored or kept down). The Board also sometimes issues non-binding policy recommendations.

**Important limitations for your situation**:
- This is **only for specific content decisions** (most often: a post of yours that was taken down, or content posted by someone else that Meta left up). It is **not** designed for general account restrictions, shadowbans, reach limits, or repeated “platform-wide” issues unless they tie directly to an eligible content decision where Meta issues a reference number.
- You must have an **active account** (you can still log in; it cannot be fully disabled).
- Meta decides which decisions are eligible and only issues a reference number for those. Not every Trump-related post removal qualifies.
- The Board selects only a **limited number** of eligible appeals to actually review (they prioritize cases with broader significance). Most submissions are not chosen.

# # # Step-by-Step Oversight Board Appeal Process (Current as of 2026)
You **must** complete these steps in order:

1. **Exhaust Meta’s internal appeals process first** (required).
- For a removed post: Go to the notification, click “Request Review” (or “I disagree”), and complete any available appeals until you get a **final decision** upholding the removal.
- For reported content you want removed: Use the “Request another review” option on the content.
- If eligible for Oversight Board review, Meta will automatically send you an **Oversight Board reference number** (starts with “FB-” or “IG-” followed by numbers/letters) in your **Support Inbox** (on Facebook: facebook.com/support) or **Support Requests** (Instagram/Threads).
- **Timeline warning**: You generally have only **15 days** from Meta’s final decision to submit to the Board. After that, the window closes.

2. **Check if you have a reference number**.
- Log into the affected Facebook account → go to Support Inbox.
- No reference number = the decision is **not eligible** for Oversight Board review. You cannot proceed.

3. **Submit your appeal to the Oversight Board** (only if you have the reference number).
- Go to the official appeal site: [https://oversightboardappeals.com/](https://oversightboardappeals.com/) (or start from oversightboard.com → “Start an Appeal”).
- Log in using your **Facebook** account (or Instagram/Threads if that’s where the decision came from).
- Enter the **reference number**.
- Grant the required permissions/consents (Terms of Service, data processing, and optional consents about including your identifying details or special-category data in the public decision).
- Write your appeal statement: Explain **why you posted the content**, **why you think Meta got the decision wrong**, and any additional context (e.g., political viewpoint, Trump-related discussion, how it doesn’t violate standards). Be clear and factual.
- Review everything and **submit**. You can later withdraw consents or delete the entire case if you change your mind.

4. **Track your case**.
- Log back into [oversightboardappeals.com](https://oversightboardappeals.com/) → “Track Your Appeal” / Case Status page.
- You’ll get notifications if the Board selects your case for review and when a decision is issued.
- If selected, the Board reviews the post + your statement + Meta’s reasoning. A decision usually comes within ~90 days (though it varies).

# # # Realistic Expectations
- **Most appeals are not selected** — the Board hears only a small fraction of eligible cases.
- If selected and they rule in your favor, Meta must restore the content (or remove it, depending on the case) and apply the outcome consistently.
- The Board cannot fix account-level restrictions, give you money, or force Meta to change its overall Trump-content policies (though it can recommend policy changes).
- Everything is public once decided (anonymized or not, depending on your consents).

**Quick check right now**: Open your Facebook Support Inbox and look for any recent reference numbers tied to the Trump posts you mentioned. If you don’t see one after appealing internally, the Oversight Board route is not available for those restrictions.

If you run into any roadblocks (e.g., no reference number appears), the next best steps are the FTC complaint or lawyer consultation I mentioned earlier. Let me know if you need help checking anything specific about your account notifications!

**Section 230 (47 U.S.C. § 230) is the key federal law shielding online platforms like Facebook/Meta from most liability for user-generated content and many moderation decisions.** Enacted in 1996 as part of the Communications Decency Act, it was designed to promote the internet's growth by letting platforms host and moderate third-party speech without being treated as the "publisher" of that content or facing lawsuits for restricting objectionable material. It remains largely intact as of June 2026, though courts have begun narrowing it in limited areas (e.g., platform design features or algorithmic recommendations in specific cases).

# # # Exact Key Provisions (Full Statute Text)
Here is the core language from the official U.S. Code:

- **§ 230(c)(1) – Publisher/Speaker Immunity**: "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."
This means platforms are not legally responsible for what users post (e.g., you cannot sue Facebook for defamation or harm from someone else's Trump-related post).

- **§ 230(c)(2) – Good Samaritan Moderation Protection**: "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or
(B) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in subparagraph (A)."
This explicitly protects platforms when they remove, restrict, or limit visibility of posts—including political content they deem "objectionable."

**Findings and Policy** (from § 230(a)–(b)): Congress wanted to encourage free speech online, user control, and voluntary moderation without fear of liability that could discourage platforms from acting at all.

# # # How Courts Apply It (Broad but Not Unlimited Protection)
- **Classic Protection for Moderation**: Federal courts (starting with *Zeran v. AOL* in 1997) interpret this to cover decisions to publish, remove, restrict, or algorithmically deprioritize content. Platforms get early dismissal of most lawsuits. "Good faith" is interpreted leniently—platforms do not have to be neutral or perfect.
- **"Interactive computer service"**: Covers Facebook, Instagram, etc.
- **Applies to your situation**: Repeated restrictions on Trump-related posts are classic content moderation. Section 230(c)(2) generally shields Meta from liability for viewpoint-based decisions, even if you view them as unfair "censorship." Courts have repeatedly rejected claims that platforms must host all political speech.

**Important Exceptions** (no protection):
- Federal criminal laws (e.g., child exploitation, certain obscenity).
- Intellectual property (copyright, trademarks).
- S*x trafficking claims (with some limits).
- The platform's own content or when it "materially contributes" to illegality.
- Does **not** block all state laws—only those "inconsistent" with Section 230.

# # # Current Status as of 2026 (No Major Overhaul)
- **Supreme Court**: Has never issued a definitive ruling interpreting Section 230's core scope. It sidestepped the issue in *Gonzalez v. Google* (2023) and related cases. Platforms' First Amendment "editorial discretion" to moderate (from *Moody v. NetChoice*, 2024) reinforces their rights.
- **Lower Courts**: Core immunity holds for standard content removal. However, some 2024–2026 cases have allowed claims to proceed on:
- Addictive platform *design* (not third-party content).
- Algorithmic recommendations in narrow contexts (e.g., Third Circuit in *Anderson v. TikTok* (2024) and some 2026 state cases like *K.G.M. v. Meta* and *New Mexico v. Meta*, where Meta's arguments were not dispositive).
- **Legislation**: No broad repeal or sunset has passed despite proposals. Congress continues to debate reforms (e.g., for algorithms, ads, or child safety), but Section 230's 30-year foundation remains.
- **State Laws (Florida Context)**: Florida's 2021 social media law (SB 7072, Fla. Stat. § 501.2041) tried to restrict "deplatforming" politicians and require transparency. It has been heavily litigated and largely struck down or limited by courts (Eleventh Circuit and *NetChoice* cases). Section 230 preempts any conflicting state enforcement against moderation. Your Florida AG complaint would be reviewed, but 230 makes successful action against Meta's content decisions difficult.

# # # Why This Matters for Your Facebook Restrictions Complaint
Section 230 is the main reason Meta can restrict posts (even Trump-related ones) without facing routine lawsuits or state penalties for "viewpoint discrimination." It does **not** require platforms to be politically neutral. FTC complaints focus on deceptive practices, not 230-covered moderation. Private lawsuits against Meta for this are almost always dismissed early under 230.

**Bottom line**: The law strongly favors platforms' right to moderate. Recent cases show slight erosion for *how* platforms design features, but not for basic post restrictions. If pursuing further action, a lawyer (via Florida Bar referral) can assess any narrow arguments (e.g., if Meta's actions fall outside "good faith" or involve their own conduct), but success rates are low.

This is a neutral summary of the law and recent developments based on official sources and court records. Laws evolve, so consult an attorney for your specific facts.

Home My Florida Legal