I have reread my lengthy exchanges with Mallet. He is not scornful. I retract that. Rather he is much more deceptive. He deceives himself first. He dismisses John of the Cross' advice when it comes to judging private revelations. I think I had missed some shift in his response to me. It seemed he scorned St John. Rather he said St John does not apply to mystics so long as they don't desire mystical favors. But that is quite foolish. He simply sidestepped my question. He does not apply the standards of St John of the Cross to various seers. He also inverts the Church's teaching on private revelation setting the burden on alleged naysayers instead of the seers. That's a huge self deception. The Church never "approves" private revelation. It's judgements are not free from error. So, we are free to critique seers. The worst is that the Church has all but inverted the rules for discernment. And this has only now become clear to me just in the last couple days. In any case Mark Mallet and the rest are unreliable entirely. They promote unproven and suspect seers without careful vetting.