Sunday, September 27, 2009

A Comments Storm

In a fit of anger, Adolf fired a couple of shells across Peter Cresswell's bow the other day.

Oh well, that's got it off my chest, I thought. Nothing much happened and there were a couple of desultory comments as the day wore on. Much later, some misinformed disagreeable rube came along and was firmly repulsed.

Ho hum.

Imagine my surprise when today I find I can't get outside into the early morning sun because there's a pile of comments a mile high, wedged like a snow drift against the front door.

http://www.inforum.com/media/full/jpg/2009/03/12/13drifts2.jpg


Isn't this blogging caper a funny business? How often have you slaved over an erudite piece of astute analysis, marvelled at its acuity, honed the poetry of the phrases and, with a glow of all round virtue, hit the 'publish post' button - only to watch for a day as the world passes you by?

5 comments:

Oswald Bastable said...

Its always my throwaway pieces that get the strings of comments!

KG said...

Oh aye--there's brass in roobish, as they say!

Redbaiter said...

Adolf, the real issue was Not PC's deceitful attempt to publically pin the so called spamming (of the questions on the election money on Redbaiter) and manufacture this big false scenario that Redbaiter had been posting profusely there when he was not wanted.

This is all a complete fabrication, and has been exposed as such, and I state once again I was not the spammer, and I did not post profusley at Not PC as claimed, and that it was all utter lies.

That is the real issue.

All this stuff about outing and trolling and the rest of it is just so much fluff. Off the point.

The real issues was Not PC's deliberate fabrications.

Fabrications he attempted because of his dislike of Redbaiter and his desire to smear me.

I ask for any commenter on the many threads on this issue (whether left or right), to advise if they think publishing lies to smear someone is something they endorse.

PC said...

It's clearly a slow news week, since it's now clear that there are people who'd rather take time on the weekend to bitch, whinge and whine than to watch one of the best Grand Finals in years. (Interesting too that the bitching, whinging and whining about me was all posted when I'd already indicated I'd be indisposed, given that I'd be watching that Grand Final.)

Anyway, I intend this to be my only comment on my banning of a couple of time-wasting trolls. I'm cross-posting it here and at Crusader Rabbit.

KG, you say there's a "stoush" going on at NOT PC. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is no "stoush," there's only a ban on someone I don't wish to have polluting my comments thread -- and a ban on any further similar pollution.

I invite folk to comment at NOT PC in good faith - to say what they mean, and to mean what they say. The fellow now using the name "Angus" hasn't done that, and nor has the fellow known to the blogospher as Redbaiter.

As anyone who's ever stepped in one of his comments knows, Rodbeater is as disingenuuous as he is persistent -- and as irrational as he is deluded. Some people talk about people, others talk about events, more intelligent people talk about ideas . . . Rodbeater can only talk about himself and his delusion. As a topic, that's far less interesting than he seems to think it is.

Just for the record, Rodbeater's first recorded comment at NOT PC under his "Redbaiter" alias was on August last year in a post about Helen Clark -- a comment that pretty well summarises every one since. Here it is:

"What a joke. The doctrinal control freaks that dominate NZ's so called Libertarian Party, and delete comments here no differently to the Standard, having the front to criticize Helen Klark. Sanctimonious pain in the arse pseudo liberals."

The comment is paranoic (I've been deleted!); factually incorrect (since it was his first post he has no deletions to complain about); off topic (the bare reference to Helen Clark gave it only a figleaf of relevance to the topic); and harps on the same obscure point which his next 207 posts would say over and over again, on whatever thread he cared to smear them.

That's why he was banned: Because he's an off-topic blowhard know-nothing who makes every thread about him. In other words, a troll who offered nothing of any value, and who lowered every comments thread to his puerile obsessions.

And he was banned and has been for at least a year, despite most of those 207 posts coming after the ban -- evidence only of his being too thick to understand that being banned meant he wasn't welcome to comment.

I'm unrepetant about the ban. The principle of free speech doesn't require that I provide dickheads with a microphone. And ironically enough, when Pablo points out the obvious over at Adolf's place -- "To claim that RB can enter a proprietary domain (a blog) and run his mouth without regard to consequences is naive at best" - both Adolf and Rodbeater resile for a moment from berating my own "bad manners" for banning this dickhedad to tell Pabo that he's banned from No Minister.

Irony, thy name is Adolf.

[Cont'd in part two]

PC said...

[Cont'd from part one]

So Rodbeater was banned from NOT PC, and despite his persistent reappearances he's been banned for over a year. Unlike other bloggers however, the blogging software as it's presently set up at NOT PC doesn't allow me to blocking a banned commeters'posts -- if I don't want their bullshit then I have to manually delete them as I come in, which I haven't always done (particularly if other commenters have been feeding the troll). Rodbeater's is one of only three bans I've had to implement in the five years I"ve been running NOT PC, and (despite his frequent whining that he has no interest in NOT PC) Rodbeater is the only one who refuses to desist. (The fact that well over two-thirds of his 207 comments come after his ban just shows you how thick-headed he is.)

And just for the record, because of that blogging software I presently use I have no idea nor any interest in knowing Rodbeater's email or his IP address (which would in any case change every time he visited Bangkok as he says he dos regularly). So I have no idea nor any interest in whether or not his trolling and the other recent trolling were by the same person or not -- fact is, that I was overwhelmed with off-topic trolling slime that was all saying much the same stuff, stuff that was posted under Rodbeater's name and anonymously and under other pseudonyms, none of which was slowing down when I asked posters to stop.

So when this latest bout of spam trolling erupted, I acted to protect my blog in the same way a bar-owner would act to protect his bar when other patrons are being abused, or a talkback host would act to protect his radio show, or a party's host woulr act to eject a gate-crasher. I pressed the moderation button, and told Mr Fletcher that his game was up.

Now, some people think I shouldn't have "named" the prick.

Why the hell not? I don't hold to the idea of "turning the other cheek."

For the scumbag to invoke the principle of "privacy" is laughable, since it's the private property of my own blog he flatly refuses to recogise. Pablo is right on the button here. "To claim that RB can enter a proprietary domain (a blog) and run his mouth without regard to consequences is naive at best." And to claim that I should sit still while he vandalises my property is ludicrous. That really would be a Sanction of the Victim, which is I suspect just what Rodbeater was relying on -- that I would be hamstrung by his idea of "blogging etiquette."

Well frankly, that's just self-serving disingenuous bullshit. You can't claim any right to privacy while refusing to recognise that same principle yourself.

So Mr Fletcher is banned at NOT PC, and he remains banned. And if Mr Fletcher doesn't like that, then that's just tough luck. I regret however that KG and Adolf don't like that, since I have a great deal of respect for both of them (even if I don't always agree with them), but if they wish to continue to allow him to pollute their own comments threads then that's their business, not mine.

And that's all I wanted to say, which is far more than the storm in a teacup deserves.