The incident a little of a month ago now where commentor, Glycocalyx, published the private details of a another commentor, JC, was despicable. People commenting on this site occasionally meet on social occasions or pass on their details via me to other commentors, for a variety of reasons, and they should feel some confidence when doing so, or when responding, that those private details will not be made public at some future time.
As I’ve already made clear on the comments page, such conduct will not only immediately incur the deletion of the offending comments (incl. comments that repeat the offending material), but the commentor will also be banned. I will also remind people that doxing is illegal, not merely uncourteous and against the policy of New Cat.
New Cat, like the old Cat, is meant to be a place where people can discuss matters of politics and culture from a right perspective, without necessarily agreeing, and doing so in a friendly though robust manner, being both charitable and pointed as appropriate. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, some of the acrimony that accumulated on the old Cat has made its way here and, in some respects, intensified. I would like to see that reversed. The occasional needling of commentors is perfectly fine, but persistent needling over time of non-trolls is entirely different and should be avoided.
One of the most welcome things to have occurred over the last few months is Lizzie’s return, and that has in no small part been successful because of conduct of her acquaintances, so to say. I’d like to see this replicated where applicable. This was at least the case until the previous weekend when I had began drafting this post. I’d like to return to the détente that existed before that weekend, and I’m sure many other Cats do as well. This is a relatively large forum with several commentors so it is not surprising that there are differences, not only of opinion, but of temper; consequently, people should comport themselves just as they do in other social situations and accommodate the diversity of personalities they encounter in public. How I specifically respond in future to any such pile-on I’m still thinking on, however, my disposition at present is to judge my earlier reluctance to intervene a mistake.
Lastly, my position re trolls is to ban them, but to be charitable in determining whether one is in fact a troll. C.L., in the last few days, over at his place, banned the commentor Prospero for reasons that what I think are essentially justified. Although trolls can on occasion provide some much needed commentary from a different standpoint, attention needs to be paid to what they typically provide to the forum and whether their contributions on the whole are in good faith or largely designed simply to provoke.
141 thoughts on “On doxing, pile-ons and trolls”
Well said Dover.
The New Cat is yours and I’m grateful you have taken it on.
I think you have made it abundantly clear that no one is getting banned for contrary view points but just for being a-holes to others through doxxing and other nastiness that is outside robust debate. I have no problem with that.
Thanks again for taking it on.
You’ve done a great job Dover Beach. Congrats.
All popular blogs have their demons. You manage them well.
Good to hear, I generally like JC, however he and several others seem to take delight in slagging off at people they disagree with or think are ignorant. Nothing wrong with a witty put down, or a (very) subtle insult but just swearing and bagging people is not a civilised thing to do. Doxxing is completely out of bounds and must not be tolerated. I still lurk here a couple of times a week, but after being abused for a stating something I felt realistic or asking a question that others thought dumb, I find it better to not engage. Hanging around with vexatious people is not good for the soul.
Your most excellent blog, Dover, and so…your rules.
Robust debate is fine, but doxxing is definitely a bridge too far.
Trolls? Meh. The Townsville village Idiot the only one I find to be rage inducing. If he never returns it will be too soon.
Love your work Dover – great post !
my position re trolls is to ban them
Anyone banned recently?
Ahem, Megan – that would be the Toowoomba village idiot.
Preposterous on CL’s blog was most likely a certain imbecile from Brisbane.
Neither of whom I’d ever like to see stinking up this blog.
Googlery is not from Brisbane. He pretends to be from Brisbane for much the same reasons as he pretends to be right-wing on and off. I suspect it’s also the same reason he also pretends to be female.
Mocking and abuse aren’t really the same thing. Also, if I said you made a stupid comment I always explain why.
Thanks Dover. I am hoping Lizzie will return.
I don’t mind a stoush but there’s a certain person who seems to take delight in attacking Lizzie. It’s unfair, unwarranted and cruel.
This blog is a treasure.
Brumbles, I wasn’t referring to the Graegooglery.
“I still lurk here a couple of times a week, but after being abused for a stating something I felt realistic or asking a question that others thought dumb, I find it better to not engage.”
Umm….who’s abused you? There are some here who are abused but I’ve never seen you abused.
Or is it that you are mistaking abuse for disagreement? They’re not the same. I want robust conversation and we should be able to disagree with each other.
JC, no trouble with explanations, it’s the swearing and abuse that goes along with it it. You can put someone down with wit, however just launching into a barrage of invective isn’t the way to go. If you think what I post is in error, point the error out, and explain why you think it’s wrong, don’t substitute abuse for response.
Do what must be done Lord Dover.
Cassie, you seem to not read the posts. I know I have taunted you about your Abbott crush but I’ve never called you names, never used swear words. Perhaps I was a little unkind, if so, sorry to have hurt your feelings.
“Cassie, you seem to not read the posts. I know I have taunted you about your Abbott crush but I’ve never called you names, never used swear words. Perhaps I was a little unkind, if so, sorry to have hurt your feelings.”
I do read your posts…and NO, I don’t have an Abbott crush, although before the election you had a Clive Palmer crush. I happen to be one of Abbott’s biggest critics.
As I said, I don’t want a tepid blog….we need to vigorously disagree with each other.
Cassie, you do know that we’re on the same side (mostly), the left sticks together and fights after winning, perhaps we need to do the same. However we still need to work our way to policies and arguments that will win the day.
Clorox didn’t just attempt to out me, he also posted what he claimed were my street address and my spouse’s name.
Can I just make a point here, the rot began when the dickhead, Thought Leader, posted information that he obtained from meetups and other contact about me which he posted in order to get back. That was allowed to occur without any sanction. Keep in mind that it was fortuitous he left at the beginning of the year as he almost destroyed your blog with his laughable comments policy. The prick was also behaving as though he owned the place. It’s your blog and only your blog.
What did I say to you? I don’t recall really getting stuck into you.
“Clorox didn’t just attempt to out me, he also posted what he claimed were my street address and my spouse’s name.”
Correct, I stumbled on the thread and witnessed it. It was utterly disgraceful.
I didn’t have a crush on Clive, I did think he had deep pockets and when Craig Kelly went there, I thought things were changing. Unfortunately both Craig and Clive crapped on me two weeks before the election and neither will answer my call or respond. I’ve gone back to the low energy LDP, they still seem honest to me.
swf, enough said.
What did Craig Kelly do to you sfw?
Ask Dover for my email and I’ll tell you.
I value almost everyone here and I also quite like Monty, who despite being a misguided moronic idiotic progressive, is probably a nice person. I’m also very privileged to know some Cats personally, Lizzie, Rabzy, Tinta, Jupes, Vicki and a few others.
And I like you sfw, you need to stay, we need to have battles, stoushes and disagreements, we don’t need doxxing. Most people here are fundamentally decent, I think..but yes there are a few bad eggs but you get that anywhere.
Quite right, Rabz, thank you for pointing that out. I’m trying out prescription cannabis oil for my chronic pain issues and seems to be causing regular brain frizting and fatigue. Maybe I’m approaching senility faster than I thought.
I should? Why?
Yoohoo, Cassie! Meeting you pre-lockdown was a privilege. Hope to be back in Sydney before the end of this year.
September 8, 2022 at 7:44 pm
Yoohoo, Cassie! Meeting you pre-lockdown was a privilege. Hope to be back in Sydney before the end of this year.”
It was wonderful meeting you and your hubby. That was before Covid…can you believe that there was a time before Covid?
‘…or asking a question that others thought dumb, …’
The only dumb question is the one you don’t ask, because there are more than likey a couple of others that thinking the same question.
The only time I hated any questions being asked was five minutes to smoko, lunch, and/or boozer oclock and knockoff time. 😉
Well said, Dover.
There is another female poster in particular who cops a barrage of abuse from one particular mouthy type here almost on a daily basis.
I hope this policy extends to cover his vile attacks as well.
“There is another female poster in particular who cops a barrage of abuse from one particular mouthy type here almost on a daily basis.
I hope this policy extends to cover his vile attacks as well.”
Yes, thanks Sancho.
Cats need to recognise that there are predators out there.
My best advice it to be aware of that.
Sadly, I think there were at least two shakedown merchants hanging around Sinc Cat.
Thankfully Dover seems to have weeded them out of this blog.
This is an excellent forum as was its predecessor however, some commenters can be very tedious eg. Monty. I scroll past the bores and read everyone else. Thank you everyone for a wealth of knowledge and opinions that are freely given in these threads.
Dover, I appreciate your vigilance regarding doxxing and abuse. Sadly, I found myself unwittingly at the centre of the two you mention up thread.
In the end, the comments have to stand on their own merits and no amount of policing can weed out offence giving and offence taking. Suffice it to say, abusing people is stupid, and a lot of it is quite deliberate and cruel. The sad thing is that intelligent people do it for shits and giggles.
Robust debate is one thing, and iron sharpens iron. Character assassination is pathetic and diminishes the assassin.
After Monty wimped out of the trip to Sweden, financed by certain Cats, I treat him with the contempt he deserves.
I’ll never know if that is true.
Preamble, Dover is the man & run’s this place well.
Also, Dover’s blog, Dover’s rules.
But…one of the recent stoushes (that I viewed one party as being on the receiving end) was inflamed when I pointed out how another party was very wide of the mark with their posting.
That party then took umbrage to having that pointed out…for days.
Some people here get called pretty horrendous things & it’s water off a ducks back.
Some people get reasonably critiqued for a post & then boom it’s like how dare you.
Being a realist, all one can do is have a scroll list that resembles the library at Minas Tirith.
Don’t tell Tim Blair.
I spoke with Lizzie after she had decided to leave . I didn’t know how bad the posts had become ., because I skip over the posts bagging people.
I have recently been the subject of false claims of bullying after I complained of elder abuse going on here , too long to explain , what I did was focus on all the people who had supported me , the other resident now has a name for being a first class bitch and the letter with her accusations went to our lawyers. As well , the tactics she tried to influence those here with early dementia or old and confused were noted.
So Thanks Dover for making sure the rules apply .
King Charles, the people can’t afford bread!
“Let them eat bugs”.
Irony alert – JC appeared to be at his most aggressive last night. Turns out the poor bugger was laid up in hospital with painful appendicitis.
If you get out of surgery safely JC, get well soon big fella.
You just stole the plot of Pirate Pete’s next Daddy’s Stocking Filler.
Old school thanks. Naa, just waiting still.
I wasn’t being “aggressive” in the least. I just want any conversation with the Turtlehead.
While in agreement with Dover, I am a little uneasy about sanctifying certain posters who cop the occasional pile on.
I lurk mostly with very a few comments. Recent stoushes involving a couple of posters involve one person who has a very front on attack style, the respondent gets upset and responds with passive aggressive taunting and social standing skyting that is mean.
Who is the bigger villain? I think it is not as simple as lauding a well-respected poster as the victim. That poster has said some nasty things as well. The pile-on usually comes ironically from friends who white knight and two or three here who are known for their quick wit and humour.
The last stoush involved a nasty response to one of the kinder, thoughtful and even tempered people on this blog. I saw little regret from the attacker.
This is a great forum, it gets willing at times, too willing for me to get too involved. But even in stoushes, I often see the wittiest comments come out. I hope it continues.
New Cat, like the old Cat, is meant to be a place where people can discuss matters of politics and culture from a right perspective,
Then what the fuck is Monty doing here?
But seriously, good comments Dover and I don’t envy your job as moderator. Posters who use personal abuse and extreme name calling are only showing their lack of ability to debate their point.
There are several mouthy types, one of which focuses on a single issue, irrespective of who it is that may hold opposing views on that singular issue, and in so doing the mouthy type takes on and names particular opponents – who incidentally, are never the snowflake in their treatment of the mouthy messenger, although this is not to refer to the never-the-snowflakes as mouthy types. It would be a pity, then, to heed calls to ban a mouthy messenger on the basis that it is the message itself which is far too troubling. For it has more often turned out to be the case that the singularly mouthy message was true warning. I mean, think WEF. And Greg Hunt. And Morrison. But then again, it’s an ancient, ancient instinct to want to ban being troubled by what is a common mouthy type.
Late to the party and didn’t know anything about the revealing of JC’s personal details although I will add my support to others who note this is utterly unacceptable behaviour.
Dover, I am replying because my name is mentioned in your post, which is a good post on a vexatious topic and made in the name of keeping the blog sane. I’m glad I came across it in my look-see to check on commentary about the passing of The Good Queen. I have tried to keep away from here for a few weeks now.
Maybe I’m just showing my age, but I get lost amidst the discussion above about who is a snowflake female or a beta-male and who is a doxxer and who is a ‘mouthy-type’ etc. There are lots of currents running between all sorts of commenters here. It’s really hard to keep a tab on who chops at whom about what or why. I do know that the Johanna-Lizzie ‘combo’, as some people see it, is a point of observer and participant interest to some. It is not something I enjoy or want and I often find it very hurtful, especially when upticks suggest that a majority here agree with her self-satisfaction and think I am well served by it. That I respond to what is an ongoing campaign of bullying character assassination (yep, my character and commentary is maybe a bit weird to some tho’ I am no skyte) is probably a mistake because my responses can get tinged with exasperation and others lose the thread of why I am feeling thus.
I can’t agree with Cassie about Erin Molan and her show on internet abuse btw, which I will watch. Sorry Cass, because I love you dearly and know how you call out well things that are OTT. But Erin’s trembling of the chin shows a genuine hurt, I know it myself, and no-one deserves to be so internet abused that they lose it and start to disintegrate. Learn resilience and even change from it, yes, but in my moral system there is no admiration for those who perpetrate and encourage the worst of it. I admire those like Cardinal Pell, who at my age too found the strength to live through far worse than most get.
Withdrawal (lurking?) is a better option for me here. At least for a while. A reflection on me rather than anyone else here; perhaps I am a weakling after all. I am actually enjoying the time it allows me to do other things. Vale to Queen Elizabeth. Time to move on now and enjoy each others differences as well as political strengths on what is the best of blogs. I will keep in touch here if Dover is happy about that; and JC, who was so kind to me when I was in hospital for abdominal surgery, I hope it all goes well for you too.
Congrats on taking a stand . We may not always agree , but looking at a different viewpoint can bring enlightenment . Abuse and deliberate attacks on character have no place in this process .
Johanna has tried to doxx me here by seeking out my ex-husband’s academic performance, which was a making-a-point about Aspberger’s syndrome incidental mention here of mine. That she was unable to doxx me despite intensive investigation, because I disguised his dates, is her accusatory ‘proof’ of my ‘lying’. I also hold a screen shot of this blog where she does actually doxx my current husband’s name (which fortunately is a very common name and hard to trace). This mention of my ex-husband’s academic honours and academic honours in general has turned with Johanna into some sort of cause celebre which it never has been for me.
It surfaced again in the most recent highly offensive attack she made upon me about my sister’s qualifications, which I mentioned, again indicdentally, in a word of advice to Duk re his disillusionment with his vocation and his medical registration. I also added, perhaps unwisely, that my sister was set for the University Medal in Medicine, but I and others believed her working class accent (proxy for her general background from Mt. Druitt) went against her – in other words, medicine was never all it claimed to be.
The next morning I was still disgusted and bruised from this attack and the pile-on it started.
Calli then mentioned someone she had met with a University Medal where ‘accent didn’t matter’. That triggered me badly, as a comment against my sister. Calli thought my response to her was out of order because she wasn’t referring to me at all in that comment – in which case, I asked, why mention an ‘accent’ in this context at all, for my comment was about that? It seems somewhat sanctimonious and passive aggressive to me, noting in the flow of discussion that we can all be passive aggressive at times, saying it is ‘not a Federal offense’.
I later said I may have been mistaken in my view of it, apologised if so, and let it rest.
Calli did not let it rest, accusing me of ‘all about me-ism’, one of Johanna’s favorites. Calli said she felt under ‘character assassination’ re being passive aggressive. First time ever here, I suppose.
I did not say welcome to the club, but I felt like saying it. Calli is, of course, a clever, measured and even-tempered female commenter and much liked for that. I’ve no argument with that assessment.
NB. Delta later came in, obviously wanting to pour oil on troubled waters, but poured this onto me, sternly calling me Elizabeth and ending with a plea for ‘adult behaviour’.
I could not see that I had been anything other than reasonable and calm.
At no time did Delta consider ever pouring that oil on the main disturber of the waters?
That was about the last straw for me, for Johanna had just given me yet another serve.
Returning to this still upsets me.
You were all well and truly warned.
I don’t want to say any more about this now. Johanna or others may wish to put a viewpoint.
If anyone is interested, I comment occasionally under my maternal grandmother’s name of Kathleen on the Oz, not as Elizabeth or Lizzie. I’ve just received 47 likes for my comment about the death of Queen Elizabeth. So have very many others received high numbers of likes. It’s not hard when the issue is so clear cut.
Vale, Elizabeth, Queen of England.
I’m not going to say anything, except that we are lucky that it’s not ‘all about me.’
Just imagine if it was. Yikes! 🙂
Thanks, Lizzie. I think I understand and appreciate what you say. Online communication is flawed I suppose. Most of the people here say things I like or at least find amusing. Joh makes comments about her career and popular music that I empathise with, having a similar career.
I don’t socialise with anyone here, though I think it would be helpful if some of us could meet and chat at a social event. That may make us understand our backgrounds and life challenges. I understand the danger of doxing makes that a challenge.
Don’t worry too much about upticks. Someone demonstrated they can be manufactured. Plus they don’t always indicate a lot. On Facebook I have a relative who can put up a picture of his coffee and banana cake and get 80 likes. I put up a picture of me recuperating from a serious cancer op and I get 20 likes. I would go bonkers if I got too stressed about it.
While I look for affirmation of my own world view on the Cat and at Currency Lad, I think it is essential that commentary from all sides be indulged to create a Socratic dialectic. An echo chamber would be boring. Without somebody to challenge my own view, and focus on my weaknesses, I will become intellectually lazy.
I was a bit sorry that Prospero got the boot from Currency Lad, but he had it coming and maybe he wanted out anyway. He was getting habitually abusive and ignored many warnings. He unintentionally added a lot of value by provoking considered responses to his random tropes and standard Leftist canon.
Just stop please Lizzie.
You are still accusing me of something I didn’t do. I did not abuse you, I did not call you names, I was not even referring to you.
You, so far, have called me sanctimonious, passive aggressive, fawning, “worryingly authoritarian” (whatever that is), patronising amongst many other things. I may or may not be one or all of those things. As I said up thread, the comments must stand or fall on their own merits.
One thing I am not. I am not a liar. Nor do I start fights and keep them simmering along for days on end.
Incidentally, the University Medal holder I know isn’t “someone I met”. I told you that he was and is an old friend. I will say no more about him as he has not yet retired.
Predators, more like it.
Calli, I have not that I can recall called you all of these things although they may certainly flow on from some of my feelings about lack of support from others here. I certainly saw and called out your early comment as sanctimonious and passive aggressive on the morning after I suffered another huge pile on. Later, I admitted I may have been wrong in having a concern as to why ‘accent’ was an issue in your comment and eventually I said the whole thing became ‘a storm in a teacup’. It is you who would not let the matter drop and still won’t. For instance, the longevity of your acquaintance with some medal holder is of no concern to me, but you seem to think it should be; so much for letting matters drop.
I am not a liar and I have never called you a liar.
You may not ‘start fights’ but you certainly terminated discussion on this occasion readily and high-handedly when it suited you. I don’t start fights, but I do fight back when I am under attack. On the occasion above I felt I had cause to broach your lack of support for a woman who has been under constant and vicious bullying, because you seemed (to me at that time) to be adding fuel to that fire.
With further reconsideration I am very happy to terminate all of my discussions on Catallaxy but will reserve judgement on that until I feel more composed in myself after giving it some time. My sheer existence here is always used against me (see JMH and Johanna above as exemplars of that) and as usual any defense I make is taken down and used by ill-wishers in a kangaroo-court to slander me.
I would not have come in here again today Calli, it is just that, like Delta, you are asking the wrong person to ‘just stop’. Perhaps you might reflect upon that. I’ve always quite liked your commentary here and would be sad to upset you, but there is also fairness in putting records straight.
I am not perfect, and nor is anyone else.
My breath is less than bated.
More retirements than Melba. But, at least she wasn’t pompous.
Look up thread. I can’t be bothered mumbling over the old bones from nearly two weeks ago, but those words were all there, including a slur on my faith.
Your many….many words today don’t paper over the truth, even if Dover has done you a favour and deleted your comments. A fresh slate would be welcome, so there is that. And now I have a bus to catch, so the stage is all yours.
I’m getting some recall now, Calli, from the eighty year old brain. I did think that your response to the pile on I initially received that created cruel scenarios about my cruise in March 2020 was ‘fawning’ and did tell you so when that pile-on of some years back recommenced a few months ago, because at that time when a gentle ribbing was offered to you as a very unequal parallel, you did fawn to the offerer. You may not see it like that, just as others may not comprehend why I comment as I do about my life with my husband. People differ, but in my view, fawn you did. And those ‘just stops’ are extremely patronising.
As Dover’s post recognises, pile-ons create tremendous and unnecessary disharmony.
My feelings about my treatment here will inevitably colour how I view the reactions of some others.
And my responses will inevitably cause some people to dislike thoroughly that I take up blog time.
At least Melba could sing. 🙂
I hope Dover has not deleted my comments of a few weeks back (not months as I said above, time gets away with me sometimes) for they were not abusive, nor were they ‘papering over truths’, but merely my objections to a pile-on and my view on one of Calli’s comments. I invite people to check back if they are doubtful.
As I said on that evening, I had hoped there was some form of detente that was making it possible for me to comment in a normal fashion again, but it clearly wasn’t so. Johanna had only to rip in with a sad case of all of her old long-answered tricked up fake memes and the hatred simply followed as eager dogs follow … well, I won’t say that.
It is no wonder that in past years I have had such ambivalence about being here and still have that.
More than one.
Oh, give us a break.
FFS. You came back into this forum with one agenda – to start the whole thing over again – just as you have, repeatedly, in the past. It HAS to be all about you.
Just bloody STOP and stop behaving like some uncontrollable infant throwing yet another tantrum.
I never ‘mumble’, Calli.
I try to be linguistically precise.
It saves a lot of misinterpretation.
As as for the rest of the ‘Meghan Merkle Whine’ – I can’t be bothered reading the tripe.
Dover nominated the pile-on I received as one issue for discussion. So I am discussing it.
Then I will have done with it. It is my life that has been torn apart by these pile-ons, not yours.
There are other issues he raises too, and people have spoken up about those upthreat.
You are behaving like Grandpa Simpson on a bad day. Let me patronise you back: Stop it.
Go the the Open Thread and start your new pile-on there.
No. It has to be dealt with.
You are not helping.
Did Dover make you the star or was he, perhaps, referring to others like JC for instance?
Meghan – stop dramatising. This is NOT destroying your life. If it is – then you definitely need psychiatric help – as I have alluded to in the past.
Patronise? Don’t be so damned childish. Nobody is “patronising” you, (and I won’t type the next bit I want to say out of respect for Dover)
Great thread guys, good chat.
To reiterate, and to make it plain, it would be a pity to heed calls to ban Struth who is the commenter alluded to as ‘mouthy’, and whose opponents are deemed to be of wilting tendencies.
Why should I give you any credence at all about anything to do with me?
You have caused more than enough trouble on this blog with your bile and ire and doxxing.
My husband wants me out of here. He thinks you are disturbed and should be blocked.
Reflect on that and learn some humility.
I don’t want to ban anyone although I think Johanna has gone beyond the pale once too often.
I just ask for thoughtfulness about some of the crap I have suffered here and to stand up for the right to explain myself without the kangaroo-court being called into session. I wouldn’t do this on the OT.
In truth, I don’t much want to come back. I wouldn’t be here now if Dover hadn’t put up this thread.
If I never come back then at least my unpopularity here will indicate some of why.
As for bringing the awful Meaghan Markle into it, remember that Queen Elizabeth has just died.
I am far more concerned about that than the Markle fiasco. She is quite a disturbed and insecure girl not handling her situation well and I feel very sorry for Prince Harry and their children, and for her too in some ways for she has mucked up her life so far when it could have been far more worthwhile.
I am having my arvo tea now from my Platinum Jubilee cup that I bought in the UK in May this year. Who could not cry at seeing in pics the passing of this era? And knowing the nightmare times to come?
Rowan Dean and Rita Panahi are excellent company these days. There is always that.
Your slagging off calli was not the first time that you wrongly attributed someone’s comment.
I’m retired. Time on my hands.
Just sayin’. 🙂
Au contraire, matey. This has been a cause of considerable anguish to me, to the extent of causing disharmony with my husband who thinks I am doing myself harm to ever want to be here given the company he sees attacking me. He has also disliked seeing me reduced to chin-wobbling self-doubt by the cruelty of the pile-ons (internet bullying is real bullying, Erin Molan is not wrong there and it is the attackers who need help and condemnation). He wants me to be my best self and write worthwhile things rather than fend off unknown irrationals on an obscure blog which he thinks contains … well, I won’t say it. I have no need of psychiatric help. I am fine with my life and friends in general.
Raging old farts who accuse a rational fully engaged-with-life woman of infantilism might need some help with their anger management though.
Your problem. Is that another doxxing threat?
Get a life.
I may have stirred this up. Sorry everyone.
I did not wrongly attribute Calli’s comment. I queried aspects of it. That query still stands in my view although I think, as I said at the time, the whole thing became a storm in a teacup. I am sorry she didn’t say fine Lizzie, let’s forget about it, and apologise for any unintended offense. I did that ages ago to Delta – I had no idea why she thought I was improperly joking about her leg some time before she mentioned it, but I certainly immediately apologised for any offense she had taken. Calli chose not to do that and still does not see why she might have caused pain for me with her ‘accent’ comment. I will let it go now. I won’t be back anytime soon to revisit it anyway.
As for misattributions, I’ve already responded on the OT a few weeks ago to Timothy Nielsen regarding how easy on a fast moving blog is is to miss certain things and to misattribute other things. I’m happy to admit to any failing you care to nominate in that regard, Johanna. It would be an honest error.
Nothing about you though is honest with regard to me. You doxx and you fabricate and like a dog you return to your vomit from years back. Then you come onto the OT, dust off your hands, and raise one up for acclaim. It does not cover you with the glory you think it does.
It is a complete falsehood that some ladeeees simply must have the last word.
Of course he was referring to others. I acknowledged that in the very para you chose to lay the above comment on me. I am having my say here no holds barred because I can, without interfering with a fast running Open Thread (‘threat’ was a typo, btw), and because the topic suits my input and my emotions about this place now. I am justifiably upset and angry about the level of bullying here, and let me play the age card just this once. I am eighty years old. Good work, Catallaxy, beating up and older lady, the left might well say simply about that. Thankfully, as Rabz is happy to keep telling me, I am not your usual eighty year old. He’s said I should come back, and so have others, but why in my last years should I accept what I have been subjected to here?
lol, KD. And it is a truth universally acknowledged that no man will ever understand women. 🙂
If you all want to pile on to me, and abuse me, and say unkind things about me, and give millions of upticks to those who are cruel to me, go ahead. I don’t give half a damp fart in a thunderstorm; you’re only a bunch of pixels. And if you enjoy abusing ppl, you’re retarded, so don’t expect me to do anything except ignore you.
I’m a bloke, I don’t give a damn about my own feelings, so don’t expect me to care about anyone elses. But I don’t abuse ppl, because it’s infantile.
I’m an occasional poster and non-stoucher: so not particularly invested. These thoughts are offered to help define my section of the market, not join in an argument.
1) Good work, actually great work, d0verbeach;
2) I mainly come here to savor others’ opinions and thoughts. I generally find it uplifting, entertaining, sometime challenging, and often educational;
3) I read (and enjoy) Lizzie, Johanna (and other stouchers) when they are posting ideas;
4) I usually scroll them when they are stouching;
5) I’m not a blog judge and have no interest, absolutely none, in the basis for their antagonism (or that of any other stouchers). In specific context, Lizzie’s wordwalls, above, are finger exercise for me (similarly Johanna’s counterbarbs) for that exact reason.
6) I don’t share much of m0nty’s worldview, but neither do I class him in the brain-dead troll legion. For me, his banning would be a stain on the blogue.
Hope this helps.
I guess you’re creating a imaginary line between mocking and abuse, doc. However I suspect Fatboy would see it more as abuse because it’s so frequent.
Failed predators I might add.
But not for the want of trying from what I hear.
Maybe they should stick to stiffing the relatives and slipping on lettuce leaves in Coles.
To be clear, I wasn’t talking about banning anyone.
I was drawing attention to another case of fairly constant abuse which hasn’t drawn an intervention.
It seems the only difference is that one gets on with it and the other one does not, as we have seen upthread.
Ahem, Faustus, the correct term is “stoushers”, as in, “We’re enjoying a stoush*”.
Presumably* sentient life forms** participating in a “stoush”.
** Perhaps we shouldn’t go there at this point.
I would hope that this would also apply to any hounded and abused as being a sock without any proof whatsoever.
You really can’t see a difference between pointing out the characteristics of an individual’s non-arguments on one hand, and abuse on the other, can you? The first is certainly a denunciation of certain kinds of ignorance and stupidity, the other is just name calling. They are different.
Try constructing examples of each.
I think I might be obliged to take a decanter and my service revolver into the library.
The injuries we do and those we suffer are seldom weighed in the same scales.
The Seekers – Nobody knows the Trouble I’ve Seen
“We leave this proof as an exercise to the reader…”
OK, I’m curious – who were they? Because I can’t think of any.
I think there were three. There were three grifters.
Well, no, Sancho, you were indeed ‘drawing attention’ to what you claimed was a valid reason to ban a persistent someone you considered ‘mouthy’ towards some others. Fair as far as it goes, yet the persistent person’s single-issue comments do not get left unopposed, which therefore makes it that the opposition has no real claim to taking umbrage – it is clearly the issue which is at stake, the persons being incidental. An inclination to ban the persistent troubling commenter is suggestive of an intention to ban the troubling issue. Now that would be a mistake, as was ignoring the troubling persistence at the outset some many months ago. But I think we live and learn.
I’m not happy about anyone who says anything that I might disagree with, I tells ya!
Ban them all!
Nice try, but no cigar.
If you don’t know who they are I can’t help you.
All exhibiting the same traits immediately before the grift begins.
I don’t agree with swooning, please ban KD.
Just been reading up.
Does anyone have any emotional incontinence pads?
“Does anyone have any emotional incontinence pads?”
No, but what’s it like wearing a colostomy bag?
Who posts multiple self-pitying wordwalls while claiming that it not about her?
I counted the number of references to my name, and looked back – almost every one was due to the person who claims to be the victim. She launched out, Dover having given her one of the many favours she gets, by naming me and others. Then, she did it again. And again.
None of us had mentioned her. But, being the centre of attention and having the last word is the core of her existence.
BTW, JC is wondering what suburb she lives in. 🙂
I give you “1” for reacting so quickly. LOL.
Clearly the colostomy bag you’re forced to wear everyday doesn’t collect all your shit.
If you don’t stop misattributing your eyesight will fail.
So it is said.
Dover, apologies for my taking up so much of this thread to detail some background to my concerns. I did need to vent them. I know the issues are more general than just my situation here and I am glad these other concerns were also addressed. Your post is a very civilised canvassing of the issues of civility on the Cat. Thank you for it. Apologies also to those who think I write ‘word walls’. I call them paragraphs. My impulse is always to verbalise my thoughts and to those wanting condensation – or nothing at all – my apologies also.
I am outside my dance class ready to shake a leg at the world and its cares. Best place for me for a while. We will be away soon travelling again. I will drop in perhaps in November to maybe catch up then. Best wishes to all threadsters.
Let’s get this straight.
Dover gives the teary-eyed eternal victim a forum. Who knows why. He mentions her, but no-one else, a fatal mistake for anyone who knows her.
Then, she posts several wordwalls indicating that she has been studying at the University of St Ruth when it comes to length and incoherence, and how much of a victim she is.
She incites attention by mentioning other people, none of whom were mentioned in the head post.
But, she vigorously contests that it is ‘all about her’, while holding the prize of the majority of comments in length. Her commitment to things that are not about her is off the charts.
As for what happened with calli, I’ll leave it to her, and she shouldn’t be bothered while on holidays. Hey, calli – enjoy the food and wine and scenery!
But the fact is that our resident narcissist, for not the first time, assumed that a comment was about her when it wasn’t. She then attacked not the substance, but the person.
She’s the hooker with a heart of gold. 🙂
Still going, I see. Dr. Rumack would be pleased:
I believe our Doverlord is bored this wet weekend and has taken his sticks and strings out of storage.
He threw Verruca Salt the Golden Ticket and cried “dance, monkey, dance!”.
A pyroclastic flow of words rained upon us. Some took up the challenge, while others cut their strings and refused to play.
Cheeky Dover. 😉
Thank you, Dover, for calling my presence here welcome. That has been generous of you, for clearly that has never been the case with many people who come here and you have to respect their wishes too. Once someone is set up as I have been it is usually the case that things don’t improve even though you, as blog owner, have expressed a hope that they will.
I think the above commentary suggests that I will always be on a hiding to nowhere here, with one person in particular leading the hounds to bay. I have named her as she should be named, and if the blog (apart from people who know me personally) cannot shame her, I will say loudly here now that she should ashamed or stand known as utterly shameless. She has been a doxxer of both of my husbands in order to create troubles for me and is a prime relentless and untruthful antagonist.
Sinclair did once put Johanna into moderation due to those times when she appeared unable to control herself. She was at that time behaving in a threatening manner to someone else on this blog, a man in that case not a woman, who complained strongly to Sinclair about it. I hope people have the good grace to read this paragraph without slurring it as a ‘word wall’. If the blog is to consist of single sentence throw-offs rather than rational explication, which my comments above have been, then it is going to become more like the Twitter sewer that is closely resembling right now.
There’s the bell to start round 8.
Back in the jelly pool, ladeeees.
Pretty good attempt, girls, but you are nowhere near reaching the heights of Egg_head vs Thought Leader.
Put some effort in.
Its a bit like standing outside Ladies rest room. I don’t think I should be here and I don’t want to take sides. But one of them is The Victim, and one of them is an alright sort of Sheila.
Just wanted to say that I’ve appreciated the wit and bonhomie on this thread. Much concord, elan and elegance.
You’re going to have to name names, because it is not clear to me which is which.
I don’t think either of the combatants realises how little other Cats care about their ongoing bunfight, apart from the sort of morbid fascination one derives from looking at roadkill.
Shitloads of concord, elan and elegance.
Wrong thread Dover.
This punch-on is far bigger than WW2.
Some writing here, at least one in particular, should remember how much they contributed to the pile-ons against me from almost all commenters at that time from around St Patrick’s day 2017.
JC and IT stood up for me against the accusations. I noted that LL (as he was then known) made no comment, and BoN very clearly defended me then and for years later, DeltaA also. It didn’t stop though.
I managed to cope with the many and varied accusations against me but when DeltaA’s comments were labelled “tedium” I retaliated. When my husband was referred to as “Norm ? wasn’t it” I felt too vicious to reply.
These two times I was really hurt, but almost immediately after each of these comments the author apologised.
I recommend pausing, thinking and rereading, before pressing ‘Post Comment’.
.1 Err, since when is “making no comment” a crime; and
.2 What the hell are you talking about?
Time for a song about wrongdoing.
Where is the panache, savior faire and je ne sais quoi you fucken mongrel?
Almost everyone writing at that time and for a quite a while thereafter made derogatory remarks on my comments, IOW pile-ons.
You, LL did not. You stood out as one of the few frequent commenters who did not join in the pile-on against me.
That Norm McDonald was a real jerk.
Must have been on holidays.
I still don’t know what you are talking about.
And isn’t it time to let 5-10 year old feuds go?
Dover, fyi, my first internal server error.
People were accusing P of being a sock, and there are feuds older than 10 years still playing out.
Needless to say, this wasn’t what I wanted to see happen, but it has been instructive.
Firstly, it seems that we are clear on any doxing, and that includes surmising people’s identities from info they provide, and the like.
Secondly, on trolls, per what I say above and the question of monty, because he isn’t entirely a troll and it is worthwhile debating someone that constitutes an example of the other side.
Thirdly, pile-ons, specially, of non-trolls. I will from herein moderate them where the comments are largely abusive and lacking in argumentative content even if I find the target adequately defending themselves.
BTW, I haven’t deleted any of Lizzie’s comments.
Comments are closed.