I've just been accosted by a probably-slightly-tipsy anti-independence troll on Twitter (one of those "risk assessor" groupies), who described me as a "chancer" for running a fundraiser without specifying exactly how many articles I planned to write between now and the general election, and exactly how much time I planned to spend writing them. He seemed thoroughly unconvinced that I could possibly write enough before April - APRIL! - to justify the amount raised.
"top politicians get c. £150 per column. You ain't a name. Let's generously say £75 per article. 67 articles? By April?"
Hmmm. I decided to do a quick check, and it turns out that I've already written 65 articles on this blog since the fundraiser started on September the 19th. Do you know what? I think I might just make it to 67 by April. Or possibly even by teatime.
Ah well, maybe after he's sobered up he'll think of a more promising line of attack.
All the same, this is a good opportunity to once again thank the 188 people who have contributed to the fundraiser (one was a postal donation), which will draw to a close in a few days' time. Without your enormously generous help, it simply wouldn't have been possible to continue with the blog, except as a skeleton service.
I'm sure you'll all vouch for me that, in line with every other blog fundraiser I've ever seen, I didn't make any specific commitment about an exact number of posts or hours of work. Nevertheless, I've done my level best to keep things ticking over, and with the unwitting comedy of the trolls constantly ringing in my ears, I will continue to do so!
Hilarious. It's almost uncanny how close he was to the actual number you've already done!
ReplyDeleteYou should know by now to ignore the trolls. They're really not worth arguing with. This blog has great information and your work on analyzing polls is fantastic.
ReplyDeleteI love the way that people who have made no contribution feel they can dictate to you the terms under which you should be able to raise money. A type of person who just hates not being able to control others.
ReplyDeleteNot to mention the cost of the bandwidth, eco-friendly lightbulbs and the replacement keyboards for when you spill coffee down them, etc....
ReplyDeleteTop politicians get £150!!!?
ReplyDeleteWhere is he getting that from?
I suspect that "top" politicians get a very good deal more than £150 for a column, but that aside, surely the very nature of crowd funding on the internet is that no one is forced into it. And people who don't contribute to the funding aren't stopped from viewing what they didn't pay for.
ReplyDeletePeople can chose to support what they want to support. It's not like the Times or the Herald where, if you don't stump up, you're blocked.
I think it may be a lesson to us all. Don;t go on Twitter when your drunk!
Now James, if you're going to reach your 67 articles by tea time, you'd best get on with it.
:)
I read Lab politician, Hattersley, used to get £130,000 a year for his once a week column.
ReplyDeleteYour patience in dealing with these people is truly remarkable. Funny how they treasure being informed and led by "names".
ReplyDeleteHey, I only contribute to causes that I think are worthwhile. If I didn't think your blog was worthwhile, I wouldn't contribute.
ReplyDeleteIt's the Adam Smith system in action.
As for your Twitter troll. he can go **** himself.
Ignore him, James.
ReplyDeleteI contributed albeit a small, modest amount. And as a 'paying customer' I enjoy your work and anaylsis.
Always best to ignore the trolls. I'm up front about my unionist predilections, but I do at least try not act like a total cock about it.
ReplyDeleteI sent you a donation which I hoped you would spend on booze, and was deeply disappointed to hear that you are teetotal. I'm not sure if I'll contribute again, if you're going to fritter it on things like research and analysis.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the MPs' register of interests, Blunkett was on £150,000 a year for his weekly Sun column in 2006. These "top politicians" who are only getting £150 a whack should consult their union.
ReplyDeleteTrolls are definition sad wnkrs - I donated because Ideeply appreciate the unique and valuable service you provide. I count on your analysis of the polls and it greatly helped getting a non-BritNat perspective on the polls all the way through this last year of the referendm and now that the WM GE is looming too. So trolls are pests like all annoying insects and should be swat ted on sight.
ReplyDeleteSomething else - we all donated freely because we think it's a good service and it's worth paying for - where else do you get this? Answer - nowhere.
ReplyDeleteThey are more to be pitied James. I've come to the conclusion that the only reason trolls infest the internet is to make their sad, dreary lives appear more interesting and to over-inflate their sense of importance ...only to themselves, naturally. Because the rest of us don't really care. Keep up the good work.
ReplyDeleteI donated a month ago for all the good reasons mentioned above.
ReplyDeleteI've just donated again to piss off the troll and his fellow travellers.