The second issue is thornier and requires a bit of background explanation. A few weeks ago, an individual who previously was a regular commenter on this blog made potentially defamatory allegations about me in the comments section of Wee Ginger Dug. As a matter of courtesy, I let Paul Kavanagh know that the accusations were serious enough that I really had no option left but to reply to them publicly. However, Paul strongly urged me not to do that, because he felt it would add fuel to the fire, and said that he and his moderation team would deal with the matter instead. So I agreed not to write a public post on the understanding that the original allegations would be deleted. It's important to stress that I didn't ask for any deletion - my own intention had been to post a reply, but Paul and his moderators preferred a different resolution, and I agreed to that.
Since then, I gather that the individual in question has been asked not to make any comments about me at all, and that this request has been enforced. Again, this is not something I asked for - it's entirely at the initiative of Paul and his moderators. However, in the intervening period, the commenter 'Independence for Scotland' has repeatedly criticised Paul in the comments section of this blog. Paul emailed me a couple of days ago to point out that I am being protected by the moderation team on Wee Ginger Dug, and to ask me to speak to 'Independence for Scotland' about dialling his own attacks down. That's something I can only do in a public post like this, because the Blogger platform does not provide me with contact details for commenters.
Paul also made the point that when 'Independence for Scotland' attacks a certain commenter on Wee Ginger Dug, it simply winds up the individual in question and creates problems for the moderators on that site. This is a tricky one, because I can't really allow my own moderation policy to be determined by the decisions of moderators on another blog. It's also worth making the point that, even if criticisms of me on WGD are deleted, they often remain up for several hours or longer, which essentially means that any damage is already done. I'm not going to ask Independence for Scotland to refrain from criticising someone who subjected me to an extraordinary campaign of harassment for several weeks in the late spring and early summer. Some of the points being made are actually fully justified - the individual is indeed a Walter Mitty-style fantasist, a malicious troublemaker, and a thoroughly unprincipled propagandist. It's no bad thing if people wake up to that.
However, as far as the petty and persistent criticisms of Paul Kavanagh himself are concerned, those are unwarranted and unhelpful and I would much prefer them to stop. I'm not issuing an edict, but I'm just asking people to voluntarily show some restraint.
Ypu must be talking about that obnoxious poster Scottish Skier who contaminated your blog and has thankfully left, and gone to the WGD. I must say that he has found a much better home there.
ReplyDeleteShame about all of this, James.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me though that the dark hand of unionism is having to whirl faster and faster to keep the pot from boiling over, and that can only be a good thing.
In other news it is ‘interesting’ that the BBC can headline that the Green Party membership endorse the non-coalition with the SNP but completely ignore the SNP membership endorsement. Obvs. they will say that snp endorsement was not a part of the arrangement but even so they lose no opportunity to present a skewed view of our lives.
"...even if criticisms of me on WGD are deleted....."
ReplyDeleteWell sorry to tell you James they are not.
Dakk attack ( calling you and other bloggers proven liars) is still there. Oh and Barpe who says you just joined Alba because you covet the leadership of the party. Not very good these WGD moderators are they - assuming they actually want to remove attacks on bloggers they don't like.
I previously tested WGD by trying to post a simple correction to the numpty Lomax to tell him I am not S. Campbell of Wings fame/infamy as he wrongly keeps saying but it never got past first base. This shows the WGD moderators could have stopped these posts about you and other bloggers but chose not to.
Oh and the Dakk attack on another independence blogger (Gordon Dangerfield) is still there.
I guess I shouldn't try to post my WGD numpty quote of the week as it may upset some of these moderators on WGD.
As you never mentioned anything about commenting on political parties my take on the SNP/Greens coalition is that it is a coming together of the right and left wings of the Taliban Trans parties. Hope this comment is not too upsetting for the numpties on WGD.
As ever it is your site and your decision to publish my comments. I have no problem with that.
I have more to say once I have more time and carried out some analysis.
James, it is your blog and I will respect your wishes not to attack Mr Kavanagh personally in any future posts. It is your opinion the attacks are unwarranted and unhelpful. I don't see it that way. I will listen with an open mind to your reasons if you care to share them.
ReplyDeleteMy reasons are:
My comments on Kavanagh are true and accurate. I have no respect for the man.
1. He calls the persecution of Salmond a conspiracy theory when he knows there was a conspiracy and that is no theory. Sturgeon is continuing her attack on Salmond with Clegg/Andrews (probably Liz Lloyds assistance/prompting) new book. This is not politics it is ..........
2. He doesn't want attacked but he allowed his blog to be used to attack other bloggers on numerous occasions. Will this stop?
3. He and posters on his blog have posted disgusting and disgraceful comments about Salmond. Will this stop.
4. His sentence (in his moderation policy) saying abusive posts will not be tolerated and posters will be banned - was a one sided joke. I note that he has now removed this sentence and a chunk of his (non) moderation policy from the bottom of his recent articles. Perhaps he realised how hypocritical it was. He or his moderators could easily could have prevented publication.
5. Leading on his followers that a referendum is just around the corner not just now but in previous years.
6. An advocate for both votes SNP then moaning about the Britnat MSPs.
7. I don't think the WGD moderators have removed all the comments about you.
Finally if my posts create a problem for WGD moderators I really don't care. I care about Scottish independence and the truth. I do not think my criticisms of Kavanagh were petty, far from it, and not that frequent. In mitigation of your opinion I can only think you have not read all Mr Kavanaghs comments re Salmonds character/supposed behaviour.
James, seems that the enforcement of Skier not commenting about you isn't working on WGD.
ReplyDeleteYou're at it again IFS. Take the hint and tone it down, or start your own blog!
ReplyDeleteI don't even check out WGD but you give us a running commentary.
Care to expand on that post so I can actually understand this time what exactly you want me to TONE down. I cannot consider granting your request if I do not understand what it is you want.
DeleteStill think there will be a referendum this year Ramstam?
I have no problem with Mr Kavanagh per se but much of the btl stuff on his site is aimed at other bloggers who have failed the Sturgeonite 'purity' test and are hardly an advert for tolerance.
ReplyDeleteAs for Skier, there's the old saying 'It's nae loss whit a friend gets'. God help anyone on WGD or elsewhere who has to plough through his inane ramblings!