Paul.L,

Whilst we have mostly diametrically opposed political views and whilst I don't even consider some of your debating tactics (as you would probably say of me), we still seem to share some basic values of online decency, so, thank you.

If you feel that you have been deceived, then I apologise. However, I ask that it be judged in the light of the malicious flaming I have been made to endure in the past.

If I had been blatently abusing a second account, I fully expected to have been called to account for it sooner or later by even reasonable OLO contributors, and I had also not ruled out the likelihood that I would be outed again by CJ Morgan, regardless.

I believe I have sufficient credibility in my own right not to have to resort to the use of second accounts, so I think that most will accept that my motives were far more pedestrian.

Anyhow, as anyone who does look at my home page will appreciate, I do have a life outside OLO, so if the worst were to come of this, I would still have plenty of avenues left for self-expression.

The initial transgression that CJM blew the whistle upon was clearly not, contrary to CJM's claims, an attempt to deceive OLO users about the origins of the material, even if it appeared to transgress an OLO rule. However, my subsequent attempts to reason with him over this came to nothing. Instead of allowing the issue to blow over, he chose to create an acrimonious witch hunt atmosphere in which I was singled out even though another OLO user openly admitted to having done the same. In that atmosphere it would have been very difficult to admit to the allegation either explicitly or with a nod and a wink. Of course, denying the truth of his accusations made my alleged crime even more heinous in CJM's lurid imagination.

(tobecontinued)

I don't think anybody is in any doubt that your motives were pedestrian, daggett. That you have ben caught and then point the finger at someone else as doing the same thing in order to somehow justify your position, well that just doesn't wash. Imagine saying "but he did it too, your honour!". Now the weasly justifications and attempts to undermine your accusers start, it's just sad really.

(continuedfromabove)

The first sentence of the previous post should have read: " ... whilst I don't even consider some of your debating tactics [fair] (as you would probably say of me) ..."

---

CJ Moron,

You are plainly feeling smug and self-satisfied from what you hold to be your own alertness and brilliant detective work, however, it seems to me that what you have really done is to have outed yourself as the narrow-minded pedant and sanctimonious two-faced hypocrite that you are (but you are probably too stupid to realise that).

So, do me a favour. If you must maintain your presence on the same forums as me, please don't ever pretend to be any different from what you have shown yourself to be here.

For me, that would be vastly preferable than having to continue to cope with your recurring, insincere and patronising attempts to ingratiate yourself with me.

---

Welcome back, Bugsy.

(But hadn't you promised twice already to leave this forum?)

I expect that you would be the kind of person who could proudly boast that he has never taken a day off sick in his working life without being actually sick and would condemn without reservation anyone else who would ever contemplate doing so.

---

This time I have decided not to cram every possible word into this particular post. As other means to discretely contribute to this discussion in the immediate future are obviously not available any more without risking the outbreak of yet another hysterical witch hunt, I won't be making the effort to further contribute in order to respond to Paul.L's post for at least another day.

Perhaps, either Bugsy or CJM could make use of the opportunity to introduce some actual substance into the discussion, for a change, in order to maintain its momentum.

What momentum?

>>Perhaps, either Bugsy or CJM could make use of the opportunity to introduce some actual substance into the discussion, for a change, in order to maintain its momentum.<<

All that happens here is that folk trawl through the internet to find the latest conspiracy or rebuttal.

Original thought: nil.

Momentum: nil.

Pericles,

Don't hide your light under a bushel. Regale us with your entirely original ideas on this subject. We wait with bated breath.

There there, James - like I said, if you don't use your sock puppet/s I'll stop lampooning them. As I implied early in the thread, my main reason for outing you was that you appeared obsessed with this claptrap, to the point where you obviously feel entitled to use sock puppets in order to proclaim the paranoid ideas that you imagine the whole world is on tenterhooks to hear.

You have every right to indulge whatever paranoid conspiracy fantasies you like, but in this forum it's cheating if you do so using sock puppet accounts to increase your posting limits. Imagine if every other nutbag who rants and raves on here felt the same as you do and simply disregarded the rules so they can get around the posting limits? Cripes.

Since I originally outed James and his sock puppets, I've been mostly amused at their regular, if sporadic appearances in various debates. Some are downright funny:

<< I would less charitable in regard to Saddam Hussein. bla bla bla... Posted by daggett, Wednesday, 20 August 2008 9:47:51 AM >>

Followed 15 minutes later by

<<daggett,

I agree with your post, except that I don't think rache was being any more charitable to Saddam Hussein than you were. bla bla bla...
Posted by cacofonix, Wednesday, 20 August 2008 10:01:20 AM >>

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2052#43262

What a fascinating conversation to have had with yourself, James - and it's by no means the first time that your subterfuge has exceeded "pedestrian" frustration with posting limits, is it?.

However, a cursory glance at "cacofonix"'s posting history shows that the appearance of such gems leapt from a couple a month to 13 in the last 3 days - which is of course why I thought "cacofonix" needed to be outed again as one of James Sinnamon/daggett's sock puppets.

That the topic is shite just means that I'm not disrupting any kind of serious discussion.