Does anybody here take the Greens seriously?

[Evil_Breakfast]

I'm happy for you to have a different opinion on Aurora as clearly you have history and I'm not party to everything that's gone on. On the other point, if she is right that you are actually an established poster who created a story about having died and then a fictitious niece taking over the account and the giving said niece a disturbing back story, then that is pretty sinister stuff and it's also against the rules of the forum . The rules exist for a reason and sock puppet accounts skew the debate which is why forums like this deal robustly with BOTS . Yes we're all Avatars posting under pseudonyms, but there are good reasons why people maintain their anonymity on public forums, particularly if their employers have a social media policy that they might fall foul of.

👍🏻
Anonymity doesn't preclude odious/offensive opinions.
We post, we respond, we debate.
None of which is likely to change the, own, individuals POV.
However; it is, always, the....right-minded individuals who clutch at available straws.

 

[monkers]

I'm happy for you to have a different opinion on Aurora as clearly you have history and I'm not party to everything that's gone on. On the other point, if she is right that you are actually an established poster who created a story about having died and then a fictitious niece taking over the account and the giving said niece a disturbing back story, then that is pretty sinister stuff and it's also against the rules of the forum . The rules exist for a reason and sock puppet accounts fan skew the debate. This is why forums like this deal robustly with BOTS . Yes we're all Avatars posting under pseudonyms, but there are good reasons why people maintain their anonymity on public forums, particularly if their employers have a social media policy that they might fall foul of.

I have a bridge for sale.

 

[Shortfall]

I have a bridge for sale.

Fine. When Andy and Aurora confronted you about your apparent error in replying as the wrong person I didn't find your explanation particularly convincing. The whole using your dead Aunty's account to post on a forum strikes me as very odd too. I don't have a dog in the fight except to say that I think Aurora gets some fairly shītty treatment on here (and not just from you) so you can please yourself.

 

[CXRAndy]

I saw some green candidate removing Reforms pamphlet from an owners letterbox. Allegedly at this moment. Maybe a bit of hypnotherapy will reveal his intentions

 

[monkers]

Fine. When Andy and Aurora confronted you about your apparent error in replying as the wrong person I didn't find your explanation particularly convincing. The whole using your dead Aunty's account to post on a forum strikes me as very odd too. I don't have a dog in the fight except to say that I think Aurora gets some fairly shītty treatment on here (and not just from you) so you can please yourself.

Likewise. You can choose who to believe here and anywhere else. My advice is to check out the claims that she makes without evidence before deciding who to believe.

 

[Rusty Nails]

That would involve doxxing, which I am opposed to even for people who repeatedly call me a c#nt.

Is there proof? I am inclined to believe what any poster says about their life in the real world until evidence from an unbiased source disproves it. I prefer “innocent until proven guilty” to “no smoke without fire”.

And not from the strange parallel online universe that is NACF.

I'm happy for you to have a different opinion on Aurora as clearly you have history and I'm not party to everything that's gone on. On the other point, if she is right that you are actually an established poster who created a story about having died and then a fictitious niece taking over the account and the giving said niece a disturbing back story, then that is pretty sinister stuff and it's also against the rules of the forum . The rules exist for a reason and sock puppet accounts fan skew the debate. This is why forums like this deal robustly with BOTS . Yes we're all Avatars posting under pseudonyms, but there are good reasons why people maintain their anonymity on public forums, particularly if their employers have a social media policy that they might fall foul of.

still putting a lot of effort on “If”. So easy to do.

What about “if not”?

 

[Psamathe]

To be fair if what Aurora says about the use of your account is true then it's not tedious nonsense, it actually strikes at the heart of the rules of the forum. I'm late to the Trans debate on here, but based on what I have seen of her contributions on a variety of subjects, Aurora is articulate, reasoned and a good debater. This against a fair bit of hostility to her viewpoints and some quite nasty insults I might add.

When I joined the forum I had to agree to T&C's declare stuff, etc. Just taking over somebody elses account means an individual has never agreed to those T&Cs and provided sought information/confirmation.

Weird thing is that getting an account is free and takes no real time, no real effort so one must ask why has this not been done?

 

[Shortfall]

Is there proof? I am inclined to believe what any poster says about their life in the real world until evidence from an unbiased source disproves it. I prefer “innocent until proven guilty” to “no smoke without fire”.

And not from the strange parallel online universe that is NACF.



still putting a lot of effort on “If”. So easy to do.

What about “if not”?

No effort required. Monkers might be telling the truth, it's just that I find their explanation a bit hard to swallow. I don't think I they're that bothered what I think either way. Aurora is obviously personally invested in this but I do find her more compelling. That's all.

 

[Rusty Nails]

No effort required. Monkers might be telling the truth, it's just that I find their explanation a bit hard to swallow. I don't think I they're that bothered what I think either way. Aurora is obviously personally invested in this but I do find her more compelling. That's all.

I’m also a great judge of character…of anonymous people behind an avatar on a politics discussion forum.

 

[Psamathe]

I’m also a great judge of character…of anonymous people behind an avatar on a politics discussion forum.

I think a lot depends on how contributors use that anonymity. I like to think I use it as I'm towards the more extreme end on online privacy but endeavour to post as though I were fully identifiable. Sometimes people can use the anonymity to be contentious, insulting, misleading, etc.

I suspect that how people use their anonymity is normally fairly obvious, particularly on a forum like this one where most participants know the general outlook of most others.

 

[Shortfall]

I’m also a great judge of character…of anonymous people behind an avatar on a politics discussion forum.

Sure. So in the absence of any other information I can choose to be sceptical about why they might want to use a dead aunt's account, particularly when they inadvertently "out" themselves as they appear to have done earlier today.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Sure. So in the absence of any other information I can choose to be sceptical about why they might want to use a dead aunt's account, particularly when they inadvertently "out" themselves as they appear to have done earlier today.

Of course you can choose to be as sceptical as you wish.

But after a couple of minutes effort I think I have found the 2023 post that supposedly “outs” the current Monkers. Please note that the post clearly states it was written by Monkers’ niece and not Monkers so not the outing you think or that was claimed.

Mr Cowden,
You have had sight of the original document received by my aunt. You have had sight of an image of a very similar document posted by AS, different only in the references to the dates. You have seen a reference made by JK Rowling on her Twitter account. Do you dispute these as material facts?

I understand that your professional work is along the lines of a patient data manager for the NHS? If this is so, then I should not be in the position of having to remind you that sovereign law prevents the publication of private data by those with a professional capacity. Also that doxxing is very bad form.

Please can you kindly explain the reason for your contributions that could be argued as incitement to commit an offence? I feel quite certain that your ultimate employer, the NHS, would be concerned to see you acting in this manner.

No need for thanks, your welcome.

 

[monkers]

Fine. When Andy and Aurora confronted you about your apparent error in replying as the wrong person I didn't find your explanation particularly convincing. The whole using your dead Aunty's account to post on a forum strikes me as very odd too. I don't have a dog in the fight except to say that I think Aurora gets some fairly shītty treatment on here (and not just from you) so you can please yourself.

Believe what and who you like - I'm not troubled.

 

[BoldonLad]

Maybe we need a change of thread title, or, a new thread?

 

[First Aspect]

Maybe we need a change of thread title, or, a new thread?

By all means try.

What are your thoughts on the Green party?