Gender again. Sorry!

[monkers]

@monkers not sure if you'd explained the ID thing before. I don't know if the reason is personal or professional but it must be difficult if you need to be careful.

My personal email is forename.surname and I've never had to worry about using it though I do have stealth email on Proton.

I will reply to you by pm if you don't mind?

 

[Bromptonaut]

As already advised I'm happy to use PM but don't feel you need to justify yourself.

I thought there was a question of 'etiquette' but you've said you have privacy concerns that's dandy.

 

[AuroraSaab]

The arguments stand on their own merit regardless of who makes them. What I object to is the invention of the lawyer niece persona in order to give authority to your opinions and mislead readers.

You had your photo on your CC profile for years.
Here you are confirming that the Twitter post in your name - which is the same person but isn't the same as the CC photo - where you called lesbians 'dumb f#cks' for not wanting to sleep with transwomen was in an account in your name, though you claim you didn't set up the account. So you've confirmed your name. It isn't credible that the account was set up by someone else because although you deleted the account there are many references still on X to posts from that account, posts made over several years. Those don't disappear when you delete an account. Why would someone set up a fake account and post lots of sensible posts on Green Party issues and the EU for years? All so they could post one nasty post to discredit you?

Apart from which you're all over the internet for reasons that you well know. You continue to post elsewhere too.

Quite funny that you would interrupt your death announcement to correct Andy on a minor point. That fact alone should give the more gullible - who think that a lie must be true if it's been kept up for a long time - a hint.

 

[monkers]

The arguments stand on their own merit regardless of who makes them. What I object to is the invention of the lawyer niece persona in order to give authority to your opinions and mislead readers.

You had your photo on your CC profile for years.
Here you are confirming that the Twitter post in your name - which is the same person but isn't the same as the CC photo - where you called lesbians 'dumb f#cks' for not wanting to sleep with transwomen was in an account in your name, though you claim you didn't set up the account. So you've confirmed your name. It isn't credible that the account was set up by someone else because although you deleted the account there are many references still on X to posts from that account, posts made over several years. Those don't disappear when you delete an account. Why would someone set up a fake account and post lots of sensible posts on Green Party issues and the EU for years? All so they could post one nasty post to discredit you?

Apart from which you're all over the internet for reasons that you well know. You continue to post elsewhere too.

Quite funny that you would interrupt your death announcement to correct Andy on a minor point. That fact alone should give the more gullible - who think that a lie must be true if it's been kept up for a long time - a hint.

View attachment 11757

All nonsense.

If you think laying the trap that I must prove my identity to you of all people to disprove your lies will work, you are mistaken.

 

[Bromptonaut]

All I will say is I know whose account rings true with me and it's not AS's

 

[monkers]

The arguments stand on their own merit regardless of who makes them.

Then argue on that basis, something I've repeatedly asked you to do.

 

[classic33]

This the account "photo" being mentioned?

 

[monkers]

This the account "photo" being mentioned?
View attachment 11758

No actually. When Monica joined and introduced herself on the main site she displayed a photograph of herself and used her real name.

When Monica joined this site, she continued to use the profile name monkers, and continued identifying herself as Monica.

She used a photo which had been used a few years before by a person who opened a Twitter account using that photo and her name to discredit her political position on an issue they disagreed with. She did nothing dishonest.

 

[Bromptonaut]

No actually. When Monica joined and introduced herself on the main site she displayed a photograph of herself and used her real name.

.

That's actually reminded me a bit about how forums have evolved.

When I first started posting around Y2K I used my proper forename and surname. As did many others including one or two still on the main site though we pretty much universally adopted pseudonyms as the 2000s progressed.

Avatars also used to be mostly of posters; Arch for example.

Mine is me but I think you'd need to be family to recognise me.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Here you are, a fortnight before you died, pretending you've never heard of the post made from a Twitter account you now seem very aware of, to the point you say you know exactly who maliciously created it. No doubt you'll say you never mentioned it to Auntie Monkers, hence their ignorance. That would be very odd though.

You're in too deep to be honest on here now. Fair enough. Just give up with the fake lawyer bs.

 

[monkers]

View attachment 11759
Here you are, a fortnight before you died, pretending you've never heard of the post made from a Twitter account you now seem very aware of, to the point you say you know exactly who maliciously created it. No doubt you'll say you never mentioned it to Auntie Monkers, hence their ignorance. That would be very odd though.

You're in too deep to be honest on here now. Fair enough. Just give up with the fake lawyer bs.

I think that is actually your position.