Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Twitter
Support

 

Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > Alan Kendall, do us all a favour, including yourself: either grow up or bugger off for good.

"Alan (scuse me not tracking your frequent change of BH ID; not sure what game you are playing there)"
If I am accused of being a troll here, I will post as one.

So infantile game playing.

Last month you explained that you had posted stuff expressly to wind people up and provoke a reaction. At the same time, you said that you were buggering off for good but not without a swipe at several commenters who had earned your displeasure. (unthreaded, Dec 2, 2016 at 4:24 PM, currently Page 79)

Now you are back. Some regular commenters have said that your postings put them off from visiting BH. In a couple of minutes of manual searching, I turned up two, including, one of my own:

(...)
Regularly when I visit you are arguing with somebody and almost never with a warmist. I've stopped posting stuff because it will be buried under a mass of comments by you misinterpreting everyone else. You're a more successful troll than EM and Raff put together.
(...)
Jan 1, 2017 at 7:37 PM TinyCO2

(...)
Now and then, ACK would come up with interesting observations and comments, particularly when he first started posting on BH. But for weeks - months even? - BH has seemed to be wall-to-wall ACK postings, many of them banalities or whingings about the tone of comments he took exception to.

After a while, I found that clicking on BH 'Unthreaded' and then immediately seeing that several ACK postings had popped up on the screen in front of me was sufficient reason immediately to find some other way of spending ten minutes with a coffee.
Dec 3, 2016 at 2:44 PM Martin A

You seem to specialise in picking quarrels with BH regular commenters - BYIJ, stewgreen, harry passfield, Pcar, just off the top of my head. Example:

Harry Passfield. I wouldn't do a damn thing "on your behalf" You are beneath contempt in my book. Dec 2, 2016 at 12:33 PM ACK

Dunno why you do it. You come across in a bad light and it puts people off even reading BH. Like I said, either grow up or leave us in peace.

Jan 3, 2017 at 8:04 PM | Registered CommenterMartin A

Martin

I enjoy many of your comments and posts, but I'm going to stick my neck out and come to Alan's defence, along the lines of my defence on the last occasion when he was being pilloried. He is a rare thing, a climate change sceptic from inside the world of academia. He therefore has a different take on things from many others who post on here (myself included), and I personally think brings value to the site, not least due to his insights regarding climate change central at UEA.

I suspect one of the problems with commenting on the internet is the same problem that can occur with email communication - things don't always cone across in the way intended, and offence can be caused when none was intended. It's also possible to type something in a hurry and/or in the heat of the moment and regret it afterwards - either because it was a little intemperate, or because it wasn't as carefully worded as we would have liked.

Bottom line, though, in my opinion, is that we climate sceptics remain a small but dedicated band, and we can't really afford to fall out with each other, and drive sceptics away from the debate.

So, my two penn'orth, for what it's worth, is that Alan should be welcome here. We should all try to take offence less easily and work hard to avoid causing it (and I include myself in that), and personally I would prefer it if Alan dropped his Supertroll moniker and reverted to "ACK" or "Alan Kendall".

Jan 3, 2017 at 8:24 PM | Unregistered CommenterMark Hodgson

Martin A. And I thought the discussion we were having about the new dichotomies in politics - you, me, Ravishing Rattie and Mark Hodgeson - was a possible sign of a rapproachment - an indication that you and I could discuss matters, even touchy matters like politics, in a rational, non-confrontational way. But there you go, just how wrong you can be.
I really have no idea why I offend you in particular, but with this particular piece of nastiness I have now lost interest.

Jan 3, 2017 at 9:04 PM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll

Many carpets make a thread
To glisten, worth a tread.
===============

Jan 3, 2017 at 9:58 PM | Unregistered Commenterkim

I have to agree with Martin. Alan, or whatever the current childish alias is today, fishes for comments to disagree with to show off his knowledge, experience and/or "superior intellect". His greatest ability though is to nitpick the nits off nits.

I see above that there is a renewed threat to "leave us in peace". Let's hope it is honoured, or if not, then in future posts there is recognition of our critical comments. Too many great contributors have left BH in recent times, some as a reaction to Alan, and my guess is that Martin and TinyCO2 will shortly be following them. If I am right that would be the end of BH for me (not that would be any great loss) but I suspect for other notable contributors.

Jan 4, 2017 at 9:14 AM | Unregistered CommenterDavid Porter

Martin A.
My comment "If I am accused of being a troll here, I will post as one".
Your response "So infantile game playing".

Far from it, I take being branded a troll by those who engage in the same practices very, very seriously indeed. My nom-de-blog was deliberately chosen to highlight this fact. It's an indictment. The fact that you (and others) get so worked up about it demonstrates that it works.

David Porter wishful thinking on your part perhaps? - I made no renewed threat (or am I nit-picking?).

Jan 4, 2017 at 11:21 AM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll

Martin A. Let's continue with your indictment.

"Last month you explained that you had posted stuff expressly to wind people up and provoke a reaction".

Indeed I did. I admitted doing this once after getting totally frustrated with accusations being thrown at me. My regret is that I failed to put quotation marks around the offending phrase (about Tory gerrymandering). A cursory search on Google using the terms "election, boundary changes, criticism" turns up dozens of occurrences where Labour, Lib-dem and even some Tory commentators have used the same phrase.

Yet there is a prolific commentator on BH who makes things up each and every week creating whole conversations or even whole posts that are entirely fictitious. Sometimes he is called on them, and I recall several instances where he admitted such fabrications. But of course these support accepted BH causes and positions and are thereby not criticized.
So my single provocation was dumped upon by all and sundry and is to be endlessly resurrected. One and only one occurrence.

EM last week made a deliberate provocative post about Trump. This was hardly commented upon - except by me.

Why the double standards?

Jan 4, 2017 at 12:04 PM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll