h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

OK, here goes:

intresting!

Here goes what?

And the question is, where goes it??

Exactly!

Somebody I don't want to name changed their tagline, and as I'm subscribed to a few journals they post to, I couldn't help but notice. So now I made fun of it in Yikes this morning. http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/F127730?thread=3848857&skip=57129&show=30 And guess what: a friend forwarded me an email (I have blocked this person so don't get any of their emails) titled: Nothing like a passive stalker, eh? linking to my post in Yikes. This email was addressed to the h2g2 Feedback (that's the editors for you and me), the h2g2 moderators, my friend and myself. Now, apart from the fact that it seems to imply that I am stalking said researcher, it is an abuse of my (and my friend's) email addy, because they can't know which email address I use for my hootoo account. I am not worried that anything negative will come out of this for me, I mean, if people don't want others to read their taglines, why do they put them in the first place? Plus, I'm sure that the eds and moderators are intelligent people who will recognise who is and who isn't the 'stalker' here. I won't address the eds because this is just so ridiculous and they have more than enough to do without such childish emails, but for once, I thought I'd not let this go completely uncommented.

Sorry folks, you were too fast with your replies.

I still don't fully understand the explanation

Ooh, and I'm late!

Do you think a certain person might take umbrage if I stuck the name The Rev. Nitwit in my tagline?

Websailor

You're not alone, Big Al. Apparently, I am
>>snipping and sniping at tag-lines ... hoping to score points in a bigger league.<<

and there's more from the same corner:


>>And you are apparent and correct, "lil". You and your little troupe have been happy to play at my expense any number of times. Including your silly court thingie.

Awright, ... Hands up to anyone and everyone who has been told from "members of the Court" that I am the equivalent of Satan Spawn? NOW ... of those same people ... If you have never met me, or spoken TO me, ... drop your hands ...<<


Well, I don't think there were any raised hands in the first place, because none of 'the members of the Court' have ever said anything like that.

I'm sayin' nowt!

Guilty as charged. Next.

wait, can I put my hand up if I think he's a numpty and I /have/ spoken to him?

I can't possibly comment on that.

yeah, but you're not rude and obnoxious. He'd comment on it.

No, I'm just a 'passive stalker' - come to think of it, I have no idea what that is and how that would work.

Does that mean we are not allowed to notice things when they are placed before us?

First up, don't take offence Bel as I won't be staying subbed to this however seems I don't even need to be online yet I'm accused of all manner nasty behaviour.
I know Rev. Nick will be lurking this journal so lets clear the air. I HAVE NOT, DID NOT, yikes anything Nick related.
Secondly, he and another researcher accused me a few days ago of being parnoid about online security. Here's a classic example of why I raised that issue. Nick, for the second time, has abused the privilidge of using someone's e-mail details inappropriately. This from a guy offering the use of HIS website for people to lodge their personal details. Needless to say this speaks for itself. Considering he works for the military services in Canada, he's not very good at keeping confidences is he?
As for his digs at me being the 'littlest man', there is one colossal difference between me and him, I'm more than big enough to admit when I'm wrong and apologise accordingly, he hasn't the brains or common decency to do that, he just goes on with his deceipt and stirring in the hopes if he say's it often enough he'll convince himself that what he says is true. The medics call that being delusional.
I'm frankly fed up to the back teeth of the pathetic sniping that he starts then goes around not only pleading innocence but giving all the impression he's the one that's being 'got at', that he's the 'injured party'. Well you reap what you sow and he's shown, publicly, time and again, just how untrustworthy he really is, people see through the 'facade' he portrays very quickly.
If anyone wants more proof then just look through all his convos and see how many times he asks folk for their e-mail address's. Why? What's he got to say that he can't say it in the open? It may well be in all innocence but, from someone who has been caught out, publicly, here in hootoo, abusing e-mail details? If this makes me paranoid then so be it, frankly, I actually think it makes me sensible and cautious as to who I give details to and should serve as a warning to all.
Chances are this may get yikesed as being 'inflammatory', the fact is everything I've said I can back up with evidence, I've stated nothing but facts.

ST.