tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21544361.post858620425058157841..comments2023-05-27T12:03:28.241+01:00Comments on Five Chinese Crackers: A lesson in how tabloid journalism works from Andrew GilliganFive Chinese Crackershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09395982651352498540noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21544361.post-12594178704030326612008-11-28T10:22:00.000+00:002008-11-28T10:22:00.000+00:00I tried to post a similar comment to this about fo...I tried to post a similar comment to this about four times last night before giving up when it didn't work. I hope it works this time.<br><br>Last night, I rejected a comment from being published on this blog for the first time (I've deleted spam before, but I don't normally have comment moderation on).<br><br>I have no problem with negative comments being published - but I don't think this one was anything more than trolling for fun by Martin (above) who I also think is Tim (above) who has a history of trolling with multiple sockpuppets. (More on this over at<a href="http://www.bloggerheads.com/archives/2008/11/martin_wiesner.asp" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">Bloggerheads</a>.<br><br>As I said before, I have no problem with people posting negative comments. I just don't like people fucking about and wasting my time - so you're highly unlikely to see any more comments from 'Martin' (or 'Tim' or 'Lobster Blogster' or 'Pogsurf' or whoever Martin decides to be on a given day) here in future.Five Chinese Crackershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09395982651352498540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21544361.post-40427351325944407072008-11-26T22:38:00.000+00:002008-11-26T22:38:00.000+00:00Yes.Yes.Five Chinese Crackershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09395982651352498540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21544361.post-34344272120994914212008-11-26T18:04:00.000+00:002008-11-26T18:04:00.000+00:00Cheers Crackers,Am I reading the article right, is...Cheers Crackers,<br><br>Am I reading the article right, is Dave Hill claiming to publish TfL's figures before they do themselves?Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08240399669150057121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21544361.post-86567911868060158642008-11-26T15:53:00.000+00:002008-11-26T15:53:00.000+00:00Cheers Pogsurf.Cheers Pogsurf.Five Chinese Crackershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09395982651352498540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21544361.post-29554612824397289562008-11-26T15:49:00.000+00:002008-11-26T15:49:00.000+00:00Pogsurf, you are the only bendy round here.Cracker...Pogsurf, you are the only bendy round here.<br><br>Crackers: great site if er somewhat crakers.Timhttp://letmegooglethatforyou.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21544361.post-38596211865159689682008-11-24T14:06:00.000+00:002008-11-24T14:06:00.000+00:00Cheers Pogsurf.Cheers Pogsurf.Five Chinese Crackershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09395982651352498540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21544361.post-43308318006888281522008-11-24T13:33:00.000+00:002008-11-24T13:33:00.000+00:00Bendy or not, Gilligan is a superstar. This man kn...Bendy or not, Gilligan is a superstar. This man knows how a shitstorm works and how to turn it to his advantage. He grows on me every time I read more nonsense from his detractors.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08240399669150057121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21544361.post-67204258322779690072008-11-22T21:39:00.000+00:002008-11-22T21:39:00.000+00:00Thanks for that, Tom. I had realised he'd mis...Thanks for that, Tom. I had realised he'd misquoted you, but hadn't dug up the misquote.<br><br>And why haven't I got a link to BorisWatch yet? Fixed that problem now.Five Chinese Crackershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09395982651352498540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21544361.post-8087554233448505452008-11-22T21:02:00.000+00:002008-11-22T21:02:00.000+00:00Another example - he took the following two statem...Another example - he took the following two statements by me, the first from a post, *quoting someone else*:<br><br>"as Alex Harrowell says, the overlap between supporting neo-conservatism and the bendy jihad is interestingly close."<br><br>...the second in a comment under it:<br><br>"My theory is that after Livingstone spotted the US was on the way down and thought London should court the next economic superpowers, people wedded to the US way of politics and money who think we should ride the USA into the ground like Major Kong got worried."<br><br>became, after the Gilligan Treatment:<br><br>""The overlap between neo-conservatism and the bendy jihad is interestingly close ... my theory is that after [Ken] Livingstone spotted the US was on the way down and thought London should court the next economic superpowers, people wedded to the US way of politics and money got worried.""<br><br>Note the handy ellipsis, the removal of the capital letter on 'my' and the removal of the evidence that it wasn't me who said the first bit. Classy.<br><br>What's obvious is that when you get Gilligan out from behind the protection of the Standard, he can't operate without incriminating himself. Fish, meet slab.Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02938347648935528029noreply@blogger.com