Losers

[the banned]

Happy anniversary, multitool. Remember me from Cycling UK?

Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

The banned runs a whole website where the banned names and criticises people on other fora who have objected to his repeated attempts to stir up hatred. The banned is busy over there now whining that this forum (and others) have denied him free speech and unfairly banned him. There is no right of reply on his website, so therefore it should be posted here.

etc

His intention is to draw more people into his 'debate' in the hope that they become radicalised in the way he has. This is why he has been posting the same content across several hobbyist fora. Naturally, he doesn't realise he has become radicalised (they never do) but one glance at his monobore obsession and it is clear that he has lost his mind. It is very far from the parameters of normal behaviour, and ultimately the best thing for everybody, including him, is to ignore him.

If the same identical post is being made on at least 3 fora, and a perusal of author's own website shows that it is a particular obsession of his and that he doesn't want to "promote discussion" but has a very specified direction in which he intends that "discussion" to take then its actually something worse than trolling. It's something verging on pathological.

Various moderators have been ridiculed and vilified on Sussex Cyclist's website. They have no right of reply there. So, claims of bullying are, at best, ironic.

This is the key part of the OP. SC has also been posting links to various fora on Mumsnet in an attempt to cause a pile on. I think SC's behaviour is exceptionally underhand and unpleasant and this OP is entirely justified.

And that's my last word.

[close]

How time flies. At the end of last year CUK let me go when I had the temerity to start a gender critical thread then defend myself against accusations of trolling* by Vorpal & co. This isn't a rehash, but a spotlight on you as a reward for getting in on the action just in time for me to be unable to reply.

You've since been a busy boy at CycleChat's politics forum, with over 4000 posts to your name after barely pausing for breath on the main site. You've taken a particularly keen interest in... let's see... gender, posting over a thousand times on that apologetic thread alone.

There is no rule that one must be a cyclist eager to discuss cycling to join a cycling forum (let the record show one of those posts was indeed about Emily Bridges), but it may be surmised that all this points to someone chiefly interested in the blood sport of politics, which gender issues are guts deep in.

You have cultivated a reputation as someone unafraid, in fact duty bound, to attack anybody who shows the slightest deviation of empathy with your worldview. This has made you a person of interest to me, NACA's unofficial secretary,† because let's face it, nice guys finish last in column inches.

Even when you contribute something decent,‡ it's only notable as a sad reminder of what you're capable of when you're not in gendergibbernazistabby mode.

boing

You're one of those people who make it difficult if not impossible to play the ball not the man, as your intelligence takes a back seat to the demons of your nature (the jury being out as to whether you have any better angels). Whatever it is you're playing at, in addition to propagandizing for The Right Side of History, you've clearly taken Gore Vidal's maxim to heart: "It is not enough merely to win; others must lose."

In closing, allow me to draw your attention to the REPLY button


(there's another one at the bottom of the page)

available to guests, though it may not be visible to cowards.

Sincerely,

Sam


*Judge my overall contribution to Cycling UK for yourselves, jury of my peers, as against multitool's short career. Ditto CycleChat.

†And captain of the USS Callister.

‡I've never been afraid to give credit where it's due (scroll down). Funnily enough, either of us could have written that – or this. As conduct unbecoming a forum member is something that inspires us both, I look forward to the 'tool takedown of moNkers (been there, done that).


"Any means to an end?" "Great minds think alike."

[Detectorist]

The cowards, the pretenders and the woman-haters

Standing apart from the quiet cowards and wilful pretenders there are men who endlessly indulge in performative moralising about what women should and shouldn’t be doing and saying. If such men — and sadly the political Left is stuffed full of them — choose to side against women who wish to undress away from men, be housed separately from men when incarcerated or be counselled only by women when raped by men, then they hate women. I have no other conclusion to draw.

Poll added.

Rush Limbaugh would be proud

your peroxide Nazi icon

a peroxide nazi with right-wing TV pundits on speed dial

It doesn't really matter that the adult human tease stoking his fevered imagination doesn't consider herself to be a feminist: it's enough that she's a loud woman he disagrees with.

[Pale Rider]

I feel like an idiot now.

Stay tuned for more of that _{perhaps sotto voce.}

If you can swallow the clickbait [You say that like it's a bad word - Ed.] and accept that the video appears staged, it presents a plausible and truly educational exchange: "Sometimes you have to break up the red pills into tiny pieces so people can get them down."

Multitool, cont'd

...Aurora's cûnty mates...

Additional poll option now available!

Oh, and watch NACA's hellhound scorpion biggest dick going after a guy whose wife has Alzheimer's, taking the high road (suspension of disbelief required).

Rent free

Worst. Tenant. Ever.

Living rent free in your opponent's head is a standard insult across the road. As if we don't all make room for our favourite lost causes.

Sanity affirmation therapy

ArabellaScott: <off to google Ptolemaic epicycles>
NoBinturongsHereMate: Oh do, they're fascinating attempts to make data fit a theory rather than vice versa.
ArabellaScott: Well. I had a brief look and ran away screaming

Short version.

Astronomers looked up and saw that things in the sky go round in circles. The sun rises and sets, as does the moon. The planets and stars wheel around over the course of the night or the year.

Obviously, they all go around us. Because we can see them going around, and because God created Earth as an actual place with Very Important Humans in it, and everything else is a not-really-important blob. So we must be at the centre.

Also obviously, everything goes round in circles. Because circles are the perfect shape, and God is perfect; so if God makes things go round, they go roundninnperfect circles.

All going splendidly so far?

The one tiny little problem is that if you calculate the positions and movements of the stars and planets, using perfect circles that go around Earth, it doesn't match where the planets actually are.

Clearly there is a problem.

You recheck the observations with your telescope to make sure the planets really are where you thought, and you redo the maths. Still doesn't work, so you have to look again at your starting assumptions.

Obviously God is right. No need to check that.

Obviously Earth in the middle is right.

It has to be circles....

Ah, but it could be more circles. Instead of planets going round Earth, they are going round little invisible axes as well as going round Earth.

That nearly makes the maths work, so must be the right answer.

Except it still doesn't quite fit.

Must need more circles.

[Pale Rider]

It's the third anniversary of my being cast out of CycleChat.*



Thanks to yet another free trial of Amazon Prime, I've finally gotten around to watching the series The Exorcist, cancelled six years ago. Poor Regan can't catch a break.

If you should find yourself in a room with someone like Pazuzu multitool {the soul of this thread, for those just tuning in}, do not attempt to reason with them.† They don't care about reason. They feed off the consternation of those who employ it and expect it in return.



While it's true they may bait you with genuine examples of logic, they'll abandon it the moment they're met by superior reasoning. You'll then find yourself conversing with the equivalent of an untrained parrot‡ plucking random morsels from a word cloud:

Bigot squawk. Hatred squawk.
Fascist squawk. Cult. Grifters. squawk squawk.
Straw man squawk. Gish gallop squawk.
Moral panic! Nuance squawkawk.
DARVO SQUAWK
{great ruffling of feathers}

They've heard these terms used correctly, but can only regurgitate them mindlessly.

"Gish gallop" is a particular favourite of 'tool's partner-in-slime moNkers, whose entire voluminous output, as I've demonstrated before, should be translated thus:

Let men in women's spaces.

Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces.

Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces.

Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces.  In women's spaces let men.

Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces.Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces.

Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces.

Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces. Let men in women's spaces.

*Still hanging on by my fingernails at YACF.

†Unless you're AuroraSaab, as you remain the chief bulwark against the forces of gobbledegook on the gender thread.


In the event moNkers actually is a woman, I'd be happy to graft on a female head (a body would be more appropriate but difficult). Until there's proof I'll stay a Doubting Thomas.

‡Is he parrot, scorpion (see previous post) or hellhound? All those and more: he is legion.


Going down?

[Pale Rider]

If you've arrived here from the place which will forever be formerly known as Twitter, you'll know me as Sam or @jollygoodthen.

'Pale Rider' usually gets taken out when I'm posting about CycleChat. What's in a name, eh?

We interrupt this deconstruction of multitool



to bring you an episode of The Devil You Know, aka Yet Another Cycling Forum. This morning I posted the following, entitled 'Caption it SixSixSix', in the appropriate board:

Crucifix salesmen can be very pushy.

It was removed without explanation by Jaded, who happens to be one of the mods I hired back in the days of ACF. I can only speculate as to what pushed his buttons:

• Didn't follow the proper numbering format and/or been there done that.
• My pre-captioning was deemed not in keeping with the spirit of Caption It.
• Accurately sensed I had been planning to settle in, thereby demoralising the regulars.
• Mistranslated my post as unflattering metadiscourse, which was not my intent, but perhaps my subconscious was indeed at work.
• Is possessed of an excessively jaded view of yours truly, and rather enjoys the power to delete my posts.

Every time I go there it feels a little more like this:

breaking sub-interruption

I had a chat today with someone back NACA way who still doesn't get it. "Get what?" you ask, in the unlikely event you've clicked into this spoiler. Get how women and children are being affected by trans ideology (and yes, 'tool & moNkers, it is an ideology). My wife's take: "Younger guys are thick; older guys are misogynists."

The gentleman in question has admittedly not informed himself beyond what information can be gleaned from his longstanding friendship with a trans identifying male, and took exception to my use of the correct pronoun, which I did advisedly – and only once, which was enough to make the point. I am simply unable to comply with the current admonitions to lie.



He's welcome to refer to his friend how he wishes, but he doesn't seem to understand how scary compelled speech is, nor that it immediately cedes ground which cannot be reclaimed.

Not wishing to be a nuisance, I won't be making an effort to educate him unless he requests clarification on my apparent bigotry. <For avoidance of doubt, that's a joke. Several, actually.

[close]

Where was I?
✓ Avoid Caption It
Previous notes to self:
✓ Skip the politics board

I mean it!

If YACF seems a little quieter than one might expect from a 16 year old forum, it's plenty busy in the politics board, which I've hidden but stopped back into, primarily for a skim of recent posts in the 'open season on trans people' thread. Still the twilight zone.

Although I can see the sense in this board being self invite only, I reckon what I'll call the blood-brain barrier was breached from the start.

It was also a reminder that CLIqUe RuLeZ (which probably explains the lack of growth over the years). Oy vey.

[close]

✓ Quickly scroll past the rantier threads and cliquier peeps
✓ Don't let the bastards get you down

on edit:
Let's just say the situation is rapidly developing.

[Pale Rider]

And the context collapse continues.

This thread, which I was alerted to over at TERFworld, actually gives me hope. Some people know how to bring the funny.

Naturally it's been closed.

The rules at STW are possibly the best, or at least most unlikely to have been written by a drone, that I've seen, though clearly I don't agree with the PTB on one important issue in particular...