I have today received what I can only regard as a lecture in an anonymous post. Quite why someone would go to the lengths of cutting and pasting a large chunk of text from a Conservative press release (which is what he or she did), then ranting on about something completely off-topic, then, having gone to this effort failing to even put a name, I will never know.
I'll make clear my rules on whether comments get through the moderation stage. you will always be published if:
1) If you stick to the topic in hand
2) If you stray from the topic, but it is your own work.
3) If you rant, you might get published so long as your give a name.
4) You rant and rant and don't make any sense, but you log on with a blogger ID.
You won't get published if you :
1) Post copies of press releases and don't talk about the topic in hand and post anonymously.
So now you know.
13 comments:
Dare we ask what the press release was about - the defection of 3 LibDem candidates perhaps, which your fair blog has so far failed to mention?
I've also not reported the many stories of Tory councillors defecting to the Lib Dems, which I believe there was a clutch of just before Christmas. We can all be "selective", but I don't really see a defections as news, unless they have a Norfolk angle.
How funny though Antony, you seem to know the content of anonymous e-mails. Why not post using your real name in future ?
I guessed because of the news on Iain Dale's blog and elsewhere - I wondered what could rattle a LibDem so much. It didn't take much brainpower to work out.
So why didn't you comment on it. In the previous week you have reported on Blears and the Commons dining investigations - hardly Norfolk based and very party political. I'll let others decide on that one.
I post using my real name thank you very much, unlike swathes of others on my blog, your blog and other blogs. Anonymous people annoy me. You can confirm my IP address and also that I have never copied and pasted anything onto your site. All comments are open, honest and my own.
Trying to smear people is a typical LibDem stunt Nich and hardly "fair".
Again antony, you avoid the issue.
You always try to highlight one story I don't cover as the exception that proves that I am bnot being fair in what I report. However, when I pointed out that I didn't cover the stories on a whole host of defections from the Tories to the Lib Dems in the weeks leading up to Christmas, this time from elected people, not people who had stood in no-hope seats, you simply ignore that point.
As for likening this to running the story on Hazel Blears, that had nothing to do with defections.
Come on Antony, read, read and read again.
As for why I didn't print the posting I deleted, I am not a mouthpiece for Conservative Party press releases. This was a press release, with quotes, cut and paste with some general abuse, which I will not print. Sorry, you might print abuse, I won't.
Hi Nich,
You've got to admit that the defections are bad for the Lib Dems. It reminds me of the lead up to the 1997 general election, when 'One Nation' Conservative MPs were deserting the Party for NuLab and the Lib Dems. I think most political commentators would agree that 2006 was a terrible year for the Lib Dems, a bad one for NuLab and a decent one for the Conservatives and Greens. I think I'm being fair - what's your take on things?
Justin, everything has to be seen in context. A couple of weeks ago I could have said "the gloss has come off David Cameron after a wave of defections to the lib dems". I didn't, because I know there is an ebb and flow to defections. This has carefully been stage managed, but are they significant people. No, in short, they are not. I can honestly say I have never heard of any of them.
Has it been a good year for the Lib Dems ? I would argue a stand still year. I think the press want to "ming Bash", and it suits them to do this, BUT, compared to mid term 2002 or 1998, the Lib Dems are 5% higher in the opinion polls and in local elections and local by-elections (parliamentary ones too), the Lib Dems are doing well.
As for a good year for the Greens ? yo're kidding aren't you ? They did well in Norwich, on the basis of a bad year for the lib Dems in the City. In london, one or two gains in some boroughs, but losing seats in Oxford and in other places.
Pot and kettle Nich - you have totally avoided the issue.
You accused me of cut and pasting that press release. Do you still think it was me or are you going to apologise?
If you are unhappy with any aspect of my blog, it is not an obligation for you to read it or leave comments.
And I should add that you seem to mis understand what the phrase "the pot calling the kettle black", which alludes to accusing someone of something you do yourself. At no point have I accused you of doing anything that I do myself, so the phrase does not apply.
Again, if you are unhappy reading the comments of a Lib Dem councillor, it is not the law that you have to read this.
You have made an inaccurate accusation. Either back it up with evidence or apologise.
Apparently, by strange and massive coincidence, Antony knew the content of an anonymous comment that I didn't print. For some strange reason, and people will think it so odd, I assumed, completely wrongly as it turned out, that because he knew the exact content of an anonymous e-mail, he must have had something to do with it. I know, it's a fanciful suggestion isn't it !
So, in this case, of course I am happy to accept the word of Mr Antony Little, whose famous list of quotes include claims of the Tories closing on Charles Clarke in Norwich South in 2005 and that the Lib Dems were going to come a poor third in 2005.
Of course, Antony, I therefore apologise for any slur upon you. Obviously, given your track record, I could never have assumed that you had done what I accused you of.
Now now children...
And to think, you're both teachers!
Starling, Little, go and see the headmaster now!
He started it ;-)
Post a Comment