Friday, April 11, 2008

Respecting Your Anonymity

In one of his comments to this post, Kevin Bonham remarks:

By the way, it has been suggested to me that you are probably Alex Toolsie. If this is not the case and you wish me to take your claims seriously then I strongly suggest that you explain who you are and why you are so persistently interested in a matter (the registration question you have now asked twice) that is none of the business of any random anonymous poster.

It should be noted that the suggestion mentioned by Dr Bonham was not made by TCG. This blog respects the anonymity and privacy of its readers and posters and we do not share IP addresses with other parties. In any case, it is not possible for me to pinpoint accurately IP addresses to specific users.

TCG does make the request that readers, when making a comment, maintain some degree of control on their emotions and finger tips.


DeNovoMeme said...

Kev Baby,

1. You were so owned by me when I outed you as a fibber on ACCF. You slander me in public and say different things in private. You were so owed that you had to call the legals to save your ugly mug.

2. You said elsewhere, "Given the number of totally clueless people I encounter on a regular basis, ..." Tell us the approximate number (or rate) of "clueless" and then out them as your prey. Now, toughen up and name names, you two faced bully boy. Won't do it? You are by far the most arrogant little back stabber I have ever had the misfortune to have crossed paths with. I may not be saintly and far from perfect, but you aren't fit to wipe my shoes.

Kevin Bonham said...

Matt, you were actually eventually the one "owned" (to quote your personally anachronistic tryhard-cool terminology) when I had your shameful and petulant behaviour struck down by EZBoard Legal, an action that seemed to cause you no end of rage that I note with some amusement continues to this day. I was actually surprised and pleased how effective the complaint was; I was initially only expecting them to remove my email address.

And we have been through this before - you did not succeed in outing me as anything, as the email you quoted had been superceded by a later one, and hence was irrelevant to your claim. You finally coughed up on your silly misrepresentations on 30 June 2007, by publishing my second email on your board. That email, of course, vindicated my claim concerning the facts of the matter (that I had two *current* conditions for joining your manure-heap, not one as had very briefly been the case), that you had unsuccessfully tried to expose as a fib. A longer account of this riveting saga (for those who really care!) may be found at

Oh, and as for total cluelessness, the approximate number of very clueless people I encounter on a regular basis in all walks of life combined would surely be a few if not several dozen, and to be certain I had missed none from the list could take me hours! I have to go out shortly so I've only got time to list two right now (and what a worthy two they are): Alex Toolsie and Matthew Sweeney!

Once we have *all* agreed that those two are indeed extremely clueless, we can move onto the next level of Matt's exciting new game!

As for whether I am fit to wipe your shoes, Matt, you are so far below me it would do me an injury to even try to reach down to your head.

DeNovoMeme said...

The ACF Vice President Kevin Bonham says: I have to go out shortly so I've only got time to list two right now ... Alex Toolsie and Matthew Sweeney ...

those two are indeed extremely clueless.

DNM: Good on ya Kev. You are the kind of bridge building diplomat Australian chess needs. Keep up the good work mate. Now, how about you add a half dozen more names to the list. Lets see you give us the full strength Kev-O-Spray. Someone with your level of hyperhubris to say "Given the number of totally clueless people I encounter on a regular basis, ..." ought to name names other than AO and me. Come on, sharpen your pencil, go for it.

Of course, I know who you think are clueless, so if you don't name them, I might have to name them for you. Then you can explain to them why you think that they are clueless and why you are such a back stabber.

DeNovoMeme said...

ACF VP KB: You see, if you're going to invoke your stupid "name names" ritual in a situation where no-one's reputation is actually being personally tarnished by my comments …

DNM: Actually I don’t really won’t you to name names do I. I am, however, using your own words to show what a hubristic elitist (pseudo) intellectual-bully-boy you really are. With your arrogant Narcissistic personality, naming names would be a cinch – you would merely toss in the local telephone book.

ACF VP KB: Once again you use this pointless trolling tactic of mentioning my position even though all my comments are made in a personal capacity only unless stated otherwise and everyone knows that.

DNM: You simply don’t get it, Mr ACF Vice President. You have ***NO*** personal liberty to publicly slag off people when you hold office. You have a 100% proven inability to behave in a manner inappropriate for a person holding office.

ACF VP KB: As for bridge-building diplomacy, [if you] want any bridges to be built to you, you have a heck of a lot of cleaning up and apologising for your act to do first.

DNM: Not to you or Gletsos – and you know it.

ACF VP KB: I could point out how much "back-stabbing" I could have very easily inflicted on you but haven't, except that given your fondness for trolling you would probably be stupid enough to try to interpret that as a threat.

DNM: That is a hopelessly hackneyed attempt at preemptive defense and thus, it remains a patently transparent threat. Try it and you will find that your reputation can fall even lower than its present level, that of an on-line prima donna thug.