Tuesday, September 04, 2007

Thank you, officer, you've been very helpful.

Why, yes, and that was a polite young man from the Waterloo police detachment who just left CC HQ, now fully-educated about one Patrick Ross of Edmonton, Alberta and his blog.

That nice officer even understands that, if something untoward happens to some poor citizen down around "Oak street, near Linden Avenue and Victoria Street south, in Kitchener-Waterloo", he'll know exactly where to start investigating.

Glad to be of assistance, officer. Just doing my civic duty, know what I mean?

BY THE WAY, one might also find this amusing (all subsequent emphasis added):

Blogger Content Policy

Blogger is a free service for communication, self-expression and freedom of speech. We believe Blogger increases the availability of information, encourages healthy debate, and makes possible new connections between people.

We respect our users' ownership of and responsibility for the content they choose to share. It is our belief that censoring this content is contrary to a service that bases itself on freedom of expression.

In order to uphold these values, we need to curb abuses that threaten our ability to provide this service and the freedom of expression it encourages. As a result, there are some boundaries on the type of content that can be hosted with Blogger. The boundaries we've defined are those that both comply with legal requirements and that serve to enhance the service as a whole.

Oooooh, oooooh ... and what might some of those boundaries be? Well, looky here:

VIOLENT CONTENT: Users may not publish direct threats of violence against any person or group of people.

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION: We do not allow the unauthorized publishing of people's private and confidential information, such as credit card numbers, Social Security Numbers, and driver's and other license numbers.

UNLAWFUL USE OF SERVICES: Our products and services should not be used for unlawful purposes or for promotion of dangerous and illegal activities. Your account may be terminated and you may be reported to the appropriate authorities.

Gosh, it's almost an embarrassment of riches, what category Patrick falls into. It might be fun to sic Blogger on him and see who gets to him first, Blogger or the cops. I can take bets.


sassy said...

no posting over there since Thursday, August 30, 2007 ..... concidence?? -

later ... “oh officer, I had no idea, have not been near my keyboard in almost a week, my dog ate it

David said...

Hey, if Patrick isn't doing anything wrong, then he has nothing to worry about.

That is the Conservative rule-of-law mantra, isn't it?

Ti-Guy said...

I think Patrick needs to understand that the police recommend you contact them when it comes to stalking and threats. They've been burned too many times before by not taking threats seriously.

Mentarch said...

Way to go CC! Such behavior can't be accepted or tolerated.

For what it's worth, I support you 100% on this, like I support RT.

Red Tory said...

Good for you in contacting the police. I thought it was kind of funny when I talked to the guy and was falling all over myself apologizing for wasting their time when they could be doing more important things, he said, “No, no… that’s quite alright. We’re here to help.” It was such a Dudley Do-right thing to say.

The folks at Blogger can be hard to get hold of (you have to work through Google) but they can and do respond when necessary. I had a site shut down that was a knock-off of mine, but the whole purpose of which was to make me out to be a pedophilic faggot (his word, not mine). That was in the early days, and I don’t know that I’d bother now, knowing how easy it is for a determined psycho to just set up another site. Or heck, even nine of them in a day, for that matter.

The sad reality of the situation is that there are a lot of sick, twisted, completely demented people out there, and if you get on the wrong side of them for whatever reason, there’s no telling what they’re capable of.

Funnily enough, my whole misbegotten encounter with this Patrick character concerned the issue of anonymity as it concerned the rantings of Paul at Celestial Junk who seemed desperate to know who people really were so he could either beat the crap out of them, or make their life miserable in other ways (at least that was my impression from what he’d written). The Douchebag of Assholery only got drawn into that argument as a sidebar just to show that Paul wasn’t a lone nutter in this regard. He’s been a complete pain in the arse ever since.

Phyl said...

Way to go, CC! And yep -- if he hasn't done anything wrong, he has nothing whatsoever to worry about.

Richard said...

Well, if Patrick and Werner don't post your address, I will, because, you know, you've already posted mine.

ps: It's not illegal to post someone's name and address on-line. Nor would I be bound by bloggers TOS

Mentarch said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mentarch said...

Ah, yes - another cyberbully comes to the defense of cyberbullyism.

Why am I not surprised?

Anonymous said...

Now he's got a post up with a fake quote, falsely attributed to me.

The Looney Tunes of Richard Evans never ends.


pretty shaved ape said...

"Well, if Patrick and Werner don't post your address, I will, because, you know, you've already posted mine.

ps: It's not illegal to post someone's name and address on-line. Nor would I be bound by bloggers TOS"

and that's the attitude that the voters of calgary will be looking for in their civic government. aldermen who just sneak in on this side of the law. leaders that are petty and understand the importance of vendetta. way to go.

Meaghan Champion said...

What a maroon... see


for more Dick hijinkx

He doesn't even seem to realize what the "edited by siteowner" mean when attempting to falsely attribute some patently absurd comment to me which was no doubt dreamed up by himself or the late and unlamented Analogue.

CC said...

Richard the feeble-minded writes:

"Well, if Patrick and Werner don't post your address, I will, because, you know, you've already posted mine."

Really? Would that be when I simply pointed out to people that they could learn that themselves by running "whois somenamedia.com" against one of your own publicly-registered domains, Richard? Hmmmmmmm?

Or perhaps when I directed them to your own campaign site which explicitly tells readers that you live in Beddington?

Or maybe if I point out that anyone can go to 411.com and just plug in your publicly-available info to learn this?

So, Richard, which of those constitutes an equivalent breach of privacy? Come on, let's hear it -- I can't wait for more of your delusional, paranoid rantings.

Really, Richard, that claim was pathetic, even for you. You're slipping.

Richard said...

Quit whining.

CC said...

I'm sorry, Richard ... that was your snappy comeback? I can't wait to see you in action on city council. I desperately hope it's televised.

Richard said...

I desperately hope it's televised.

Sadly not. Hell, they don't even record how the council votes on any given issue. That's one of the reasons I'm running. Transparency is required.

Meaghan Champion said...

So sad you decided to re-direct the Somena Media look-alike site back to Stormfront, Dick.

I bet Mr.Hawkesworth would think that's really funny.

Phyl said...

I think I'll start sending all my Calgary relatives and friends some details about how their possible future city official behaves toward people he disagrees with. I'm sure they'll be extremely interested.

the rev. said...

Has anyone thought to start sending urls and explanations to other busy Calgary based blogs (ie Calgary Grit)? I know Richard is dying for us to send his name to the newspapers so that he can play the conservative martyr who the nasty liberals are trying to silence -- quick reality check Dick, even Sun reporters are unlikely to buy that meme when they see the shit you've pulled and the posts you've made.

Crabgrass said...

the rev.: "I know Richard is dying for us to send his name to the newspapers so that he can play the conservative martyr who the nasty liberals are trying to silence"

Yes, we're trying to silence him by giving things that he has said or written in the past a higher profile. I wonder how that will work out for him.

Balbulican said...

Crabgrass is quite correct. No commentary on Richard's "writing" is necessary: simply links and quotes. No libel, no defamation, no slander: just his own words. Heh.

CC said...


If there's a Calgary-based blogger who wants to do something with this content, by all means, they can drop me an email. I already have some wheels turning, but the more wheels, the better.

And, as always, no confidential information will be harmed in the destruction of Richard's political career.

the rev. said...

suh-wheet! I knew you would be on the case. I just thought it might be another avenue to pursue. Because the more that pile on Richard the better as far as I'm concerned. Calgary is a conservative town in a conservative province and if there is anywhere in Canada that Dick could get elected, it's Calgary. But even the most conservative voters in the most conservative province are bound to have some standards and the more they learn about what a shitheel he is, the less likely he will be inflicted on the municipal government.

I've covered more than my fair share of village, town and city council meetings over the years and I've seen what happens when you get some grandstanding idjit who thinks he's just been elected prime minister on the council. They think they are there to fight "communism" or "defend the small business man" or "protect public morality" and as a result the business of the local government, which most of the time has nothing to do with any of those things, grinds to a screeching halt while the aforementioned numbnuts makes a lot of idiotic, misinformed speeches and generally gets in the way because they don't know what they are doing.
The next thing you know they are running for the provincial legislature.

Richard said...

You've got what, the fact that I've purchased some domain names and directed those names to some morally reprehensible site? Beyond the fact that most people won't know what you're talking about, I've done nothing illegal. Most reporters will laugh at your assertions that there's some sort of political story there.

I do welcome you to try it however, beyond the extra publicity, the humor value would be immense.

I can see it now...

reporter: It's been rumored that you've been involved in on-line misconduct. How do you answer that?

me: Oh really? Who's spreading those sorts of rumors?

reporter: I'm sorry, I can't divulge my sources.

me: I see. Have you checked in to the background of your sources? If I had to guess I'd wager that they're the same individuals who keep stalking me because I'm a conservative. One is a racist native woman who has a habit of talking to herself (with different voices) in various on-line forums. Another is a comment troll who's pissed at me because I don't think it should be legal for 50 year old men to have sex with 14 year old boys. The third is an anonymous blogger that is proud of himself for telling the mother of a fallen soldier to fuck off. Here's the conversation thread where they're discussing using the local press as a means of attacking me publicly. Have a further look into your sources, there's some good information here, here, and here. If, after you've read up on them, you'd like me to answer your questions, I'll be more than happy to explain it all to you.

reporter: um, ok, thank you. I'll check into them now.


reporter: holy fuck! I'm a pawn being used by crazy people!

M@ said...

Wow, you sure are eloquent and smart when you're being interviewed in your own mind.

Are you taller, too? And do you maybe own a pony?

Richard said...

Sorry m@ but journalists are required to check their sources prior to pursuing a story. If one of our local journalists ran with the story and it got out that they didn't check their sources and it showed the sources to be you folks, said journalist would be taking a lot of heat.

Beyond your outlandish claims of offence, the only facts you really have are that I've legally purchased some domain names and pointed them to reprehensible sites because I felt those sites reflected the attitudes of specific bloggers. Period. That's not a news story and it most certainly won't destroy my campaign.

But, please, I welcome you to try. The extra publicity would be great.

M@ said...

Sorry m@ but journalists are required to check their sources prior to pursuing a story.

They're required to check with you?

Well, you're so intelligent and well-spoken, as evidenced by your little imaginary self-drama, I guess they have no choice. They wouldn't be able to resist your incredible charm and strength of personality.

But let's see, let me try to imagine if I were a journalist and got this hot tip. I guess I'd start by putting "Canadiancynic.net" into my browser, and see what came up. Then I'd run a whois search on the owner.

By that point it wouldn't make much difference who had told me about it, would it?

I don't intend to contact any journalists about the whole thing, and have never indicated anything of the sort. It would be pointless anyway, because you've said "Period." It's such a compelling argument for everyone involved. God, you're such a brilliant orator -- Calgary Ward 4 should be so lucky as to elect a man of your many talents.

Richard said...

Like I said. Go for it.

M@ said...

I forgot to mention your superior reading comprehension skills, didn't I?