Sue Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Loz Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> Newton Wrote:> --------------------------------------------------> -----> > > In the interests of keeping this thread> focussed on the original issue> > > > Nice way of sounding high minded whilst> supporting a known, unrepentant harasser of> women.> > Honestly, Newton, you are starting to sound as> over-emotional and over-exaggerating as Lewis and> the SSW. If the thread is going to be locked, I just want to ask why you (Loz) think what Newton said is either "over-emotional" or "over-exaggerating" - seeing as I was the one being harassed.Since the harassment has continued after my asking the harasser to stop, he is clearly unrepentant.So the description seems quite factual to me. And I guess wanting the thread to exclude anything to do with that could also be seen as supporting the harasser, though that's perhaps more of a stretch. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962796 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otta Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Loz was talking about this.-------------------------------------------------------> Nice way of sounding high minded whilst> supporting a known, unrepentant harasser of> women.Now Lewis' behaviour on twitter is out of order, and if he'd been positing my name I'd be unhappy. But the language newton has chosen to use here is way OTT."Harasser of women" - We all know that that makes Lewis sound like something that he doesn't deserve to be painted as."Pain in the arse", "spreader of false thruths", "over stepping personal boundaries" would all be appropriate descriptions of Lewis following his recent antics, but "harasser of women" has a far darker and wider connotation and it is unwise to throw that sort of language around.He's out of order for his twitter antics, but I don't think he's broken any rules, or posted soanything that isn't available on the internet for anyone that cared to go looking. So unless he's sending personal messages I don't think there is any harassment going on here.That's my opinion anyway. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962804 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penguin68 Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Since Sue's alter ego is in the music and entertainment 'business' it might be argued that his constant linking of this to what is in effect abuse of her viewpoint (which opposes his which he has painted as being with the right-on angels) has the impact of damaging, by such linkage, and entirely unfairly, her professional image and standing - at one level they are in competing parts of the same business spectrum (local entertainment inter alia) - so his actions, by trying to damage her professional reputation by making that link are, broadly, anti-competitive. His attempts to paint others of us into a partial corner (as having business or professional or personal links to the council or those who might benefit financially from the council's plans) were about destroying our credibility in this debate - his links to Sue's other life are, I would suggest, about destroying her credibility in her professional entertainment life which competes, perhaps in his mind, with his. And that's my opinion. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962822 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Otta Wrote:------------------------------------------------------->> > > "Harasser of women" - We all know that that makes> Lewis sound like something that he doesn't deserve> to be painted as.> Harassment is not limited to sexual harassment, if that is what you are getting at.A simple (ie non-legal) definition is "Aggressive pressure or intimidation".And one has to wonder why it is only me (clearly a woman) he has singled out to focus his aggression on outside of this forum.ETA: Penguin68, I very much doubt if he sees our music gigs as competing with his "comedy" gigs, as I imagine there is very little audience crossover.However it does look as if he is trying to damage my credibility amongst the people who come to our music gigs, otherwise why publicly post to our Twitter page which is set up for the sole purpose of promoting our gigs (and sometimes for sharing folk music related tweets likely to be of interest to our followers)?ETA: And Otta, why would anybody "care to go looking" on the internet for information about me, unless they had ulterior motives? Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962858 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otta Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 I'm not saying they would, but it's in the public domain if someone wants to find it because of your well known association with Goose.And I know harassment is not limited to sexual, and no that's not what I was getting at.God Sue sometimes it feels as though you're just looking for something to argue about. I was simply trying to say why Loz may have felt that language used by a poster (that wasn't you) was a bit OTT. I still stand by my opinion above and don't think Lewis is harassing you, even if he is being a total cock.As for why he seems to be singling you out, I guess the Goose gives him an easy "in" in terms of who you are. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962866 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Otta Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> > > God Sue sometimes it feels as though you're just> looking for something to argue about. I was replying to your post, which I disagreed with.That's what a forum is for.How come my post is "argumentative", but yours (also disagreeing with other people?) isnt?ETA: And I have had some involvement with harassment, including setting up a harassment and bullying helpline in one job and introducing a harassment and bullying policy in another, and if you don't agree that Lewis's behaviour is harassment then we will have to differ on that point. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962871 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loz Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Otta - nailed it in one.Sue - "someone harassing a woman" might have been acceptable, but Newton didn't say that. He/she was going way OTT for effect. Remember his/her first post suggested "for women associating with Lewis, don't think that because you're not the target this week you won't be next" and *anyone* associating with Lewis "deserve to have children spit in your face on the street". As Otta said, Lewis is being a complete twunt, but as we've seen on this thread, Newton wildly overstating a case loses people who would otherwise be sympathetic. > And one has to wonder why it is only me (clearly a woman) he has singled out to focus his aggression on outside> of this forum.Obviously I can't prove this, but I suspect that you are the only person on this thread Lewis has been able to figure out a real-life name for. I actually don't think your gender entered into his limited thinking. Lewis had been angling for some time for people to post enough information for him to identify them - now we know why.I once had an object lesson in why you should guard on-line identity unless otherwise necessary. I used to be post with my real name, until one day about 20 years ago someone actually rang me at my place of work to shout at me and threaten me about something I'd said online. Since then I have been *much* more careful about what I reveal on the net.IIRC I had a similar conversation (though not with that particular anecdote) with you on here a few years ago. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962882 Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiera Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 I would say that the reason Sue was targeted was because she was openly trying to discredit him/SSW publicly. In Sue's own words ".......My thoughts were more that any of their supportersreading the thread would see the lie of the land,so to speak, and stop being supporters - notnecessarily of the actual cause, but of the organisation relating to it." Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962885 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otta Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 That post came after The Twitter posts. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962891 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otta Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Sue Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> > How come my post is "argumentative", but yours> (also disagreeing with other people?) isnt?Look I am not trying to row with you, but maybe when you type things like> ETA: And Otta, why would anybody "care to go> looking" on the internet for information about me,> unless they had ulterior motives?It feels a bit like you're singling people out and demanding answers from them. When in this case all I meant is that you'd put your name on a website which is publicly available, that was all. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962897 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 kiera Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> I would say that the reason Sue was targeted was> because she was openly trying to discredit him/SSW> publicly.> In Sue's own words > ".......My thoughts were more that any of their> supporters> reading the thread would see the lie of the> land,so to speak, and stop being supporters - not> necessarily of the actual cause, but of the> organisation relating to it."Eh?I posted that in relation to a possible reason for not closing down this thread, ie so SWW's supporters could see from his own posts what sort of a person he was and decide of their own accord to dissociate themselves from his organisation.Although they will only be able to see some of it because his worst ones were deleted, and then he was banned.I don't think anybody needs to discredit him publicly - he has done a good enough job himself on here, as you can see if you read the whole thread.But hey, easier to distract attention from that by having a go at me, eh, as we also saw further up the thread by some other SSW supporters.Interesting strategies some people have. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962905 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Loz Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> > Sue - "someone harassing a woman" might have been> acceptable, but Newton didn't say that. He/she> was going way OTT for effect. Remember his/her> first post suggested "for women associating with> Lewis, don't think that because you're not the> target this week you won't be next" and *anyone*> associating with Lewis "deserve to have children> spit in your face on the street". As Otta said,> Lewis is being a complete twunt, but as we've seen> on this thread, Newton wildly overstating a case> loses people who would otherwise be sympathetic. So because in your/Otta's opinion Newton's comments were over the top, it therefore follows that Lewis wasn't harassing me on Twitter?> > And one has to wonder why it is only me (clearly> a woman) he has singled out to focus his> aggression on outside> > of this forum.> > Obviously I can't prove this, but I suspect that> you are the only person on this thread Lewis has> been able to figure out a real-life name for. I> actually don't think your gender entered into his> limited thinking. Lewis had been angling for some> time for people to post enough information for him> to identify them - now we know why.Yes, that is possibly true, but one has to wonder whether, if he found out a man's identity on here and posted it publicly on Twitter, and stated their ED forum name as well, and linked it to a Twitter page which is not their personal page, whether he would then continue to do so - more than once - when asked to stop.Do you think he would have done that? Obviously we can't know. But I suspect not. > I once had an object lesson in why you should> guard on-line identity unless otherwise necessary.> I used to be post with my real name, until one day> about 20 years ago someone actually rang me at my> place of work to shout at me and threaten me about> something I'd said online. Since then I have been> *much* more careful about what I reveal on the> net.> > IIRC I had a similar conversation (though not with> that particular anecdote) with you on here a few> years ago.Quite possibly. I am - I think - careful about identity theft, so there is some information I would not put online. However it never in a million years occurred to me that somebody could use my personal posts on a topic on here to try to discredit my music events, if that is what he is trying to do.Some time ago - after he had started posting on here, but before he was banned - he sent me a friend request on Facebook. Obviously I didn't accept it, but I now wonder whether he was trying to find out more personal information about me. I'll never know that, either.But at that point he must have known my name.It's not so much that my full name is a massive secret. Lots of people know it, obviously. It is that he deliberately used it in order to link it to my posts on here and to the Goose, and continued when asked to stop. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962912 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Otta Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> Sue Wrote:> --------------------------------------------------> -----> > > > How come my post is "argumentative", but yours> > (also disagreeing with other people?) isnt?> > > Look I am not trying to row with you, but maybe> when you type things like> > > ETA: And Otta, why would anybody "care to go> > looking" on the internet for information about> me,> > unless they had ulterior motives?> > It feels a bit like you're singling people out and> demanding answers from them. When in this case all> I meant is that you'd put your name on a website> which is publicly available, that was all.How do you know I've put my name on a website?The only people whose full names are on the main part of the website are the artists.My name is in tiny tiny letters in faint grey on black at the bottom, for copyright reasons, along with that of the website designer, also for copyright reasons.You must have really gone out of your way to find that. I had to really search to find it myself. Nobody looking at the website would ever notice it, under normal circumstances.I find that quite creepy, to be honest. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962915 Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbboy Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Otta Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> The group that people are now largely referring to> as Daesh would rather the world continued to call> them ISIS, the reason being that it adds some> validation to their claimed caliphate. By calling> them Islamic State we somehow acknowledge the> existence of said state.> > Let's stop calling this ridiculous group "SSW"> because it only makes them feel validated.> > I am NOT comparing the actions of this group to> those of Daesh obviously. Lewis has not beheaded> anyone (yet). But his mad dash to chain himself to> a digger and get his photo in a local rag just> screamed "look at me look at me".> > Let's just stop all this and starve them of the> attention they so desperately crave.Being a US citizen, is he likely to have a visa and if so, presumably it has conditions that if he breached could result in his removal? Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962966 Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhistory Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Thanks to Sue for providing the lead:Lewis Schaffer is a Brit called Brian by Anna Crockatt of the Relatives. Published on 8 Nov 2014Beautiful Anna Crockatt, one-half to one-fifth of The Relatives (usually with Richard Guard) questions the authenticity of Lewis Schaffer, Lisa Moyle, Nunhead and everything that Nunhead American Radio is and stands for. She repeats the slur that Lewis Schaffer isn't an American but a Briton from the Brownhills Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962982 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newton Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 1) panda boy: you are completely correct and I unreservedly apologize. I should have done a bit more research before posting. To be clear, I have exactly no problem with people wanting to preserve the site as it currently stands (or have any other reason for opposing the councils actions). Sorry.2) Otta: I'm sorry if you dislike the phrase "harasser of women", but the problem is, I'm not even being rude or abusive when saying it, I'm just being descriptive. Here's the first definition I found on the internet:> the act of systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group, including threats and demandsNow, here's the crucial point here: you don't get to pick whether or not it's harassment. The test isn't whether it's annoying you, the test is whether it's annoying Sue. So maybe start listening to her rather than trying to mansplain your misunderstanding of the term.And frankly, if you believe it's OK to publish some people's personal information on twitter just because it's possible for someone to get the information from the internet... you have no idea exactly how much information is on the internet. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-962996 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loz Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Sue Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> So because in your/Otta's opinion Newton's comments were over the top, it therefore follows> that Lewis wasn't harassing me on Twitter?I didn't say that at all, nor would. Just that Newton is doing you no favours at all.> Quite possibly. I am - I think - careful about identity theft, so there is some information I> would not put online. It really is quite scary how little information someone needs for identity theft. Or can lead to identity theft.And, as you've found, even less than that to find someone online who does unpleasant, rather stalkery things. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-963000 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 edhistory Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> Thanks to Sue for providing the lead:> > > Lewis Schaffer is a Brit called Brian by Anna> Crockatt of the Relatives. > > Published on 8 Nov 2014> > Beautiful Anna Crockatt, one-half to one-fifth of> The Relatives (usually with Richard Guard)> questions the authenticity of Lewis Schaffer, Lisa> Moyle, Nunhead and everything that Nunhead> American Radio is and stands for. She repeats the> slur that Lewis Schaffer isn't an American but a> Briton from the BrownhillsI don't understand any of that.How did I provide the lead?Where does the quote come from? The Relatives are a local band, I don't get the connection. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-963010 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loz Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Sue Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> You must have really gone out of your way to find that. I had to really search to find it myself.> Nobody looking at the website would ever notice it, under normal circumstances.> > I find that quite creepy, to be honest.When I learnt to drive, my father always told me that the safest way to drive was to 'assume everyone else on the road is an idiot'.The internet version of that must be 'assume everyone else on the net is a dangerous weirdo'. Or, at the very least, work on the basis that there are many, many people on the internet that are dangerous and/or weird and/or criminal. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-963012 Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbboy Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Found this link https://nunheadamericanradio.wordpress.com/about/ which might explain it???????? Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-963014 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otta Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Sue Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> How do you know I've put my name on a website?How else would he know your name? Plus I think you said as much back in this thread.> > The only people whose full names are on the main> part of the website are the artists.> > My name is in tiny tiny letters in faint grey on> black at the bottom, for copyright reasons, along> with that of the website designer, also for> copyright reasons.Perhaps so, but google "goose is out sue" and there you are, you don't even need to click on a link, your name is right there in the google results.> > You must have really gone out of your way to find> that. To be VERY clear, I hadn't tried to find anything. Until reading this post from you, I hadn't searched or anything else.> I had to really search to find it myself.> Nobody looking at the website would ever notice> it, under normal circumstances.I hadn't found it, it's only now reading this post fom you that I've bothered going to google to see how easy it would be to find. Lewis clearly had, that's all I was saying. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-963027 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Otta, you're right and I apologise. Google is indeed a wonderful and worrying thing, as I just found.Unless this is an elaborate double bluff, it appears that not only do Southwark Woods not exist, but Lewis Schaffer doesn't either.https://thejohnfleming.wordpress.com/2013/10/12/american-comedian-lewis-schaffer-revealed-to-be-english-character-actor-brian-simpson/2013/https://thejohnfleming.wordpress.com/2015/12/27/this-conversation-with-two-comedians-really-happened-and-i-dont-even-drink/So given the youtube clip I posted on the new (cemetery) thread in this section, also thanks to google, where one of the other organisers of SSW has clearly been in cahoots with Lewis's "comedy" since at least 2014, has this all been just "comedy" fodder?Maybe Lewis/Brian could let us know, via one of his alter egos. Because if so, he's got quite a few questions to answer, I would say, given the trouble he has caused the council and others.ETA: And he has form in this kind of thing, if the following (from Wiki) is true - but who knows."Edinburgh Fringe StuntIn 2009, he announced as a publicity stunt that he would be sponsoring the Edinburgh festival comedy awards that had previously been called the if.comedy or Perrier awards.[3] He claimed he had purchased the naming-rights to the awards for "?99 with his mother as a judge". This was reported as fact in various publications[4] and lead to threat of a lawsuit from the award's rights holder[3] and being fired by his theatrical agents.[5]"ETA: Don't read that second link, which is an interview with him, unless you like extremely offensive remarks about people from a particular racial/religious group burning easier than others. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-963041 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe_froeman Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Remarkable. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-963043 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otta Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Sue Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> has this all been just> "comedy" fodder?> That's what I've been saying. He may care a bit about the trees, but no one acts like he is unless they're aiming for reaction. That's why I found it funny when he staryed claiming people on here were married to councillors and had vested interests, it just seemed so outrageous it had to be "comedy".But he is clearly very dedicated to pushing as fat as he can. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-963062 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Otta Wrote:------------------------------------------------------- That's why I found it> funny when he staryed claiming people on here were> married to councillors and had vested interests,> it just seemed so outrageous it had to be> "comedy".You found that funny?I wonder if the people concerned did?There's one thing being "outrageous" as a comic on stage. Fine. You know what you're letting yourself in for if you go and see the show.It's another thing stating false information about people on a public forum whilst purporting to be somebody else. If he is actually somebody else.ETA: And the people running the Perrier Award - and his agent - clearly didn't find his lies (because that is what they are) funny.ETA: And I didn't - and still don't - find his online behaviour towards me funny in the least. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/79919-new-opportunity-to-save-the-woods-deadline-friday-23rd/page/32/#findComment-963068 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now