Very Boring blog

[Deputy Dawg]

Anyone seen this?

Interesting reading...

Very Boring Blog.

[Dylan]

Nice one Dawg but it all looks as bollocks as the other to me, quite Frankly (no pun intended) I, along with many others are pretty bored with waiting and holding my breath for an outcome. By the time it comes, things will have shuffled on and peops will have forgotten the furore. Oh I see it, That's the intention! My My!

[jackoneill]

Nice one Dawg but it all looks as bollocks as the other to me, quite Frankly (no pun intended) I, along with many others are pretty bored with waiting and holding my breath for an outcome. By the time it comes, things will have shuffled on and peops will have forgotten the furore. Oh I see it, That's the intention! My My!

DOn't know about you guys but did you see anything particularly new on there or was it just all same old same old?

[tonytheprof]

A number of fake posts as comments (pretending to be real people), lots of ranting, some bad language, and it's created by someone anonymous who says he's not scared of any opposition! And a one track subject, with lots of cut and paste from news sites, but very little comment (and most of that personal abuse).

And what will the blog do when the Haut de La Garenne affair finally ends? Looks a bit like "Head and Shoulders Shampoo" which rather lost impetus when dandruff marketing dropped out.

[Forest]

Tony the prof.  Other than the 'created by someone anonymous', can you not see the irony in the startling similarities between your description of this blog you profess to dislike, and another where you are a regular commenter ?

[tonytheprof]

Certainly there are similarities, but one where I comment does put solid documents into the public domain, not just cut and paste jobs from online newspapers. That's why I read it.

[Deputy Dawg]

There is a bit of a stir on the Very boring blog today with their latest posting about the blackmail emails that have been sent from Stuart Syvret to Miss X (an ex girlfriends of between 14 and 16 years).

Anyone have the full copy of this email thing that they can forward by message?

[tonytheprof]

You mean an ex-girlfriend or partner he's been with for 14 to 16 years - sounds very dubious otherwise (into Roman Polanski territory!).

Yes, it's obvious who the ex is - isn't it. Someone full of Eastern promise!

What is also interesting is the way in which they've posted his current address, which as not a States member, and if not in the phone book, is therefore personal information of a kind that could be seen as close to breaking Data Protection, depending on how easy it is to get it otherwise.

If real, disgruntled Miss X (or her children) is the likely source of the email doing the rounds. I do wonder why people never learn to keep confidential stuff outside the email area, where it can fly off into cyberspace and get half-way round the planet.

Do you remember the idiot who sent an email to his office "friends" about an email he'd received praising his sexual prowess, and then it went global, the girl went into hiding, and he got the sack?

"The young woman behind a revealing e-mail seen by millions is still in hiding as five top law firm employees accused of circulating the correspondence await their fate. Reporters have tracked down Claire Swire's family home, where her parents spoke of their embarrassment. Five workers based at the Norton Rose firm in London, UK, face disciplinary action when they return to work on Monday. They could even be dismissed for their alleged part in distributing the e-mail containing an apparently off-the-cuff sexual remark by Miss Swire.... Within hours it had spread from Norton Rose to other prestigious London law firms before making its way across the world as far as New Zealand."(16 December, 2000, BBC News)

Or the "good day to bury bad news" email?

The golden rule is: never put into an email (especially an angry one) anything that you wouldn't be prepared to say in public (or have in the public domain).

As they say, two can keep a secret, unless one's an ex-girlfriend, and the other's a blogger.

[imacrappaud]

I would like to add to your Golden Rule and that is never forward a non work related email around your work, and even more Golden don't send it onwards to people outside your place of employment. A lot of people got the sack over here not so long ago for that despite warnings.

You may not be able to stop people sending you rubbish but it is only you that decides to forward it on!

[tonytheprof]

We have a Mailmarshall system at work, that puts into "hold" anything coming in or going out which uses bad language; it's not perfect, but it prevents any emails coming out from work which would reflect badly on the business (because of the email address).

Most of the "bad language" tends to be incoming jokes, and most of those are coming to the partners!

[ole razzy]

This is a nasty and sordid little affair that puts everybody concerned in a poor light. I dont for one minute think that SS gives a toss about it but for Deputy Labey it must be a ghastly affair - especially with all the ass grabing jokes flying around on the farce blog. I admit I have had to laugh at some of the comments but a lot of it comes across just plain malicious and it paints a rather dreary picture of us living in an insular and rather petty society. That said it is all really rather remarkable. As that well worn saying goes 'You just couldn't make it up!".

What seems to have emerged is that certian states members have been given a full set of email correspondence, allegedly by Labey, in some attempt to demonstrate how contemptible her former partner has become. What we dont yet know is if she ever intended it to end up online.

Now if we for a minute assume that she never wanted a full account of her being involved in drunken ass grabbing antics in Friday's (it was the choice of bar that I found most distasteful!) then its safe to say that at least one states member who was trusted with the information has leaked it.

Now ask yourself who is part of the establishment and dislikes Syvret just as much as he does Labey?

By sheer luck I get my full and un-redacted version tomorrow at Sunday lunch in Grouville.

All very cryptic I know.

[tonytheprof]

"Gazza" is obviously very full of glee, and undoubtably wins this week's award for "worst local blog of the week" for sinking to very low standards - perhaps he should apply to become an accredited reporter for "The Sun"?

The commentary supplied makes it not just a dissemination of information (which might just have some legitimacy, although I can't see it) but also a very personal character assassination on Stuart Syvret - the argument that he has trashed people's reputations, so why can't someone do it to him - is a very weasley bit of special pleading.

I had thought that HDLG Farce was improving, but it's obviously moved backwards as far as any blogging standards are concerned. Let's hope it does not lead to a series of copy-cat postings.

[rico sorda]

Im not sure at who  the target was with this posting. I think it started out as a big dig at Stuart Syvret,  then when it go published has in fact  attacked Deputy Labey and family.

Now some might say that is Karma for leaking the email but that is not my view. If she intended it to end up on the bog then she has been stitched up like a kipper.

If she is not happy about the blog posting all she should do is write a comment and ask them to remove it. If she is not happy about her private life being discussed like that a simple comment is all that it takes.

So Deputy if you want it removed all you do is put the ball in the court of the blog owners. Go on their site and leave them a comment, they don't have to publish it,  explain how you feel and see what they do.

It is that simple

Bloody Eastenders

rs

[Mr Susan]

I rather hope they get an injunction too although I can't see it happening. I rather like the idea that they believe the outside world is interested (14 different countries!). Well, for a giggle, I always use a proxy address. I wonder if they really believe the hits from say the Russian Federation, Greece, Finland, USA or Bolivia (!!) are genuine. As if the people in La Paz  or Moscow haven't got better things to do.

*walks away whistling*

You ain't seen me, right?

[Rob Kent]

To some extent I am sympathetic with the view that this is private correspondence never intended for public consumption, but at the same time there are two mitigating factors: firstly, no email is private, which is a consequence of its means of distribution - that is, it is transmitted over a public communications system via one or more third-party servers. You should basically think of an email like you would do a postcard you send from a holiday resort - many postal workers along the way are going to see it. There are exceptions to this, like when you know that both parties are using encryption, but I would say that was unlikely if it was sent to a States email address. (By coincidence, I sent Stuart instructions for using Google mail with HTTPS (Secure Sockets Layer) turned on about six months ago.) The source for this leak may have been the recipient but it could as easily been anyone with a server that processed the email traffic.

Secondly, while the whole thing is horrible and distasteful, it gives an insight into the state of Stuart's mind - good or bad. And it is the kind of thing that would be printed in Private Eye. Whether or not that makes it right, I don't know.

Despite their obvious glee, I think that the Farce site was probably wrong to publish the emails, even redacted. It seems to me equivalent to publishing someone's divorce correspondence, and many of us know how messy that can be.

There is one other persistent misconception on the Farce site that I would like to correct: because someone supports some of the causes Stuart fought for (or shares his criticism of Jersey institutions), it does not make one a blind 'SS supporter'. I have no opinion of him personally and have only met him once. I have publicly criticised certain aspects of his style and some of his actions but I generally support him over HdlG and have thought that he has been shafted by the Jersey 'oligarchy' from way back - since he got suspended over the Jeune affair in fact.

I think he was wrong to publish the 'hospital killings' report (here's why http://www.badscience.net/2010/04/lucia-de-berk-a-martyr-to-stupidity/).

The last few years of watching the goings on in Jersey makes me so glad I don't live there. It has all the makings of a Tennessee Williams play, 'Orpheus Descending' or similar. Whatever you think of Stuart, there's a big democratic deficit on the island. It's being run for rich people and the ordinary non-rich people are paying a heavy price.