*
have to disagree, kate... toxic's just
not a strong enough word.

*

Karma's a bitch.

Isn't this just a little, what's the best word for this? "Tawdry"? I mean, if CC is a total douche, and you engage said douche in argument, link to his douchebaggery, isn't it to be expected that said douche will slime you? This "outing" of bloggers from each side strikes me as just a tad pathetic. Anonymity isn't just for safety, it's also for the simple fact that people have families. Has anyone written anything so horrible that you's wish him unemployed? I'll say that if you believe that, you missed the whole point of "sticks and stones". The Internet is becoming the playground of ill behaved children.

Anonymity is something you work to maintain - it is not something anyone should expect to have.

In the infamous words of one Bobby Peter John Day...This all so "FELLATIOTASTIC!"

You nailed the point exactly, rat, when you said "people have families". If you're afraid of your words coming back to haunt you and your family, you shouldn't be saying them, period. If you don't want trouble, you shouldn't be saying the kind of stuff he said on a regular basis. Eventually, those things end up turning on you. Now he reaps what he sows. If he loses his job, and his family suffers, he's got nobody to blame but himself.

Not only did the scumbag have it coming, but he's getting off lightly. Being pseudonymous doesn't give you a license to spread vicious, slandering lies about publicly identified individuals you disagree with.

Criticism, or even name-calling is one thing, but Robert PJ Day, hiding behind his anonymity, put out a public call asking people to help him find Richard Evans' kids' school.

If I had kids, and someone did that, I'd find my way to a face-to-face meeting, with an eye to rearranging fat-boy's attitude.

He should count himself lucky that the police aren't involved.

rat:

Anonymity is the prime reason why the internet is "becoming the playground of ill behaved children". When there are no consequences to your actions people tend to act poorly (some more than others). If this Cynic guy acted this way face to face with people he would be missing teeth. Maybe now that he is "outed" he will behave more maturely.

"Has anyone written anything so horrible that you's wish him unemployed?"

What does "wish" have to do with anything? Those that employ him will decide if they want to continue employing him.

BTW: Anyone can be outed.

rat, I note you do not sign your real name. Neither do I.

Reason being, in my profession simply holding mildly Conservative opinions and writing about them will get you a bunch of grief. Owning a gun or even saying you might like to will get a posse formed to run you out of your job on a rail.

A posse formed by disgusting human beings like Mr. Robert Peter John Day, aka Canadian Cynic who seem only to feel truly alive when grinding someone else's face into the dirt.

I have to say he's not as fat as I expected.

BTW does this mean Ti-Guy and CCs other sock puppets are all going to shut up too?

Sadly not, Phantom. They are currently spewing crap all over Suzanne's place. Why she puts up with it I'll never know.

RG

There is one simple thing to say about this. Robert Peter John Day would never have said the things he says under a pseudonym or behind the protection of a computer screen to any of our faces. Never say anything on the internet you aren't prepared to say to someone's face.

*
"rat asks... Has anyone written anything so horrible that
you's(sic) wish him unemployed?"

go to the first comment up top... and read slower.

*

"If you're afraid of your words coming back to haunt you and your family, you shouldn't be saying them, period"

Here here - its pretty simple.

He looks like a typical passive aggressive university entitlement whore.

Never worked a day in his life, has a nice paycheck and life, yet he has so much to bitch and moan about.

Anonymity is not a right.

I believe that anonymity is important when defending the right to freedom of expression when physical threat and violence can befall those expressing themselves. On the other hand, anonymity on blogs has spawned a whole phenomenon of bloggers and commentary which slanders, libels, and insults others while hiding behind the internet. In the past, that was never a right.

If one is to toss around the kind of slander, libel, and insult that Mr. Day does, one should in the very least be an identifiable individual. Take David Letterman for example ... he insults personalities like Palin, publicly, and either falls or stands by what he does. We are all free to criticize or defend him. The public has a chance to seek remedy in the open market place of ideas. On the other hand, characters like Day do what they do simply because they think they can escape the consequences of the free market of ideas ... which may include employer sanction if business is harmed, legal actions in civil court, public shunning, ... or they may get public acclaim, or the acquiring of a loyal following or even financial gain. Anonymous bloggers though, often do and say things that they could, and would, never do if they had to take full responsibility.

In Day's case , one might be able to argue that he holds a dangerously pathologic fixation with the Blogging Tories, and especially Stephen Taylor, Richard Evans, and Neo. He has interfered in people’s private lives as well ... all the while hiding behind anonymity.

The kind of name calling, slander, libel, and vulgar critique that passes as "speech" on his blog, but which hides behind anonimity is a gross bastardization of freedom of expression. It's one thing to hide from Islamist killers or deranged stalkers, it's altogether another to hide your identity while personally attacking others for sport ... after all, that's all that Day and his crowd do it for ... sport.

I only went there once. I was disgusted and as I tend to speak my mind that takes something. I never expected to see my comment and never checked back. Some places I use my own name. Usually the lefty kind. I do that for one reason and that is I don't have to hide from my viewpoint now when I didn't before. Here I use a nom de plume simply because most do, it is prudent and I do not feel the need to prove I won't be intimidated.

This is the creatures, ah hmm..... whats the word...cumuppance!

The word is "comeuppance" not cumuppance...

Right Girl, I guess it was too much to hope for.

Still, now at least people have a name to put on their Human Rights Commission complaints that will be ignored, eh? ~:D

Incidentally I should mention, I don't mean that Bobby Day should be made to shut up. On the contrary let him rage on and on. Its just nice to know who I don't want to turn my back on.

Sometimes there are unseen but viable reasons for posting anonymously on the internet. I began to do it when I realized that my public name was also the name of a well-known reporter (but I am not that person) and that it would be sure to cause problems for him as my views tend to be right of centre and certainly right of the MSM by an honourable mention.

And the name I do use is actually the name I was born with, and the name that I have used for writing opinion pieces for many years. I was never really trying to hide, and certainly not out of shame or embarrassment (as if I had callously suggested that a grieving mother should rethink her grief, what a horribly simplistic world view that is, but so typical of our leftoid chattering classes).

Now Canada's most famous serial complainant affects to be "hurt" by my descriptions of him, and has told his friends of my real identity, thinking this is a punishment for me. In fact, it is no such thing -- I have been fighting battles against our entitled Liberal classes for many years under both names in many places, without much success, but then I think we can all share in that frustration.

The time is coming when a lot of the unchallenged myths, lies and half-truths of our left-liberal society will be challenged, exposed and tossed aside. One of the first misconceptions to fall will be this one -- that I either wish to pay, or could pay, any Liberal bureaucrat six figures for the right to free speech. He'd be lucky to get my six iron and not in a very useful form either.

I had a run in with evans once. He extrapolated one small remark, and made some very nasty comments about my person.

I think both these guys are assholes. Let them out each other, who cares? If someone outs me, so what? People who comment on blog sites don't strike me as particularly dangerous. Most of them blow off their entire head of steam in a couple of paragraphs.

I think, as someone else hinted, that the main reason for anonymity is, many of the commentors are using company computers, on company time.

I had a run in with evans once. He extrapolated one small remark, and made some very nasty comments about my person.

Care to provide a link? It's only fair that you back your assertions, anonymous or not...

Thanks Kate, for the link.

It is unfortunate that anyone feels they must assume a fake name to speak their mind, regardless of their employment or situation. If one feels that they must hide their identity, they also feel they must hide their hypocrisy.

Live free or die!

Joel Schroeder

Phantom, that's pretty much my whole point. At work I keep my opinions, and my gun ownership, to myself. On the Internet I am free to voice them. It is nice to be able to voice them without someone Googling my name and dropping a line to my employer. Not that my employer would fire me, but it would be one hell of an annoyance just because I voice some opinions. Anonymity isn't the cause of the bad behaviour on the Interwebs, it's the intolerance of dissent and the desire to punish the unbelievers. Anonymity is the only shield and an "outing" war between the factions will reduce the debate.

Only a scumbag can out an anonymous blogger. If they had concerns about legality of what he wrote, they should have contacted police.

Richard Evans, you are a duchebag and an assmagot.

Looks good on the piece of shit.

As pointless threads go, this one takes the cake.

Should CC's children pay for the crimes that their father has committed? In a world of free-willed individuals, the answer should be a resounding no. Then again, God set a nasty precedent when he decided that Adam and Eve's descendants should pay for Adam and Eve's crimes. The children will pay for the sins of the father.

Personally, I think this is all a bit stupid, but who am I to argue with Kate, or God, or Richard Evans? When have either of these three admitted to making a mistake on a blog?

Anybody throwing around the "c" word at Kate, Wendy, Kathy and others deserves to have to watch their backs.
Behavior like that needs to be adjusted.
It's what makes us civil.

Like Rightgirl said, Robert PJ Day is missing something, I hope the sunshine helps him find it.

My two cents is that I agree with the premise that you do not put into written text anything you do not want to come back and bite you in the ass. There is no such thing as being anonymous when you author a blog.

The future could find you explaining yourself to peers or employers, or even voters if you are so inclined. How many candidates have been scuttled by things they wrote in the past?

BTW my real name is not Illiquid, I know, I know, nor is it The Climate Heretic...surprise!! I used to post my Bio on my sites but nobody really cared so when I changed Blog software I never put it back, you know what? I will do that today.

If what I've read of canadian Cynic is true then he is one sick puppy and should be legally responsible for making threats.

While it is true that anonymity is not a right as per se, people do have a legal right to use a nom de plum if they so desire. Normally, there is no problems for most of us using a "handle" but neither should we expect to hide behind it as an excuse to slander or commit any criminal acts.

This "outing" of bloggers for the sake of proving a point reminds me of the rash of "closet outings" of notable people that some gay activists turned to a few years back. It screwed up more than a few lives and families and didn't prove anything.

In general, personal attacks are uncalled for (although calling someone a twit for saying something stupid is fair comment.)

In this case, it seems more than justified to out this creep, shame this creep and make public the words of this creep.

If some coward goes after ones children the gloves come off and pretty much nothing is off the table. This sub-human garbage didn't just cross the line in posting very detailed info about someone's children, he demolished the line. If he ends up fearing the consequences of that degenerate act, good.

If you don't want to be outed than be respectful. To ask people you call "Nazis" not to "out you" is hilarious.

Linux geek...say no more

"This is interesting at June 15, 2009 11:23 PM"

What do you mean, like in a teabagging, or a Freudian slip kinda way?

This sub-human garbage didn't just cross the line in posting very detailed info about someone's children, he demolished the line. If he ends up fearing the consequences of that degenerate act, good.
June would you kindly care to point out WHERE that was done?
I'm ready to bet that you can't - because he has not.

The information on Richard (NAMBLA obsessed) Evans was in the public domain.

C'mon June, are you a blind follower or can you think for yourself and actually offer some proof?

CWTF: "The information on Richard (NAMBLA obsessed) Evans was in the public domain."

Kinda sad, my Cherniak-obsessed friend. So you'd be OK if someone posted where you live to people who might have an inkling to do you harm? It's one thing to be in the phone book and quite another to have someone circle your entry in red and write "pedophile" with an arrow to it. Whether CC actually posted the school or only implied it was one near the address of Richard Evans is irrelevant. Mentioning Evans' children in that context is threatening and I think any reasonable person would see it that way.

I don't think outing CC's identity is the right thing to do, but I have little sympathy for him and his defenders, especially if the best you can do is a hair-splitting defence of whether or not he actually posted the school. Grow up.

torybaiter; I would say none. It's a stereotype of those guilty of that very act in order to deflect the truth.

"Linux geek...say no more"

What is that supposed to mean? A higher than average proportion of geeks are libertarian and/or conservative. I assume it's because we're well trained in logic.

So, CWTF aka CC aka Robbie Day, how are ya sleepin' these days? Looking over the shoulder a bit? Having trouble keeping the ol' Wheaties down?

Don't sweat it, bro! We Conservative types pretty much can't be bothered to chastise weird people like yourself in person. Might get splashed by the ooze, y'know. Hard to dry clean.

No, what I'd worry about if I were you is the enormous, gigantic government machinery that's sitting on the line, waiting for the green light to pop into gear and start chewing up your life. If you want a real shiver, google "workplace abuse" and count the number of different government departments whose hundreds of tax funded minions are ACHING for a new case to justify their bloated expense accounts.

One offended girlie in your life drops one dime, and you are slow motion lunch meat. Jennifer Lynch ain't going to give you a pass, Robbie.

Personally I think this state of affairs is appalling, and I vote against it whenever I can. Women shouldn't have to have dozens of multi-million dollar agencies to protect their calm at work. They should be able to mangle misogynistic perverts themselves, at need.

There'd be a lot less perverts in the world, I'm sure you'll agree.

To paraphrase Sean Connery in The Untouchables, "don't bring a knife to a gunfight". And Mr. Evans did not. Fight fire with fire. Good job.

CWTF

First off, it's Jason. June is the month we are in.

Second, in the link above you have name, address and instructions on how to harass the children. In a better world you'd be tried and shot for less. What part of that is hard to comprehend?

I have not followed Evans, and don't care to. If the guy is what he is accused of, it still doesn't justify bringing his children into the equation. Period.

Why is it that leftards feel that if you don't tow the leftard party line without straying even a bit then you can attempt to destroy someone completely and go after family? See Palin's treatment for another example.

Frankly Palin was not my cup of tea. I didn't much care for her when she was announced on the VP ticket. But the more sub-human leftard garbage attacked her and her family, the more I sided with her. Especially in the classy way she's handled the abuse. I don't like a lot of her policy but it's hard not to like her character. Her detractors are some of the most vicious, hateful, hypocritical vermin I have ever had the displeasure to witness.

The southpark guys said it best: I hate republicans but I really, really f'ing hate democrats. The left really are not worthy even of the air they breath.

Rat, I kinda agree with you, but I also kinda don't. My problem is that you and I need to be anonymous on the web because of extreme political correctness, which is championed by the likes of CC, Dr. Dawg, Balbulican and all these other really objectionable creatures who say the foulest things all the time.

I just like to see guys like that held to the same standard that oppresses you and me every day. You play with the bull, don't whine when you get stuck by his horns.

Maybe if Robbie Day and Johnny Baglow and a few more of these cretins have to experience the PC meat grinder first hand, they won't be so devoted to making it bigger.

Apropos, http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article6509677.ece

Police blogger outed by the courts in Britain. More shut-upery from the British Big Brother brigade. Downside of outing, it gives bureaucrats
more power.

Time to shrink the meat grinder! Either that or time to get really ingenious about remaining unidentifiable on the web. Next killer app could be identity concealment for bloggers, programmers start your keyboards.

My problem is that you and I need to be anonymous on the web because of extreme political correctness
Yawn me a river....
Why is it that it's always different with your type?

If the guy is what he is accused of...

I'm not. Their little group didn't like the fact that their views on the age of consent were being exposed and they tagged me as being NAMBLA obsessed as a result of my desire/efforts at getting the age of consent raised.

I'd suggest that you head over to Robs site to read up on it but it seems that he's chosen today to re-vamp his blog. One can almost hear the shredder red-lining in the background...

"If the guy is what he is accused of...

I'm not."

Definitely good to hear if not entirely surprising (leftards accusations are about as reliable as their 5 year plans were.)

That said, even if the accusations were true, they still would not justify taking it out on family.

I think that if you are prepared to say something in the public square, you need to be prepared to own your words. If you want to be anonymous, the risk you take is that people will figure out who you are. Accept it, or shut up.

And besides, people should not think that they can say threatening or defamatory things from behind a mask,and then cry when they get outed.

If you are going to call a guy a pedophile, you better be prepared to back up your words with evidence. And if you are going to threaten children with harassment, you had better be prepared to be run out of town on a rail.

Anonymous dissent is critical to a well-functioning democracy. Sometimes the reason people post anonymously is to avoid the wrath of the powers that be. That's why I don't support the outing of bloggers.

Having said that, one can not use anonymity to commit crimes or torts, and that might apply to CC. But I think the real reason people want him outed is because he's the most vicious blogger in the Canadian political blogosphere, with overtones of misogyny and antisemitism thrown in for good measure. In my view, that's not good enough reason. I won't lose any sleep over this, but I wouldn't have done it.

By the way, Day runs a computer training company and perhaps does programming consulting work. I don't think he's formally employed.

I wonder if Day will tone down his blog now that his real name is out there?

"I wonder if Day will tone down his blog now that his real name is out there?"

Google Cache anyone?

rabbit wrote

"Anonymous dissent is critical to a well-functioning democracy. Sometimes the reason people post anonymously is to avoid the wrath of the powers that be. That's why I don't support the outing of bloggers."

I agree that anonymous dissent is part of a well functioning democracy. But those who employ such tactics absolutely must do so with the full realization that others are entirely within their rights to find out who they are and out them. That is the risk you take when you publish anonymously, and any thinking person knows that.

Besides, I hardly call what Canadian Cynic was (is) doing "avoiding the wrath of the powers that be". Is Richard Evans one of the "powers that be?"

What if the "powers that be" that the anonymous blogger is avoiding are the criminal or civil courts?

Anyway, I have far more respect for the Kate's, Ezra's, and Steyn's of our time than I do for all the anonymous cynics and yapping dawgs out there who take cheap shots and hide behind anonymity.

Every blogger is into it voluntarily. If there is someone else who posts garbage about you - tough luck. I feel that you, Richard Evans, made it harder for people to express their views on the internet for fear of being outed by the douchebags like you. What you did is below the belt, immature, coward and outright disgusting.

His site should be fully downloaded by now.

As for the debate about posting his personal info, I'd post the combination to the lock on his front door if I had it.

He can count himself fortunate if the least that happens to him is a big, ugly libel suit.

So Aaron: Is turnabout not fair play, or do you have similar criticisms for the cynic's publishing of Mr. Evan's address etc.

and I quote the cowardly cynic:

"So far, we know (from totally public information available online) Dick's family situation, and even his home address and phone number (107 Beddington Cr NE, Calgary). So what are we going to do with that? I'm glad you asked.

Based on that information, it shouldn't be hard to figure out where his children go to school (again, most likely public information based on residence). And from that, it should be relatively easy to get a list of relevant local teachers and school board members (again, openly public information). And once that's in hand, it should be a piece of cake to make sure all of those responsible individuals are educated as to Dick's disturbing predilection for online child rape and promotion of child sex."

Karl:

I agree that Day is not using anonymity to avoid "the wrath of the powers that be." More likely he's using it because it let him be an unmitigated jerk without damaging his business. Nor is outing him a crime. In fact, I'm surprized it took people this long.

But I would have let him remain anonymous because I value the freedom of anonymous speech more than I value the (infantile but understandable) satisfaction of exposing one idiot.

Nobody is suppressing his freedom of speech. Just his freedom from consequence.

Anyone considered how many heads on our side might roll in retaliation outings? Me thinks that we stand to loose more than the leftards - at the moment they are in favour with the bad boys with IEDs.

A while ago, I was harrassed online by "brave" anonymous people (I knew who they were, actually, but they hid their identities, though not very well). The only way I could stop it was to reveal private messages sent to me in order to prove "anonymous" were liars.
I loathe airing dirty laundry in public and I wouldn't like it if someone blabbed about me. People use online handles so they are not hassled. Fair enough. However, when they use their anonymity for the purposes of libel, harrassment or other malicious campaigns, it's fair to say that what comes around will go around.
No one should lose sleep over Mr. Day.

Kate:

There is no "right of anonymous speech" in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, nor should there be. I do not equate it with freedom of speech. And if someone defamed me, as Evans may have been defamed, then I would have no hesitation exposing them to deliver legal papers.

Even so, anonymous speech is an important force against tyranny and some respect is due. Even in this case.

By the way, I notice that Day has removed his picture of Brian the dog on his website. With his loss of anonymity, is he now worried about trademark violation?

Aaron - never take counsel of your fears.

My fears?

I feel that you, Richard Evans, made it harder for people to express their views on the internet for fear of being outed by the douchebags like you. What you did is below the belt, immature, coward and outright disgusting.

Yeah, well, all I can say to that is that I hope one day you'll take off the panties (they seem to be chaffing) and put on some big boy pants.

Whether you like it or not, you own your words...

Anonymity is important in a free society only for those who need protection from harm, be it because of their race, personal views, religion, etc. That's why we have secret ballots. (strange, that many unions don't favour secret ballots)

Anonymity on the internet is a privilege enjoyed by millions who neither abuse it, nor need it.

Anonymity when used to slander and libel and harass with impunity creates victims who don't have recourse. It is a crime in Canada, by the way, to victimize another person on the internet.

Mr. Day uses his anonymity for the latter. Were he a 14 year old attacking peers in the way he attacks others now, he'd be termed a bully and in fact, Canadian police would/could become involved, not to mention the school system. In essence, Mr. Day is just an adult child with the social IQ of a 14 year old.

After reading his site for a few minutes, and taking the required shower from the filth, one wonders if this man is either schizophrenic or perhaps a cross dresser.

Anybody who acts and talks that way in real life would be an outcast. He must hide it in real life, and lead a double life on the internet.

Rick

You nailed it Paul.

one day you'll take off the panties
This reply gives away the calibre of person I am dealing with: "I am right because I believe so". Something along those lines was recently told to Merlin Kinrade in Caledonia. It was an OPP cop in command of the line blocking access to DCE for the non-native protestors.

CWTF said: "Yawn me a river....
Why is it that it's always different with your type?"

Silly question to ask a troll I know, but did you -read- that little bit Kate posted there at 1:58 pm? CC posted her address with an invitation to terrorists to have a go at her.

Richard Evans had his name and address posted with an invitation for people to have a go at his kids.

I've seen Kathy Shaidle's name and exact location at a certain time posted in similar fashion (by another different pig who shall remain nameless because I don't have a screen shot), with the suggestion that people have a go at her.

See, this is where it gets different. Rat, me, we post opinions. Some people don't agree with my opinion, they tell me so, we have fun thrashing it out or flinging poo or whatever.

CC and company attempt to arrange hits on people they hate, because they hate 'em. That's not name calling and trolling, that's an attempt at physical damage to another person.

That their efforts have so far failed doesn't alter what they are trying to do.

So now, if Mr. Robert Day posts my name and address with an invitation for fellow Leftists, terrorists or whomever to come and assault me, I'll know where to send the cops.

Plus, in an age where every single solitary transaction you do by phone, credit/debit, internet, toll booth and whatever else is cached, backed up forever and 100% search-able, plus Carnivore, plus google, plus God only knows what else is out there sniffing around, any dreams you may have of anonymity are just that. Dreams. You can remain anonymous from me, a private citizen, if you are a little clever about IP addresses and etc. But Big Brother is definitely watching your every twitch. Which was my point at 12:33. Which you seen to have missed.

That's why its different, monkey boy. Difference between sh1te and shineola.

Aaron, with all due respect, you're nothing more than a deluded concern troll. Right off the bat you call me a douchebag and then expect a civil response? Seriously? Then you say that I've hit below the belt, am immature and disgusting? Again, you expect a civil response after that? And you call me a coward? I'm not the one posting under a pseudonym princess! My name is RICHARD EVANS! I blog and comment under that name. I'm a political candidate and a business owner under that name. I'm a husband and father under that name. My address and phone number are freely available to anyone who looks. One of us is a coward you little pecksniff, and it aint me.

Come back when you grow a pair.

Actually, someone did have a go at Kathy. A muslim female. But Kathy isn't a coward.

RG

CWTF: "Why is it that it's always different with your type?"

Because of your type.

Aaron, here's a sincere (i.e. entirely non-rhetorical) hypothetical question -- I'm curious to find out what your actual position is:

In a case where X, a pseudonymous, hidden writer, identifies Y by name and location, posts a death threat directed at Y, and asks people to hunt down where Y's children go to school, do you believe it would be wrong to publish the real identity of X?

Thank-you in advance for your answer.

"Even so, anonymous speech is an important force against tyranny and some respect is due. Even in this case.Posted by: rabbit at June 16, 2009 2:34 PM"

Rabbit (and others who think Evans did something questionable),

What you are all missing is responsibility. Day wanted all the benefits of an anonymous profile but did not exhibit the responsible behavior necessary for anyone to respect his anonymity. Instead of engaging in civil discourse with others or coherently expressing his thoughts and opinions, he hid behind his nom de plume and viciously attacked and vilified those he disagreed with.

Wanting all the advantages and benefits afforded by our various rights and privileges without accepting the responsibilities that go along with them is an all to common affliction of those on the left/liberal/socialist end of the spectrum.

CC doesn't debate or blog, from my perspective he trolls conservative female blogs and the precedes to hurl bigoted, hateful, degrading remarks at them. Keep in mind he's not rebutting something they've said about him he attacks without just cause or provacation.

Verbal abuse is becoming a real problem for women on the net, there is a growing number of men who troll the net looking to find women to hurl hate at. These men are not normal, in fact there is a name for men who use the net to attack women it's called a predator. Their behavior needs to be dealt with not smiggered at like many males on the left do.

"No kidding, Rick. CC would be far more dinified if he talked about how gas sniffing, First Nation fathers liked to boink their daughters. Yeah! SDA for the sophisticated stuff!"

Link.

Please.

You have 4...3...2...

CC doesn't debate or blog,
Wow, I guess his blog is just a figment of your imagination.

EBD, elaborate on your query. Is Y anonymous at the moment of those events? And why can't Y go to the authorities if there is a death threat?

No, Y has has never hidden behind a pseudonym. Now answer the question.

Robert Day
519-886-6446
40 Goldbeck Lane
Waterloo, ON N2J 4L1

SDH:

So the privilege of anonymous blogging now only goes to those who are responsible? And who is to judge who is responsible? Shall we set up a tripartisan committee to decide?

On this I agree with you - Day certainly did not do what it takes to make people respect him. Indeed he does everything in his power to make people loathe him. It's a form of manipulation - a way of getting people to dance on the end of a string. Day probably didn't want to be outed (it could cost him business) but he's probably delighted at the reaction to it.

Day likes to kick ant nests. He uses the hard-C word and everyone scurries around frantically. I think he even enjoys the reaction of his usual commenters like Ti-Guy and Cherniak_WTF, who slavishly lap up whatever crap he throws out with never a disagreement. Again, a form of manipulation.

"So the privilege of anonymous blogging now only goes to those who are responsible?" - rabbit

You got it, Slick. In the words of the indomitable Inigo Montoya "Lemme 'splain":

If you want others to respect your pseudonymity, you should be respectful in your dealing with others. Judgment of respectfulness is left to the individuals Day has dealt with.

If Day had been respectful - which by any objective standard, he was not - then people who aren't jackasses would be calling Evans a douche, and rightfully so.

Frontier Justice

"my idea is that if a man insists upon behaving like a brute, after fair warning, and won't quit the colony; treat him like a brute and flog him"

http://www.mysteriesofcanada.com/BC/judge.htm

CC doesn't debate or blog,
Wow, I guess his blog is just a figment of your imagination.

Posted by: CWTF at June 16, 2009 6:17 PM

End post:----------------------

It's not a blog it's a hate site, sorry for using lib terminonlogy but if the shoe fits wear it. How is his Ranting and raving at FEMALE conservative bloggers opinions, with no attempt to rebut them, considered blogging? Instead he smears, slurs, insults and degrades them that's not blogging that's calculated contrived personal attacks. That's not blogging that's using the net to abuse women.

This issue isn't about free speech, it's about a man who uses the net to verbally debase, abuse and degrade female conservative bloggers. He's free to spew his hatred, but now that his name is in the public domain we females and organizations that work towards the reduction of abuse against women are free to take legal action if they so choose. Can anyone please point out another blogger who used a so called blog to singularly degrade, verbally abuse and subjugate females if so I'd love a link.

Robert Day has sown to the wind and is going to reap a whirlwind, I presume.

I have always found Robert and his cohort, Lulu, to be the least formidable of all debaters simply because practically everything they write is laced with ad hominem. It's almost as if it is impossible for either of them to debate a point or an issue without drawing the intelligence or character of others into question.

I found it best to simply ignore them.

Every action has a consequence, something all the leftards spend their lives hiding from (leftism is basically cowardice and laziness applied to all facets of life - do try to prove different, leftards.. .go ahead)... and the reality of his actions just smacked Robbie Day in the fundament. You can't spend your waking hours being a despicable excuse for a human being without expecting someone to finally give you your just rewards. Couldn't have happened to a nicer person. I personally hope he's scared shiteless, 'cause that's the punishment he deserves for his morally retarded garbage, and quite frankly, anyone defending him belongs on the same manure pile.

Day went out of his way to make every encounter on the web a "personal" issue.

This is the hallmark of a very empty person.
Perhaps he should be pitied more than scorned?

NOT.

EBD, yes, it is wrong to publish X's real identity without first calling police.

"it's the intolerance of dissent and the desire to punish the unbelievers..." The Rat
I agree with rat on this. I cannot fathom how someone can HATE/ABHOR/WISH HARM UPON someone because they are of a different political stripe? (there's something klanish about that thinking). I also cannot fathom how someone can assume that all those who disagree with them are stupid.
That said, if someone threatened my children then all bets are off.

Hmmm.... Well folks, as a lurker on the poli-blogs, I can truthfully say you've led me to come to some conclusions about the Canadian political scene, via bloggers.

You're all idiots.

Both sides, and the supporters who rave them on. Short of grade school playground behavior, I don't think I've seen a level of stupidity like this in years. And yes, if one of my children got into spats like these, there would be some serious consequences for them. Grow up, the lot of you. Can we cut the knee-jerk left/right flogging, and try to provide some actual forward thinking ideas and solutions? I'm not holding out hope.

Two items:

a) Using a similar name redirect puts you right up there with spammers and phishers. That's approaching the only crime that I'd still support the death penalty for. Can you tell I work in IT?

b) Never, never bring up someones children or their employment in ANY discussion, online or not. It's verging on behavior that even I would recommend to the police for investigation.

Please, try to keep it clean folks.