Following on from this post – ‘Eddie’ isn’t Cunliffe, but… – I have some questions for lprent:
- Do multiple people use the pseudonym ‘Eddie’ at The Standard?
- Are you aware of known commenters at The Standard who use multiple pseudonyms?
- Do people who comment under a pseudonym at The Standard post under a different identity (apart from Anthony Robins)?
- You claim the use of pseudonyms on blogs is an important part of the culture. If pseudonyms were misused would that affect the credibility of the culture?
UPDATE: so far he’s noticeably avoiding the questions despite being obviously aware of them, as he’s commented at The Standard:
[lprent: Want to be part of PG’s rather amusing kremlinology exercises? Or whales version of “funny”? Quite why they obsess about this site is beyond me. I blame myself for being nasty to them by telling them what I think. Oh dear. So cruel. (yeah right)]
I don’t obsess as much as lprent who usually jumps to the defence of his blog. Just holding to account.
Oh, and it’s kinda funny to hear him say this when he also obsesses so much about Whale Oil and Kiwiblog.
UPDATE 2: lprent has seen the questions, he has continued to fob them off at The Standard, and has chosen not to answer them. As David Cunliffe found out, not saying something can sometimes mean a lot. lprent chooses to remain silent rather than defend what must now be seen as the deliberate, dishonest and deceitful misuse of pseudonyms at The Standard.
And another commenter at The Standard has joined the conversation:
23 November 2012 at 6:39 pm
He seems to be under the impression that you owe him something, or indeed give a shit.
No, I don’t think lprent owes me anything. But I think he should give a shit about the many genuine users of pseudonyms on political blogs, especially at The Standard, whose integrity can be justifiably questioned when a major blog blatantly pisses on the principles of online pseudonyms.