I recently banned commenter “Charlie” for the suggestion that Queenslanders deserved to suffer from the floods because we didn’t build enough dams. Immediately, a new commenter “Henry Maltby” sprang to Charlie’s defence claiming, among other things to be a recent arrival in Queensland, considering study at UQ. The behavior patterns were suspicious enough for me to do an IP check that revealed, unsurprisingly, that Charlie and Maltby were the same person, with an address in Adelaide (I have my suspicions, as to who it is, but nothing definite). For any site-owners who don’t like abusive sockpuppeteers, the IP address to look for is 126.96.36.199.
Any sockpuppeteer is, by definition, a liar and fraud. But Charlie/Maltby also told numerous specific lies, and explicitly pretended to be two different people (rather than merely reappearing under a new name). And, as well as being a liar and fraud, s/he/it’s obviously a fool – too dumb even to spoof a fake IP address.
Update While Charlie/Maltby has been trolling here, Tim Curtin has been emailing me in an apparently civil fashion, and he sent me another email shortly after this was posted, admitting to it. It was, in any case, a very simple matter to check that he is using the same IP address as the sock puppets.
While this behavior is extreme, it’s impossible to be honest, of normal intelligence and an active delusionist. Anyone who pays even a little attention can see that people like Monckton and Plimer are frauds, who persist in the same claims despite having their errors pointed out. But anyone on the delusionist side who pointed this out (to the best of my knowledge, no-one has) would be expelled from the tribe. So, tacit acquiescence in fraud is the minimum requirement for participation.
A couple of qualifications are in order. First, people are complicated. Some who go along with intellectual dishonesty on topics central to their tribal identity may be more scrupulous in other respects. And the delusionist dominance of the right wing of politics and the media is such that many rank-and-file rightwingers accept delusionist views out of pure ignorance, having little exposure to anything us.
Finally, is there any value in exposing the fraudulence of someone writing under a pseudonym? Unless their real name is discovered and published, it can have no effect on their day-to-day life. But, from the viewpoint of readers and commenters here (assuming they don’t live in Adelaide themselves), knowing Charlie’s real name would make no difference. We’ve read the comments, noted that they are typical of the kind of thing written by delusionists in general, and now we know their author is a liar. So, farewell Charlie and thanks for your amusement value.