It’s an interesting phenomenon: as the core group of supporters of the Hampstead SRA hoax diminishes, their propensity to claim that anybody who believes differently is a “Hoaxtead troll” increases.
What exactly is a Hoaxtead troll?
The definition seems to differ depending on who makes the claim. In general, it seems that to attain the coveted title of Hoaxtead troll, all that is necessary is to question the word of those who promote the Hampstead hoax.
This has led to some amusing situations, such as the accusation yesterday that a person who has loyally believed in almost every other conspiracy theory that comes down the pike is in fact a Hoaxtead troll.
Poor Kimberley, all she did was question the actions of Abe and Ella. We don’t know whether she believes that children were abused in a Satanic cult, or babies served for lunch at McDonald’s, but she has dared to question the orthodoxy as upheld by Angela, and so she must be banned from the herd.
Kimberley’s mind has been polluted with impure thoughts. She is now a Hoaxtead troll.
Another facet of the ongoing troll hunt is the constant assumption that Hoaxtead trolls are everywhere. For example, during yesterday’s “yellow vets” march, Eddie Isok confronted some random woman and demanded to know whether she was associated with Hoaxtead Research.
We can only imagine what she must’ve thought. “What kind of research? I thought you lot were marching for Brexit or something. Have I got the wrong parade?”
Given those involved, it probably shouldn’t surprise us that the search for the elusive yet omnipresent Hoaxtead troll has descended into a virtual witch-hunt. It has reached ludicrous proportions over the past few months, which we take as an indication that this blog has become the virtual bogeyman of the hoax-pushers.
In a recent Andy Devine video, he accused members of the White Pendragons of pushing Hoaxtead’s agenda, and of “using Hoaxtead Research evidence” against him.
The White Pendragon/Hoaxtead link strikes us as hilariously improbable, but we have to say that we are curious about exactly what evidence Devine believes we have against him. If it’s anything truly juicy, could he please let us know? Thanks awfully.
Another manifestation of Hoaxtead paranoia is this conversation between Andy and Angela, who seem to think that the author of BarthsNotes, an excellent blog in its own right, is run by EC:
It’s a flattering thought, but it’s entirely untrue. Many bloggers oppose the Hampstead SRA hoax, not just us.
Nevertheless, if there’s one word that seems to be on the hoaxers’ lips these days, it’s Hoaxtead. Apparently we’ve become something of an obsession for them, which is probably less a reflection of any power we might actually wield and more about the hoaxers’ own misguided belief that their actions are subject to constant scrutiny by the powers that be.
Another factor: Sabine McNeill’s recent sentencing seems to have them panicked, and now they’re seeing us around every corner.
Paradoxically, we’ve observed a sort of hoaxers’ whistling in the dark: another manifestation of Hoaxtead phobia seems to be desperate attempts to diminish the importance or impact of this blog by claiming, for example, that all of our comments are written by one person, or that all alleged Hoaxtead trolls are actually multiple socks of a single person.
Strangely, we’ve heard both arguments from the same people. They simultaneously claim that we are everywhere and constantly trolling them, and that we are only really one or two people. They don’t seem to recognise any contradiction in this stance.
However, both contentions betray the same fear: that those who oppose the Hampstead hoax are now much larger in number than those who promote it. And in that, the hoaxers are quite correct.