On flame wars and ‘Hoaxtead trolls’

In the four years that this blog has been online, we’ve occasionally found our name wrongly associated with activities that we didn’t commit and don’t endorse.

An extreme example would be John Paterson’s claim that someone “from Hoaxtead” punched him outside Southwark Crown Court during Sabine’s trial, and his subsequent barrage of threats and demands that we “turn over” this alleged person or face dire consequences.

Monday’s Paterson threat

It should go without saying that neither Scarlet Scoop nor El Coyote commands some sort of goon squad which runs about the city punching people, but there has been no convincing Paterson of this. (Also, as far as I’m aware, George Dufort is an imaginary character, but whatever.)

We expect this sort of thing from some of the more aggressive Hampstead hoax aficionados. What we could not have predicted, though, is that a war would break out between two relatively friendly factions, and that we would somehow find ourselves dumped into the middle of it.

What is a ‘Hoaxtead troll’?

Recently an ugly situation has blown up on YouTube, in which “Hoaxtead” has been repeatedly invoked.

I’ll be very honest: I don’t know how the situation started, I don’t know who said what to whom or in what order, and I don’t know the current state of affairs. I have neither the time nor the interest to watch flame wars play out in real time, as (believe it or not) I have a life away from the internet.

But I do know that people seem to be lobbing nasty threats and allegations and counter-threats and counter-allegations back and forth, and that somehow, yet again, it’s being blamed on Hoaxtead Research.

I understand that some of the people on one side of the battle are folk who read and sometimes comment on the blog, and I want to make something abundantly clear: Once a person clicks away from here, they don’t represent Hoaxtead Research in any way.

By way of analogy, I sometimes read the Times or the Daily Mail, and I might comment in their comments sections, or even cite certain articles here, but that doesn’t make me a “Times blogger” or a “Daily Mail blogger”.

Our core values as a blog

The current situation raises a bigger issue than that, though.

When she started this blog, Scarlet initiated a strict “no threats” policy, which has always been a core value. As the main writer here, I have always tried to promote similar values: the importance of intelligent enquiry and legitimate criticism; compassion for others; tolerance for differences of opinion; intolerance of hateful behaviour; and a sense of humour about it all.

I realise that not everybody shares these values in equal measure, and that disagreements on the internet can devolve into threats and infantile name-calling before one can say “WTF?”

And when our readers click away from this blog, they are no longer bound by whatever rules or guidelines we might impose here. I’d like to think we lead by example, but the sad truth is that some people are more interested in scoring points or drawing (metaphorical) blood than in impassioned but reasoned argument.

Although I believe every person is responsible for their own behaviour, I also recognise that many people have personal issues, such as mental health difficulties, which call for compassion. The thought of exploiting another person’s mental health problems in an effort to “get to” them is frankly abhorrent to me.

Long-time readers might recall a few occasions on which I’ve removed posts at the request of certain people’s family members, who expressed concern that the posts might be making their love ones’ conditions worse. On other occasions, I’ve refrained from writing about certain individuals, or redacted others’ names, because I felt that naming them might cause serious damage to their mental health.

That doesn’t make me a saint; it just means I feel a sense of responsibility and restraint, and I try to make the right judgement calls. I don’t always get it right, but I try to keep the core values of this blog in mind whenever I sit down to write a post.

‘You’re a cult!’ versus ‘Control your people!’

A frequent accusation from those who wish we would just shut up and go away is that Hoaxtead Research is a “cult”. Those who follow us, like our posts, or comment here are labelled “gang-stalkers”, which apparently is conspiranoid code for “people who point out our poor behaviour”.

Hey Cat, you’re welcome for the views

I note a few names in the above which have only ever been named on this blog in positive or at worst, neutral terms; and at least one person whose name was explicitly banned from the comments section for a year or longer. But hey ho, apparently truth is the first casualty of trooferism.

Still, that does not stop some people from making similar extravagant claims, and implying that those who read this blog think and act in lockstep. The implication is that this “cult” acts unquestioningly on my direction, and that I somehow mobilise the troops to do my bidding on a whim, à la Dr Evil.

Perhaps this idea arose because our comments section is relatively flame-free, and our commenters almost always treat one another with respect. Sure there have been a few notable exceptions, but in contrast with some discussion boards, things at HR are generally pretty harmonious.

Or perhaps the online UK troofer community just isn’t used to having their actions scrutinised, and they don’t much care for it. Hard to say, really.

In contrast to the “Hoaxtead cult” accusation, I’ve received messages lately from people who are alarmed by the current YouTube situation, urging me to “control my people”. I suppose I could do this, if they really were a bunch of brain-dead zombies—a cult, if you will.

The people who read and comment here aren’t cult members. And like it or not, I cannot control their behaviour. Here on the blog, I can delete comments, but as soon as a person clicks away from this blog, they are on their own.

My best current guess is that a relatively small group of people are involved in the current scrap, and as far as I can make out, those on both sides appear to be out for blood.

I wish it were otherwise. I wish all concerned would grow the fuck up and start acting like reasonable adults. I wish they would agree to disagree on whatever it was that set this thing off in the first place.

I’m deliberately not naming any of the combatants, but I will say that I know that some of them are capable of much better than this. I wish they would show it.

Hoaxtead Research: Flame wars, not in our name

35 thoughts on “On flame wars and ‘Hoaxtead trolls’

  1. Hur Hur Hur. It all started when Abe Christie was in Brian Harvey’s (ex backing singer from Boyzone) chat trying to get him to promote Hemp and Hampstead SRA. A couple of Hoaxtead blog readers / commentors (Flo Destroyer / Lady Sparkle) intervened in live chat to alert Brian Harvey. Brian got more confused than usual and instead of kicking Abe out, he picked a fight with Flo and Sparkle. Well, things escalated very quickly. I’ll not entertain you with exactly what happened but it soon descended into bananas, plastic dog dirt and large black puddings being wielded. Surreal is understating it. When it’s over we can establish exactly what it was about and it may make for an interesting blog article.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I was totally unaware of what was going on but had a look and tbh thought both sides of the argument deserved each other. If I had any sympathy it was with Cips Clips who was apparently being threatened with being reported to the dole office. Crap thing to do to him imo, especially in this day and age, as the authorities are so nasty to people. If you want to report someone for something go and find someone well off who’s cheating on their taxes and dob them in please. They’re the ones who deserve it.

      ‘When it’s over we can establish exactly what it was about and it may make for an interesting blog article.’ It already has made an interesting blog article but for all the wrong reasons.

      Liked by 1 person

      • He bragged about reporting Lady Sparkle to the Police and was actively attempting to dox me by sharing content alleging I was a paedophile. If you haven’t done the research and aren’t aware of the full facts you may look silly jumping to conclusions. Grassing a Grass is perfectly appropriate when they dox people and waste police time with their malicious lies.

        Like

      • Did you miss the bit where someone who made obscene comments while at work and wearing his work uniform was reported to his employers ? It’s a nasty game and the stupid usually come off worse.

        Like

      • I really don’t want to get involved in the YT bickering but I have to say that there have in my view been inappropriate comments on both sides. And some of Cips Clip’s comments have bordered on sexual harassment. I’m just listening to a video he’s put up today in which he refers to Sparkle’s “dried up cunt”. He’s also just threatened that she and others he doesn’t like will “end up in prison or a pile of blood or both “.

        Bottom line, though – the slanging match has nothing whatsoever to do with this blog. I’ve tried to assure him of that but he just blocks and deletes.

        Liked by 1 person

        • No. This blog has nothing to do with the case and Abraham’s latest attacks on people through Brian Harvey and Cips. This blog is purely about Karen’s ego and her attempt to promote her career as a novelist and screen writer. It’s the Karen Knows Best blog to promote her career and has ceased reporting on anything current as she rehashes 4 year old garbage inbetween emailing and skyping publishers and movie / TV executives. She’s setting up to make money and fame, and will fall to the curse. Karen’s just after the same dirty dollars Angie and Thomas Dunn chase. SICK.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Well she had me fooled. There I was thinking she was doing this for all the best reasons.

            Grobnob! You must be psychic to know all this. You been talking to Derek Acorah?

            Liked by 2 people

          • I’d check IP addresses and URLs. Not going to comment on individuals but back in the nineties, we had a saying on Compuserve: Always remember. You could be conversing with an intelligent dog and have no way of knowing.

            Not literally of course, it was a reminder that online personas could not be trusted.

            Liked by 2 people

          • Et tu, Grobnob? 😦

            Hope you’ve stirred up enough drama now and feel ready to move on to the next unsuspecting group. Adios, dude 🙂

            Liked by 1 person

          • Grobnob, maybe you can help me out. I can’t see the link to this blog’s PayPal/Patreon/GoFundMe page or to any site flogging Karen’s 20-year-old novels. Am I missing something?

            Liked by 1 person

          • “I never said it was of no impact to people involved, but that it was a much smaller story in terms of the attention it garnered. Stop changing the goalposts and redefing what ‘massively viral’ means. It was a small story, even at it’s height. It was never viral, never massive and is almost completely unknown outside of a very small number of people. If you cunts want to insist it was a globally enormous story that rivalled someone calling trump’s daughter a c### or a halfwit finding a body in a suicide wood then go ahead and delude yourselves. That doesn’t change the fact that its still a minor story that’s never been anywhere approaching ‘massively viral’. And having the gall to attempt to tell ec that translates to me slating this blog ? Why dont you just call me a baby eating nonce ? The story is a small one, it was featured briefly in the media and since then has faded into a small cult of obsessive devil hunting slanderers and those trying to curtail them. You still haven’t shown me any tangible evidence of it being ‘massively viral’ and you obviously can’t or you would have done. You should either back your claim up, or shut up. 160 followers on here, is that viral ? Or reflective of the fact that only a few people actually care? I’m afraid it is a minor story on the periphery of news, fake or otherwise. Prove me wrong with facts, not opinions. Just because its important to you doesn’t mean it was a major event of global importance. It was a pair of idiots blackmailing an ex over child custody that got hijacked by demented lunatics as some crusade against child eating Satanists. Practically nobody has heard of it. It’s no sleight on anyone here that its a small story, just a statistical fact. Now stop acting like pissy teenagers about it all.”

            ~ Grobnob’s views on the Hampstead case, 28.06.18

            Like

          • Tbh, that sounds remarkably like something similar to someone’s written view on YouTube. No point linking to it or naming the individual’s sick account, I thought at first it was a former poster here who was & is very bitter on being called out on her behaviour. It seems I was wrong, for once in my life. 😉

            But hey, no point in starting flame wars here, I think we all are a bit more mature than that. When someone has been more than happy contributing to a blog for so long, then suddenly turns against it is puzzling to say the least. Anyway, bit my monkey, not my circus.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Hopefully Karen can clarify the issue today for us. I do hope no-one is writing anything about the Hampstead case that has monetary value attached to it. I also notice that comments on the latest blog entry have vanished from last night. These were in reference to Grob backtracking from his comments, which I have been led to believe, are the same as before.

            Like

          • Sanchez, as we’ve stated on more occasions than I care to remember, this blog has never asked for donations and never will. It was one of my rules when I set it up. Neither EC nor I have made a penny from the Hampstead case and I’m not sure why you would think we have.

            And no comments have been taken down. Happy to clear that up for you.

            Liked by 3 people

          • So let me get this right Scarlet: that no-one associated with this blog is writing or planning on writing a book, screen play, or assisting in the writing of a book or screen play. Is this correct? I have never said anyone is making money directly from the Hoaxtead blog.

            Like

          • Nope. Have not done so, and no plans to do any of the above. If I were asked, I might consider it, but any proceeds would be donated to those whose lives have been financially affected by this hoax. However, that has not happened, so it’s really a moot point, isn’t it?

            Liked by 2 people

  2. well said E.C I agree it needs to stop were is this all going and what’s it going to achieve nothing. It’s getting like name calling in the playground. From what I seen people are responding to things being said on them in videos which they do have a right to reply it’s how you conduct yourself in the reply that makes you know better than the person.it needs to stop it’s not going to go anywhere other than back and fourth. As for hoaxtead being a cult or government agents we know were that originated from. JP an Eddie and Andy and Jesus and a few others since then it’s spread throughout the so called truther community. so now any time there’s a disagreement let’s blame hoaxtead it must be them there paid to do this by the government and there a cult it’s absolutely absurd. it does need to stop an people have the right to respond and defend negative stuff said about them. But it’s how you conduct your response that makes you know better than them.

    Liked by 2 people

    • ‘It’s getting like name calling in the playground.’

      It’s much worse than that. Name calling in the playground might make a few people cry but they’ll recover and won’t end up in a mental hospital.

      People need to stop feeding BH’s paranoia.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Agreed it has stretched a bit further than playground stuff with the doxing and the involvement of police. But none of them seem to realize it’s going no we’re other than people gonna get nicked when they step over the mark of laws of this country. Me I’m having nothing to do with it. I’ve asked who from hoaxtead have been attacking who I got no reply so that’s it far as I’m concerned.

        Like

  3. Well I’m no longer at GCHQ after the yearly stock take uncovered a discrepancy in the feather duster cupboard. I believe I was set-up. Probably by the Illuminati or some other jealous Hoaxtead agent.
    So I’m now a free-lance agent available for hire.
    I’ll do anything- even wash cars at the 77 Cook Road council car-park (if King Wanoa is reading this). I have references.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Can I be cashier Sam? I reckon I could make big tips at that car park!

    As for the YouTube racket, it will die down. As far as I can see some are looking for subs as they do mention them all the time, one person trying to get a court case together which of course will never happen as the Statute of Limitations has run out & another who has turned on Hoaxtead for some unknown reason.

    The other parties have at all times reiterated that they are independent, they post here occasionally which is true so why the blog is being pulled into it is beyond me. That’s my take on it anyway.

    Liked by 3 people

  5. I think as long as there is ppl on YouTube who support and believe the Hampstead cover up this blog will always be at loggerheads with someone, I mean we are calling them dirty rotten liars lol they not gonna be our bff’s. If you carry on dishing the dirt hopefully the believers will dwindle down to Andy Devine and his dog but maybe we could turn his dog with a few home truths on his owner.

    Liked by 2 people

      • I’d argue it’s quite simple to see how you’ve the blog is roped into it. When you have people that “follow the dots” to create large conspiracies from “facts” and preach this to “sheeple” then you invariably get pulled into it, much like a Rebellion ship to a Death Star (May the 4th reference!)

        Ergo – one person may have said “I read a blog” and they know this blog, because clearly it is the only one in existence, therefore that person is part of this blog, which we all know is a cult (in fairness, I’ve been called a cult many times. Well I think that’s what they said). The cult, by definition, acts as a whole entity, much like God, who is a singular entity yet consists of three parts, and therefore anyone who says blog must be part of Hoaxtead. Just link the dots and facts together, right?

        Personally, just because I read the blog, I get upset being called a Satanist. Mostly because it isn’t possible, as to believe in Satan (their version of Satanist) means I also have to acknowledge that God exists. Which is odd because I don’t believe in their little made up friend whom they worship.

        Like

  6. I’ve been having a look at all of everything and having a massive think…I remain stunned and amazed which was my initial reaction when I first alighted upon the fracas/flame war…I absolutely sympathise with those who have been lied about by a dreadful troll i.e. the fella who reckons he’s qualified to be a tour guide of Glasgow – good luck to him, why not stand on a side street just off the main street of Glasgow city carrying a placard inviting all on a riveting tour of his beloved city under the guise of alerting tourists to his conspiratorial ‘da vinci’ themed strolls?

    If your comfort zone is ‘digital busking’ why wouldn’t you take your abuse of people’s naivete further by taking it on to the streets?

    Whilst I could make sense of him being a pathological liar and an unabashed opportunist and am aware of his multiple socks I could not make any sense of people who were apparently onboard with Hoaxtead’s message jumping on his lies and using them to further a hitherto unknown agenda.

    I don’t understand that at all. Aside from that…some commenters have attempted to extract a promise from El Coyote that she will never ever dare try and make money out of telling the story of what happened…why, how, what….huh?

    Who are those anonymous commenters telling anybody what they should or should not do…why are they trying to extract promises from any of us that we will not take this tale further especially with an expectation of earning money from it?

    My experience of this blog is one where I find it an incredible educational resource, the information within is vital to understanding the crazed and manic ill-percieved delusions and outright pathological lies of seriously disturbed individuals – Thank you Hoaxtead!

    And Yes…beyond a shadow of a doubt I will be using all that I have learnt here to highlight the perils of social media through writing opinion pieces or reports of what has occurred but without mentioning names…I even fancy creating a play for theatre …I have the title ready, it’s gonna be called “Behind a net curtain” and it will be starring an amalgamation of frootloops….whatcha gonna do? will you sue me for profiteering?

    Liked by 1 person

We welcome comments! House rules: no threats, no doxing, no naming protected witnesses, and stay civil to one another.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.