Re: Truce Huddle: Does Anybody Else Think "Lucy" Is An Agenda Puppet?

Shrike wrote:
On Mar 18, 5:30 pm, lucy <lucym...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 18 Mar, 13:41, Shrike <hauntedri...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Mar 18, 12:23 pm, Evans <dark.jira...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 17, 7:15 pm, Loki <hauntedri...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Is it just me or is there something fishy about this new arrival
"Lucy"?
Take a look at her posts and short posting history.
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en&enc_user=kJ8S6BYAAAAYo3...
For me the question is, is she linked to Jade Goodey or Max Clifford?
I wouldn't be surprised if her IP trail led back to MC's office. You
read about this sort of thing all the time in Private Eye, where
they've managed to trace flattering newsgroup posts and Amazon reviews
back to govt PR offices and publishing companies with vested business
interests.
Interesting. Have you any examples of these posts or false positive
reviews? I once saw an publisher review his own collection on Amazon
once but thats about it.
If you read the magazine regularly you'll know that they often feature
stories where (for example) somebody working in the head office of the
Tories or New Labour is linked to a fake online review / comment /
criticism which purports to be made by a member of the general public.
It's just another tool in the PR workbox.
In the Literary Review section they occasionally feature news items
about authors or publishers tinkering with online reviews and
suchlike, either to puff their own projects or to disparage those of a
rival. Indeed, I know one small press publisher who openly canvassed
several people (myself included) to vote for and positively review a
book of theirs few if any of us had actually read. All manner of
string-pulling goes on.
A classic ruse is to post a flattering Amazon review and then get
people to vote it as useful so that it turns up at the top of the pile
when idly browsing customers contemplate buying the book. Similarly
they'll co-ordinate an avalanche of negative votes on a review which
fails to praise the book. Never having sold on Amazon I'm just an
impartial bystander but I know that this cynical guerrilla marketing
is commonplace and widespread. Indeed, root around in any book or
author related discussion forum and you'll almost certainly find
reference to such tactics.
By the same token usenet is open to abuse from people with vested
interests. What's more, the tinkerers will always be anonymous sock
puppets ('agenda puppet' is actually a much better term because they
only have one rasion d'etre) because they'd be horriby humiliated if
they attempted to oppose any criticism in person. No famous person in
his or her right mind would post in usenet under their real name - or
rather, extremely few would - but the notion that they wouldn't want
to comment using a pseud is preposterous. Of course they would, they
are human like the rest of us, and hold have equally valid views. But
it becomes a problem when they start trying to tinker with reputations
and reviews while pretending to be an innocent, independent member of
the public.
To return to Max Clifford. I'd never viewed his Wiki page before
yesterday, nor Jade Goody's, but a cursory glance over both suggests
to me that they've been authored in a biased fashion, as other people
on Wikipedia appear to have suggested. Now, bearing in mind he is a
publicist.......nudge nudge, no smoke without fire etc etc.
Of course, people are free to pretend that they can see nothing fishy
in these Wiki entries nor in "Lucy's" sudden appearance, but it seems
far ore likely that they are taking up a ridiculous contrary stance
just because it's me who has pointed to the smoking gun. As I said
earlier, folk like Spud, Lawro, Plowman and Hopeless would eagerly
leap into bed with Gary Glitter if they thought it would somehow spite
me, so depraved are their morals.
Now, that's my one post of the day on this very silly affair. I
couldn't care less what those idiots think but I replied to you
because you asked a sensible question in a relatively civil fashion.
To my mind there's something nauseating in the tabloid deification of
Jade Goody, just as there's something little bit fishy with certain
Wiki entries and "Lucy's" sudden arrival, and I suspect string-pulling
and entry tampering. However, it's no big deal, I may be wrong, and
what's more, I really don't care what other people claim to believe
because I can think for myself.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
It would appear you can't think for yourself at all, not one person
has come forward to back up your claim I work for Jade or Clifford. It
seems many here think you are a bit strange, I for one can't think for
a minute you work for Private Eye, perhaps you do or perhaps you don't
but your claims are weird and border on paranoia. If it's no *big
deal* why don't you just admit you are wrong? I don't work for either
of them and you've jumped the gun when judging me?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It isn't a claim, you silly mad woman. It is a speculation.


You're calling her silly and mad?? You make a new thread accusing her of being some undercover agent for jade goody - you are certifiable barker. Don't come here making out it's a band of "malcontent's" out to get you , on your own you have just tried to hassle a poster off here , emailing Private Eye? you nutter barker. I note nobody - not one - supports your stance on this.

Funny how lucy got the measure of you straight away - not a word needed form me !
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Today
    ... So Traveling Ray ... You can only say you read the review. ... being dishonest like the way Josh quoted Barbara Bush out of context ... As exact equals to his posts, ...
    (misc.writing)
  • Re: LA MARZOCCO GS/3 BRAND NEW -- $6,010.00
    ... AND any of your links in your review to my ebay store are ALL killed! ... OK dave I will not post anything with links to that eBay review. ... No. please see above -- the bogus gaggia listing AND your bogus ... mention of any of my posts, it is all back on again. ...
    (alt.coffee)
  • @@@ OTIS BROWN WARNING @@@
    ... Before you consider paying attention to anything that Otis Brown ... I invite you to review all of his previous ... If you can find a shred of evidence or scientifically accepted proof ... Otis's posts tend to fall into the category of anecdotal: ...
    (sci.med.vision)
  • +++ OTIS BROWN WARNING +++
    ... Before you consider paying attention to anything that Otis Brown ... I invite you to review all of his previous ... If you can find a shred of evidence or scientifically accepted proof ... Otis's posts tend to fall into the category of anecdotal: ...
    (sci.med.vision)
  • ### OTIS BROWN WARNING ###
    ... Before you consider paying attention to anything that Otis Brown ... I invite you to review all of his previous ... If you can find a shred of evidence or scientifically accepted proof ... Otis's posts tend to fall into the category of anecdotal: ...
    (sci.med.vision)
Loading