From webstump at ..iark.greenend.org.uk Wed Jul 15 11:02:45 2026 Return-path: To: hex at ..seen.ac.am Subject: Re: Re: White British Man References: <1132qrd$1if8$1@solani.org> In-Reply-To: Reply-To: matthewv+ulmtestmod at ..riolis.greenend.org.uk Errors-To: webstump+ulm-bounces at ..iark.greenend.org.uk X-Webstump-Event: [178410451219952] reject abuse Message-Id: From: webstump+ulm-bounces at ..iark.greenend.org.uk Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 11:02:43 +0100 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 The post that you submitted to uk.legal.moderated has been rejected by a moderator. Your message appears to the moderator to be abusive or hurtful to another contributor. The group charter and moderation policy can be found at https://uklegal.weebly.com/ Disputed moderation decisions can be discussed in the newsgroup uk.net.news.moderation ============================================ Full text of your message follows > From webstump@chiark.greenend.org.uk Wed Jul 15 09:35:12 2026 > Return-path: > Envelope-to: webstump+?@slimy.greenend.org.uk > Authentication-Results: mailhub-cam-d.mythic-beasts.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=uni-berlin.de; dkim=pass header.d=uni-berlin.de header.s=fub01 header.a=rsa-sha256 > X-STUMP-Warning-0: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-1: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-2: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-3: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uni-berlin.de; s=fub01; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Mime-Version:References:Message-ID:Date:Subject:From:To:From: Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:In-Reply-To: References; bh=Ro8LniVz+TvN4LpPvxp7jag9ZiQjSMis/9TBZaMDfnM=; t=1784104506; x=1784709306; b=h/3vkZqkE2/YHUZzdpFudPKb8wAdnbZeHmIijsWP7G/2/eV9jSJKCcLTlv5/F t7m2+MwhjNHkPN > From: Norman Wells > Newsgroups: uk.legal.moderated > Subject: Re: White British Man > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 09:35:04 +0100 > Message-ID: > References: > > <1132qrd$1if8$1@solani.org> > > > > > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > X-Orig-X-Trace: individual.net /JLMOR4PFXt+5xn06KDdrw4H6sbUF2nVTkyNq6QM9pNJXOps8+ > Cancel-Lock: sha1:T8koNQfE0kfqEHCetvlSgjrMU5I= sha256:3TjO4KBlLIUm9Q3AQ2ePFD5mAQJ4QvvEska0ixA7iD0= > User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird > Content-Language: en-GB > X-Originating-IP: 130.133.4.5 > X-ZEDAT-Hint: RO > X-Mythic-Source-External: YES > X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: 54 > X-Spam-Status: No, score=5.4 > Delivered-To: usenet-uk-legal-moderated@usenet.org.uk > X-BlackCat-To: usenet-uk-legal-moderated@usenet.org.uk > X-Mythic-Originator: uid-1081-on-lynx.mythic-beasts.com > X-STUMP-Warning-4: Unfolded headers Received: Received: Received: Received: Authentication-Results: Received: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: > > On 15/07/2026 09:05, The Todal wrote: > > On 14/07/2026 14:42, Norman Wells wrote: > >> On 14/07/2026 13:49, The Todal wrote: > >>> On 14/07/2026 08:55, Norman Wells wrote: > >>>> On 14/07/2026 08:12, The Todal wrote: > >>>>> On 13/07/2026 20:36, Norman Wells wrote: > >>>>>> On 13/07/2026 19:58, The Todal wrote: > >>>>>>> On 13/07/2026 16:45, Norman Wells wrote: > >>>>>>>> On 13/07/2026 15:19, The Todal wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Apologies - yes, people do need to be reminded that Tommy, aka > >>>>>>>>> Yaxley- Lennon, does have a criminal past but you can only find > >>>>>>>>> it by searching for Yaxley-Lennon. I suppose he hopes to > >>>>>>>>> cleanse his reputation by adopting the new name. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Care to tell us why you use a pseudonym here? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I have been in Usenet for decades and there were times when > >>>>>>> malevolent individuals amused themselves by doxing others, or by > >>>>>>> threatening to go to their place of work and bash them up. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I didn't want the world of usenet to collide with my job or to > >>>>>>> upset my colleagues or clients. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> And I expressed some opinions in usenet, occasionally, that might > >>>>>>> have surprised or annoyed certain very conservative clients had > >>>>>>> they known that I was the author. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Everything is different now, but it is actually worse than > >>>>>>> before. If you are standing for election as an MP or councillor, > >>>>>>> your political enemies will carefully examine everything you have > >>>>>>> ever posted to Twitter or Instagram or (more rarely) Usenet and > >>>>>>> quote it to show that you are racist or a supporter of terrorists > >>>>>>> or a possible paedophile or you have contradicted the wise > >>>>>>> opinions of your party leader. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> So, why are you now attacking such behaviour by Yaxley-Lennon who > >>>>>> seems to have done much the same? > >>>>> > >>>>> He hasn't done "much the same" - he is a demagogue who tries to > >>>>> recruit gullible followers and attempts rather ineffectually to > >>>>> conceal his criminal past. > >>>> > >>>> So, you disagree with him.  Fair enough, and maybe you haven't done > >>>> that exactly, though you have yourself tried to conceal your past > >>>> views and activities, on your own admission, by the use of your > >>>> pseudonym, just as you say he did. > >>>> > >>>> I'm struggling to see any real difference between the two of you on > >>>> that. > >>>> > >>>>> It is quite likely that the sort of people who admire Tommy > >>>>> Robinson are too stupid to check the past history of Yaxley-Lennon. > >>>> > >>>> Oh, by a bit of doxxing then, just as you thought unacceptable above! > >>>> > >>>> Is there any real reason why you continue to use your pseudonym when > >>>> all the justifications you make above are well in the past? > >>> > >>> Is there any real reason why you feel the need to establish my true > >>> name and identity? > >> > >> No, I'm not even trying.  What I'm interested in is why you seek to > >> conceal it when none of the 'reasons' you've given apply now or even > >> have for a long time.  And in why you rather inconsistently criticise > >> others for attempting, perhaps less successfully, to do just the same. > > > > The only person I have "criticised" is Tommy Robinson, the convicted > > criminal who wants to lead an army of blackshirts to reclaim the nation > > for white bigots. > > So, fair enough, you disagree with him. We weren't considering his > views, though, but your criticism of his use of a pseudonym, just as you > do for much the same reasons that he does. You both want (or wanted) to > conceal activities or aspects of your past, yet you don't seem able to > accept the obvious similarity between you. > > > What I'm interested in is why you are keen to defend him. Is this a > > kneejerk response on your part, to rise to the defence of anyone who can > > claim to be a man of the people facing censorship of his views? > > I'm not defending anyone. I'm just querying your inconsistency and > perhaps hypocrisy. > > > And why do you believe that by posting as Norman Wells you fulfill all > > reasonable expectations from everyone else and that you show yourself to > > be honest and candid, merely by using a name that we are expected to > > believe is your real name? > > > > Would you like to go further and supply your national insurance number > > and passport number, perhaps? Would that make your opinions more reliable? > > I doubt it. Here, we are just what we write. Names, numbers, alleged > personal achievements and brilliance count for nothing. No-one ever > knows the truth so it's pointless asking for them. > > > If I now declare that my "real" name is Norman Conquest, does that put > > your mind at rest?  Feel free to call me Norman Conquest from now on. > > Then why don't you post under that name? Are you still trying to > conceal and deceive? > > >>> Do you imagine you are performing a public service or are you just an > >>> inquisitive busybody in search of amusement? > >> > >> Why is any of us here? > > > > I think you hope to provide well-meaning advice to other readers. And to > > debate important issues of the day. And to defeat your opponents. > > > > Did I omit anything? > > Why anyone is here is a personal thing that can't be verified. We are > just what we write. > > > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEfWu6wfyjzX88oocanSrwpvmn4x4FAmpXWsMACgkQnSrwpvmn 4x4tGggAgDR5LC5IfcFO8MtCqbTYzoS2hr0osqknL/kR+Crf6nNdF2QxqBMQnv7n gVsXl3DieYSw7LDhf1rE2Y2hyjz/haDmPdMXyq7JMW2azilhN+i94hQWm71pHuKh jOQlCutPDR3ceicpjr6J+OZg4KBp6hn4c/cIFIvc/O0EqZNkH+OepXrP2ZW8ZYWx Mugm36RKRn/VCZUEZzBtP1fHBlDgDwrUEbIrl/Yq/Edca1qFCGnwjxzzgMsvB9PD xcez42QKUv4VB0bnwJA3bE1r1RSh82gcnXVQVcyilXCadaeX3IetVOFNMVcyRvuZ 4TO/UAoGnsFYD2miT5cDrDK8eQ8v7w== =V0XD -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----