Monday, December 11, 2006

What Are The BCSE Hiding?

This is the second story published today, so don't miss the other one. This is just a quickie.

We've previously discussed the BCSE's attempts to smear me, and how this back-fired (one, two, three).

If you've read the third link above, then you'll know that the BCSE's claim on its website that I have never approached them prior to publication in order to check facts is also false. In that story, you can read for yourself the e-mails I sent to BCSE chairman Mikey Brass in order to get his side of the story before going public. Brass chose to entirely ignore my questions about the BCSE's hypocritical stance on copyright.

But, accurate, verifiable statements about those they disagree with aren't the BCSE's forté, as we've seen. I've said before, though, that I don't want to point out all the BCSE's errors, as it would involve giving more publicity to allegations that just don't deserve the light of day. My approach has instead been to show the BCSE's general unreliability and agenda.
(Though here's a little fact-let if you wanted another one - the BCSE's section on me claims that I'm 28 years old, but gives you no way of verifying that claim... and in fact, I'm not. I wasn't when they put it up, and I'm not now either).

Well, let's come back to the point. Today I am making my question to the BCSE public. I have previously asked Mikey Brass, BCSE chairman, to provide me with his comments on this issue via e-mail - but he's ignored me. So, I'll put it here where everyone can see it. Here it is:

Dear BCSE,

I know that a certain UK university has threatened you with legal action over (now withdrawn) parts of your website.

Would you care to give me your comments before I publish the (already written) article about it? Obviously, I will be suggesting that this is pretty damning as far as your credibility goes. What are the facts according to the BCSE, please?

I will be pointing out that you were not willing to stand behind your own article when the solicitors called round - and that if you're not willing to stand behind your own articles, then why should anyone else take them seriously?

Also, I would like to draw attention to some statements on your "Contacts" page ( There, it says that "any letter threatening legal action WILL BE PUBLISHED. Do not under any circumstances contact this e-mail address with legal threats containing demands that correspondence be kept private. By contacting the above e-mail address, you are agreeing to these terms & conditions. If you do not agree with them - then DO NOT GET IN CONTACT."

Now you have received a communication threatening legal action. Why haven't you published the letters concerned on your website? I would suggest that the paragraph quoted above is just an attempt to bully your opponents into silence. But like the school bully when a real authority comes along, though, you slink away quietly. Why aren't you being true to your word? Isn't this more evidence that you can't be trusted? Isn't it true that if you posted the university's letter, it'd make you look bad? What does "WILL BE PUBLISHED" actually mean?

If the BCSE do decide to reply, then I'd ask them to reply from an official address. Some of the BCSE's members or supporters have taken to sending me abusive e-mails in the past, and I've blocked them. So if the BCSE want the message to get through, they need to send it from

David Anderson
bcse-blog at dw-perspective dot org dot uk

No comments: