The banning of a hateful troll, why I did it

trollI don’t like banning people, but occasionally I have to.

The troll I have banned is known on various places by the pseudonym “dotcom”. He also goes by the name John Bond and uses the email [email protected] The email is live but I am unsure if John Bond is his real name, but pretty sure his first name is John from metadata of images and documents he has sent me. His ip address that he used was .

Progressively over the past few weeks “dotcom” has got worse and worse with his fixation on opposing marriage equality. His rants and ill informed debate about show more about his prejudices and self loathing than anything I have ever seen before.

On posts about marriage equality he launches into rants quoting disproven myths about gay sex, AIDS, HIV and the “gay lifestyle”.

The moderaters attempted to adjust his behaviour politely, but it made him worse, but now he was playing the victim, claiming that people were “trolling” his comments on my blog.

The final straws have come though. Firstly this comment on the blog post about Marriage Equality in France in response to reasoned debate by another commenter who was calling him on his bigotry: 

Okay. You pushed me beyond my limits. Alice. I just got in my car and went to the local public toilets, where two gay men are now lying and probably dying. Because of your interminable badgering of me, you drove my dislike of gays to where you set out for it to go. You drove me from disliking of you, to unbearable hatred of you. And I just took it out vicariously on two poor dirty public toilet dwellers loitering in my local public toilets without any condoms, promising bareback to me for free. You caused this Alice. You brought hatred upon not only yourself as a gay hugger, but on all gay people who have read this thread thus far.

Much and all as I like to see bigots, racists and other intolerant people mocked and ridiculed, that comment went beyond the pale. he has posted 502 comments on my blog, he will not ever post the 503rd.

He also posted this rant about being told off by moderators:

I do own what I say here, fucktard. You patronising cunt.

I don’t retaliate fuckwit, but making an exception with this post to the biggest idiot of all, the patronising cunt, Petal.. You don’t have to ban me retard. I already said I would go back to other sensible and less perverted blogs. Fuck your stupid perverted blog and its crazy perverted twisted and biased perverts who think it is normal to tell the whole world that they are dirty unprotected arse-fuckers of their wives. How dare people talk about their intimate sex lives with their own spouses like this, and think this is what sane people do. So-called moderators, my fucking arse. Filth mongers the lot of you.

You don’t have to Ban Button me. I’m gone, retards. But you will have to have the last say, anyway. You will not be able to resist. Won’t even have the decency to accept a resignation from me. Even mentally retarded control freaks to this peasant extent. Fuck you Petal, and fuck all who have to put up with you at your house, poor people. Fuck the Slater perverts house as well. Happy breakdowns Cam, you, the other patronising sick cunt. Bye now.

[And this is why we are about to have gay marriage fucking up our beautiful New Zealand – cos no-one can speak out against it.]

Now watch your comment numbers plummet again, as they did while I had a couple of days off. Idiots. Perverts.

Yeah, don’t let the door smack you in your precious little arse on the way out.

The second reason for his banning, as if I ever needed another one, was the fact he has been emailing other bloggers and nutting off at them about me, and demanding they de-link their sites to mine.

I gave him a place to debate, let him comment in the interests of freedom of speech and his repayment of that privilege is to attempt to shut me down?

It doesn’t work that way “dotcom”, and you are a nasty, vicious, hateful troll who needs to be outed.

If ever there was a time for Lily Allen’s song “Fuck You” it is now:


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • StacyMcNaught

    Haha, I have never bothered to listen to that song properly before. That is one catchy ass tune, and clearly rather fitting for the smoker of cocks that is/was dotcom.

  • Andy

    Not that I care much about it but quite frankly dot com is as much obsessed with gay marriage as you are with bashing Catholics.
    So what’s the difference between your obsession and his?

    • The difference is clear. WO has a blog, Dicktcom doesn’t. He can go start his own blog and take over 7 years to build up an audience after hours and hours of hard work if he wants to say what ever he likes. He wants WO’s audience and won’t play by the rules ( relaxed as they are )

      • grumpy

        May have taken 7 years ( and most time it is an awesome blog) but his obsession with poofterism and increasing intolerance of other opinions signals a future change for the worse.

        • His stats say otherwise Grumpy.

          • grumpy

            One of life’s mysteries – but maybe not.

            He has used poofter marriage shamelessly to build his hit rate up, even, we suspect, inventing phantom contributors to goad others.

            Would not be surprised if dotcom wasn’t one of them.


          • Moaning Greasy Flyblow

            alter egos to inflame and boost ratings. had crossed my mind but surely not ;)

          • grumpy

            I have been watching for some time and the conclusion is now inescapable.

          • Mitch82

            The reason Whale and the blog will survive and thrive is that he sees what Colin Craig, the Catholic Church and the US GOP stubbornly refuse to: conservatives are going to have to come to terms with gay marriage and accept it, or they’ll quite simply become relics of a bygone era.

            As far as the debate goes, it’s been a long time since there’s been any rational conversation. The anti side know they’ve lost. All of their arguments have been overwhelmingly debunked, and it’s devolved into the few committed morons like ‘dotcom’ flinging their feces through the monkey bars at the public.

          • LesleyNZ

            Of course this blog will survive – The Whale has revealed the real TRUTH in many stories and issues. That is why I read this blog. Dotcom’s standard of language in the above post would be enough for me to ban him, but then my standards are probably too “proper” these days. mitch22, I for one don’t care about “losing” as you put it. Let’s wait and see what the outcome is – time will tell. Am happy to be a relic of a bygone era. Doesn’t worry me. Going with the flow of popular opinion is easy – going against the tide never is. If you understands the heart/nature of mankind – nothing that happens here on earth is ever a surprise.

          • “phantom contributors”

            Do tell.

            No, don’t let that hang there.

            Time to back that up.

            Or time to retract it until you can.

          • There are no phantom contributors you idiot…try being me for a day, bet you expire from the effort. Ask Pete and Travis how much work I do, or Barnsley…loosen the grip on your cock, you are draining the blood from your brain

          • Well, Pete and Travis are just made up alter egos, so they’re going to agree with you, aren’t they? Plus we’re juniors and afraid of you. (Consistency in the accusation would be helpful)

          • grumpy

            Point to one, just one, issue where Pete and Travis hold a different view to the boss and I might listen to you.

          • You need to keep in mind that Travis and I are helping Cam out, and this isn’t our blog. We don’t get to decide the editorial direction of WOBH at all. On top of that, we’re taking the load off Cam by doing the non-opinion posts, like Face of the Day and Photo of the Day. We do the “fluff” so Cam can concentrate on the core business of this blog, just like Jittendra helped out before us.

            So you wouldn’t be judging the posts under my name. You would have to go into the comments.

            I am on record in the comments that I am very clearly uncomfortable with Cam’s crusade against teachers. Teachers Unions? Fine. But Teachers? Cam seems to have had a rough run himself. He’s married to a teacher mind you. Here’s a reveal – so am I – soon. I think there are mediocre teachers and bad teachers that need weeding out, so I do support any moves to get rid of bad teachers and, as a result, reward the good ones. I have two kids at primary and they’re doing fine in an environment that’s very community driven. The first newsletter of the year came out and for a school with only 450 odd kids, it has a full A4 page with all the extra-curricular sports options. These teachers are pouring lots of time into this school and “their” kids, and the whole “12 weeks of holiday” meme that keeps being bandied about is a pile of doodoos for most teachers. Apart from teachersrock and all his/”hers”/theirs alter egos’ unhelpful drive-by one liners, I frequently in agreement with their point of view when it pertains to teachers (but when it relates to teachers unions)

            So, is this sufficient, or do you need more, still? Like, I can phone you and we can have a chat? Whatever it takes for you to believe I am a distinct individual. If you are satisfied, can we drop this distraction now?

            As for Travis – who could possibly believe Cam would invent an alter ego that was that much work to maintain? All over the comment sections, all over Twitter harassing the pollies…

            In the words of the sage, John McEnroe, “You can’t be serious!”

          • grumpy

            That’s it??

            You don’t like the teacher unions but think Whale might be a bit tough on some individuals?

            I know you are individual persons, just how convenient that you all follow the “party line” on the subjects that matter.

            Makes poor old dotcom almost a martyr (like the other one).

          • Don’t shift the goal posts grumpy. If you don’t like the answer, man up and accept it.

            Are you serious or are you just trolling?

            Because how likely is it for Cam to ask for people to help out, two people who have been long term commenters on his blog step up, and somehow we are DISAGREE with major issues?

            That’s unlikely to happen.

            Ok. So we have had your slur that cam’s got pretend people dealt to. That’s progress.

            As for your silly need to see Trav or I post stuff that Cam doesn’t like – what planet are you on? This isn’t our blog!

          • Geez Lousie conspiracy theories much? I must be a made up wife also. I don’t agree with a lot of what he says but then again maybe that is WO adding a dose of realism to his phantom wife. I really don’t know where he finds the time to be me, Pete AND Travis as well as WO and the Editor of Truth as well as a husband, Father and son.

          • kehua

            Ahha dear SB, you are but a figment of his insatiable imagination, who else could endure such a complicated man ? haha

          • Oh my God you are right! He IS high maintenance and if I was real, surely I would have smothered him with a pillow by now? Since I am make believe I might as well be gorgeous, with a body like a super model ;)

          • BR

            I’ve said before that I don’t believe that Mr Slater believes what he posts about homo “marriage”. It is however good for the blog ratings and is guaranteed to attract attention and fuel debate.


          • Well I do, so too bad what you think

          • BR

            So why would a conservative blog owner promote an agenda that it is so blatantly of the left? The one and only thing the left are good at is the propagation of lies, deceit and propaganda.

            And you feel the need to join with them?


        • Ed Snack

          Perhaps we come here to marvel at the increasing signs of instability and desperation ? Train wrecks can be quite a fascination.

          • NZ went through the same all-heat-and-no-light process during the Homosexual Reform Legislation debate. There were people back then that thought it signaled the end of the world, and they’re still around today for round 2, so I guess it wasn’t as bad as they said it would be.

            If you’re ‘enjoying’ this, be sure to come back and check out the next debate:

            Same Sex Adoption and Same Sex Artificial Insemination.

          • grumpy

            Poofters already have same sex insemination, it’s just that their aim ain’t much good.

          • BR

            I still don’t believe that buggery should have ever been legalised.


        • 4077th

          And here it is…31 up votes…says it all really…

          • grumpy


    • Mitch82

      Whale’s focus on Catholics is based in fact. Dotcom’s obsession about gay marriage and AIDS has no basis in fact, reality or science.

      • Precisely…the Catholic Church HAS hidden and thus enabled child abuse for decades. Until they fess up instead of denying they did it they will continue to be a fit and proper target for ridicule.

    • Ronnie Chow

      The difference is that ‘Dotcom’ is a narcissistic sociopath , and Cameron is creating and reinforcing the argument , against strident opposition , that the Catholic Church hierarchy is , based on clear recorded evidence , an entirely pedophile organisation , which cannot logically be defended as legitimate or valid .

  • grumpy

    The real troll in all thatbwas that heterophobic hater “gayguy”.

    But you can hardly ban your alterego can you?

    This poofter marriage business has become an obsession with you and fucked up your judgement.

    • Wanna dance?

      • grumpy

        Not surprising.

      • Hazards001

        That’s interesting. I was aware Cam had access to my email address(I wasn’t when I used it or I’d have used a different one…too late now as you can check IP addresses as well) but not the mods. As my email addy is my real name I will no longer be posting on here.

        I have enjoyed being here but am not prepared to risk my livelihood or my families well being by being outed on a blog site. TC all…laters Haz.

        • Moaning Greasy Flyblow


      • Hazards001

        Nothing to say? Usually you can’t be shut up.

        • No, I’m done here. Unless you have something specific you want to bring up?

          • Hazards001

            Said it…but to expand…you’re pathetic…try me.

    • I think your grip is too tight…loosen it a bit, might get some blood to your little brain so you can actually think about what you are furiously one hand typing.

    • starboard

      agree . Gayfag would have to be a close second to dotty. Full of hatred that homosexual.

      • And yet LOTS of unnecessary personal abuse such as that is let go by this blog. No matter how many times you (plural) are encouraged to attack the issue and not the person, stupid things like “gayfag” just drags your own credibility into the gutter.

        And Cam’s policy is to allow it. So you can expose yourself exactly for the person you are.

        But going for a Mod’s jugular or inferring you’ve just offed two people in the local public toilets as a results of someone else’s comments — come on now, there have to be very few that think free speech has to include that sort of carry on.

        For the record: dotcom wasn’t banned when he wrote that diatribe about me. He wasn’t banned when he inferred he just mudered two people. He was banned because he went around other blogs asking them to remove all links to this blog. It may be asymmetric but who didn’t expect Cam to react to a proactive move to damage this blog?

        • starboard

          Just realise, a lot of my comments are tongue in cheek with a wink…Gayfag gets grief because he dishes out shit on non gays quite heavily he gets it in return as did that homo school teacher kosh..they cant help themselves and in return they are fair game.

          • Noted. We all have preferences. I got over all the bastardisations of people’s names years ago. Donkey, Hullun, Liarbor, etc – it detracts from the debate for me. But I know many like it. So… *shrug*

          • Gayguy

            I dish shit out on haters.

            And you are a hater, so I slap idiots like you around.

      • Gayguy

        Full of hatred for haters. Nothing but love for good decent people.

        • BJ

          You are the only one that uses the word h.t. here – and h.t. is the very last emotion a person experiences – so your vitriol says a lot. Love and h.t. can’t exist in a person at the same time – maybe a look in the mirror might help your confusion.

          • grumpy

            Not the only one, Whale does too. See his description of dotcom as “hateful”.
            Coincidence – much?

    • Gayguy

      Again with the lies.

      I have no desire to take any rights away from heterosexuals I challenge you to find a single case of me saying so.

  • cows4me

    I had to laugh that day, way to scared to post, get mauled to death. Anyhow he pissed me off also, accused me of saying things I never had about him, bit unstable if you ask me.

    • Yep, it is fine to have an opinion and to voice that forcefully, but being derogatory and just plain wrong and then acting all gay when called on it was pathetic.

  • Lion_ess

    I watched Dotcom for a few days on David Bain threads at Kiwiblog and thought he was obsessive. In saying that, there appeared to be a number of posters obsessing over there, because a month later, the same ones are still debating margaret’s glasses, etc.

    I watched the WO thread on Marriage Equality also that day, and my take was that Alice Nickenbocker was GayGuy and was trolling Dotcom. Two things occurred – firstly the thread comments quickly became not worth reading and secondly the reactions went over the top in terms of acceptability, in particular the reference to beating up gays in toilets or whatever it was, I didn’t stick around long enough to see the other comments referenced in this post.

    Dotcom apparently had the view (here and on Kiwiblog) that his high volume of comments somehow help the blog rating, when in fact they made thread comments not worth reading.

    • Alice wasn’t gayguy…i checked…

      • Moaning Greasy Flyblow

        a disturbing mental image…

    • unsol

      No idea on the GG or Alice thing but on the rest I agree. My PC time is limited so I always go for the education, welfare, transport, marriaqe equality & all child-related topics. As WO posts on so many varied & often interesting topics I have to pick & choose. Any time that the tone is lowered to the point where any attempt to have a rationale debate would be futile, I lose interest….and that says something as I like to have the last word (of course – few females can say they dont with a straight face!).

    • Gayguy

      Which shows how silly you can be. I am not the only one who held DC in utter contempt for the lies he told, nor the only one who he reacted with extreme bile once he was backed into a corner by his lies.

      So before jumping to conclusions about who is who, it might pay to stop and think for a moment.

      • Lion_ess

        I didn’t jump to conclusions stupid, I said that was my “take” on the thread.

        • Gayguy

          You concluded that we were the same person.

  • J.M

    Where Dotcom and I differ on the subject of homosexuality is that I don’t feel homosexual acts should be banned, merely just not encouraged, as homosexuality weakens society. Civil unions I can cope with, as homosexual couples deserve to have the same property rights as the rest of us, but the fewer homosexuals, the stronger our society is.

    • unsol

      Your comment contradicts itself & implies that denying marriage to LGBT couples will somehow reduce the number of LGBT. Considering they existed even before they were legally allowed to I am not sure that is even remotely logical.

      Saying that the world will be better off without LGBT is akin to the sentiments expressed by Hitler.

      The only thing that weakens society is bigots & fundamentalists.

      • Damn. You invoked Godwin’s Law. By definition, we have to stop the debate now.

        • unsol


          Godwin’s Law applies more to the melodramatic types – such as those who bring up the genocide when you suggest pit bulls should be eradicated. It usually applies to comments that are trying to be inflammatory & that have no substance behind their claims.

          In this instance my reference to Hitler & his quest to produce the perfect race was perfectly timed; how else could you possibly interpret JM’s comment?!

      • J.M

        Nope, homosexuality for many people is a choice. The more people that are discouraged from taking that route, the better.

        • Gayguy

          Again factually incorrect.

          • J.M

            Many so called gay people spend years in Heterosexual relationships and then choose to enter in relationships with people of the same sex.

          • Gayguy

            Factually incorrect again. You will find that they have been trying to live as heterosexuals and fight their natural sexuality in order to avoid being targets for people such as yourself.

          • J.M

            Targets? I beg your pardon? If you read what I have written here, you’ll know that I am tolerant of homosexuals. I just don’t think it is something that should be encouraged.

          • Gayguy

            LMAO, you tolerant???? Yea, and I am the next Pope.

            That is a massive factually incorrect statement on your part.

        • unsol

          What garbage. “Many” is ambiguous & just a way to try and declare assumption & misguided beliefs as fact. Such a statement is based on myth resultant from people who just can’t bare the idea that 2 people of the same gender can be attracted to each other.

          The so called science some use to back up these wild claims is about as valid as the claims of those who said that the earth was flat.

          End of the day the claim of LGBT that they are born that way cannot be disproven so who is any born this way hetero to disagree?

          It is awfully convenient to hold LGBT to a higher standard; at what point did you choose to be hetero as opposed to gay? I would imagine – assuming you are not gay – that you never made a conscious choice. You just knew you were.

          Well contrary to what you wish were true, the same can be sex for those who are LGBT

          • LesleyNZ

            How do you prove someone is born gay? What is the test?

          • unsol

            How did you prove you were heterosexual? Or did you make a deliberate choice to be attracted to the opposite sex and if so, what age…before or after the age of reckoning?

          • LesleyNZ

            I can’t prove it but I do know what God’s plan was for the human beings He created. No doubt those who do not agree with this do not believe in creation: Genesis 2:23–24
            23 Then the man said,

            “This at last is bone of my bones

            and flesh of my flesh;

            she shall be called Woman,

            because she was staken out of Man.”

            24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

          • If they are a bloke they like to fuck blokes…and if they are a chick they like to fuck chicks…quite simple that test.

          • LesleyNZ

            That is not a proper answer. The behaviour you describe above does not prove that from the moment of birth the baby is gay. Note: using the f word in this context is correct although rather crass.

          • BJ

            I would suggest that liking to perform a physical act with your same gender is because one is deeply afraid and distrusting of anything outside what they know and accept about their sexual being – and ones sexuality (read – ones total expression of self) can get screwed up very early in life at crucial pychological developmental stages. And, as has been proved, that the foetus is affected by maternal distress, maybe even in the womb, decisions are made to be afraid of letting the opposite get that close

          • ..and someone thinks you and I may be the same person. I would never have put it that way, but it certainly makes the point in the least amount of words!

          • grumpy

            Don’t think anyone thinks you and whale are the same person. It’s just strange that on high hit generating topics we have convenient commenters cropping up using similar language to Whale.
            Poofter marriage – “gayguy” and overuse of “haters”
            Teachers – “Teachers rock” and before that Kosh.
            Excellent hit generators though.

          • It generates a lot of heat but very little traffic. Any debate such as this involves a few dozen people, checking back and answering. We’re talking hundreds of page loads extra, not thousands. Others just see a wall of writing and run away screaming.

            Just popping in another article/post will earn the blog the same if not more pageviews, so it really doesn’t pay to be here to drive the pageview counter stats up – it’s not efficient enough for the time we spend here.

            We like there to be a healthy community, but your idea that this is done “just for the hits” (we certainly wish it was so!), doesn’t really get backed up by fact, sadly enough.

            Now, if we could have these go off on every other post, then it would be different. But right now, with only a few a week like this? It’s peanuts to the pageview counter.

            Our time is much more efficiently spent building the blog in ways that pays off long term rather than create empty calories through “fake” debates. We are much more interested in increasing our audience rather than make our existing audience more active.

            As I told others, if you’re interested, just ask.

          • LesleyNZ

            Hey – what has happened to Kosh?

          • grumpy

            He became “teachersrock” and “gayguy”……….

    • Gayguy

      Which is just plain factually incorrect.

  • unsol

    When it comes to marriage equality, offensive & derogatory comments from most people seem to almost be synonymous on this blog and there are definitely more than a few trolls who frequent this site, but Dotcom really did take the cake.

    It was totally the right call Cameron – for the sake of this blog & for his own mental health.

    He commented on little else & seemed obsessed with anal sex as if to assume that 1) that is all gay men ever do & 2) that gay women, bi & transgenders dont exist.

    As for suggestions made by some that you are using this topic to fire up traffic, how silly.

    Your blog has been the most popular for the last 3 years I have been reading it, primarily because your topics are varied, contentious & straight-up.

    And those who like to state that posting on this topic is akin to “poofterism” (which is not even a word) imply an unhealthy obsession that Dotcom could relate to & perhaps also indicative of someone not sure of their own sexuality.

    Re comments that WO is intolerant of different views on this topic – no, that would be me. After all, he allows you to comment on here doesnt he? I would never allow such bigotry to have a voice on my blog as while such comments may give the rest of a us a chance to ridicule the idiots I prefer not to give such hatred, ignorance & naivity oxygen as it is not like anyone is open to changing their views.

    So I would say that rather than whinging you just be grateful that here your bigotry is allowed to have a voice….to a point.

    • grumpy

      Was that a job application for assistant junior trainee moderator? I find it beyond belief that a blog that purports to be right wing has so little variation of opinion among it’s moderators.
      Even The Standard has some editorial differences.

      • unsol

        Dont be silly grumpy. For a start the so-called juniors can ban the likes of you and second, smarm & delusional airs of superiority – especially when via the false bravado of a keyboard warrior, will get you no where.

        Variation of opinion? I am sure there is plenty where it comes to many topics including on the issue of ME. I have no idea if Petal & TP are pro or anti, but it is irrelevant. Their job is to weed out people like Dotcom.

        The best way to stay out of the firing line is for a start, don’t run around abusing the moderators & second don’t wish cancers, aids & other awful things on them, their families or other commentators.

        Apart from that it would seem anything goes so I am not sure why you have your knickers in a twist.

        • grumpy

          Probably because banning has always been the preserve of that bastion of internet freedom, The Standard.
          It goes against my freedom loving instincts to agree or approve of
          Whale falling to their level.
          Seems the great leftie cause of poofter marriage has seen this site throw away it’s previous libertarian principles – a shame.

          • Did you not read my post, or are you too stupid to understand it? I rarely ban, as opposed to The Standard who bans for no reason at all. I outlined my reasons.

            If you think it is ok to come into my place…my blog is my place…and shit and chuck up all over the the floor…all the while calling me every insult under the sun and not expect me to react…well just just proves that you are dumber than a sack of hammers.

          • unsol

            The “great leftie cause of….marriage” – because asking for a man made right to be extended to all people in legally & socially acceptable relationships is the monopoly of this left wing? How naive.

            So tell me grumpy, who told you that same sex attraction, relationships & life long commitment is wrong, weird, evil, unnatural ( despite always naturally occurring in man since the beginning of time) or whatever other derogatory adjective you want to use? Serious question. Your queer ideas have to stem from somewhere.

          • grumpy

            Just saw this, so on the offchance you are still watching, I will tell you.

            I have only known a very few poofters in my lifetime.

            The first was a local boy I was at school with – he had an accident and sustained a serious head injury – nek minnit, became a poofter!

            The second was a schoolteacher of mine. We all knew he was a predator but that didn’t stop him forming relationships with vulnerable boys, especioally those who were having trouble at home. He even had a few living with him and his wife from time to time. Finished up with a senior position at an all boys primary school (heaven for him). Nek minnit – gone! Sacked overnight and no word from the Board of Governors!

            The third was a relative. Rich, suave and very succesfull in his field. While staying with other relative he jumped into bed with a young cousin and explained that he liked it both ways. A very tricky family situation.

            You see, every poofter I have known has been problematic. All have managed to switch between male and female attraction. So, I take the wonderful pictures being portrayed he as just propaganda bullshit.

          • unsol

            Thanks, just seen this now. So you only have anecdotal dysfunction pertaining to the few gay men you have met, to base your views on?

            What about lesbians?

            My brother is gay – loving home that had a typical kiwi set up in the 70s & 80s (mum was at home, dad worked, dad very much your average kiwi bloke) who isn’t camp, but loves to cross dress, was not abused and doesn’t molest children….incidentally it is girls that get molested most with 80% of those who molest boys identify themselves as hetero.

            And the same can be said for my cousin and his & my brothers friends. All have always been gay, not bi & have never felt not different. It was not something they chose – especially since many suffered horrific bullying (thankfully not my brother or cousin).

            As for gay women i know – some have been abused or raped & others haven’t. But given most of the hetero women I have met meet the 1in 4 sexual abuse stat, that means little. Women are always targets no matter what their sexual orientation.

            So for those of us who have real life LGBT people in our real lives, this claim of social engineering is bullshit & nothing short of hysteria driven by fear & hatred of something some find icky or just can’t understand.

            All this is is just 2 people like those in my family wanting to have the same right I had to marry the person they want to spend the rest of their lives with. It is that simple. No big deal at all and if anything we should be celebrating anyone who wants to sign on the dotted line for their relationship as it would seem most cant be bothered.

            Marriage is awesome & everyone should have the right to do it. At least same sex couples, unlike the girls in the early marriages, are adults in loving & consensual relationships.

          • grumpy

            Obviously one’s opinion is shaped by the experiences one has had. You have had good ones whereas I have never seen that.
            As far as lesbians go, I cannot just put them in the same category as male homosexuals. Several of our good friends are lesbian and they are delightful people. Most of them have had bad experiences with male partners.
            In many cases men are the worst thing that can happen to women.

          • unsol

            “In many cases men are the worst thing that can happen to women” – wont argue with that, other than to add the same can be said for children (girls are molested more than boys but of the boys that are molested 80% of the male offenders identify themselves as heterosexual – rape crisis & MOH state this).

            It’s only natural that ones views are shaped by ones experiences in life.

            But to assume that all gay men are bad is like me assuming all hetero men are rapists, wife bashers & child abusers. Fears and personal experiences may have their place in the discussions, but when it comes to something like giving a minority group the same exact rights as the majority, they are not the primary basis with which we should base our determinations on.

            In terms of why you put gay men in a different category to gay women, I really cant see why. Same sex attraction is exactly that. If it is about the sex, well all sex is actually quite gross if you really think about it. Regardless of whether you are gay or straight it’s very animalistic & undignified!

          • grumpy

            We are all entitled to our opinions. I have developed my opinions based on what I have experience of and I have to say that some of the garbage coming from the proponents of gay marriage have only strenthened my views.

        • “I have no idea if Petal [is] pro or anti”

          If you want to know, on any topic, ask.

          • BJ

            So Are you pro or anti gay mar…ge?

          • I believe Civil Union is enough to provide the equivalent protection in law. I am entirely comfortable with same-sex couples entering long term relationships and wanting that relationship recognised in law. I do resent the fact that the gay lobby has gone after the word marriage. For me, it comes down to a concept. Marriage is between a man and a woman. That is well defined and totally accepted. But in the end, I can’t be bothered getting excited about a concept, so yeah, if it makes them happy, fine, call it marriage.

          • unsol

            No doubt you & Cameron have interesting debates then.

            I have yet to read or hear a convincing argument that justifies the continued discriminate against the LGBT community.

            You can’t be equal & separate & to suggest that your natural attraction to & relationship with someone of the same sex somehow makes you less worthy of all the rights that are bestowed upon those of different sexes is in my view retarded & void of logic. Not to mention morality.

            Marriage was only ever defined as being between one man and one woman when the Church thine State decided their claws into it.

          • There is no time for debates at this end. Seriously, it’s full on just to get you people something to argue over every day ;)

            I was never asked what my views were, or to ensure my views followed Cam’s before being accepted to help out. The bar wasn’t that high – Cam’s drowning in work, and I was just a bit of wood that floated by at the right time with the right skills, attitude and some time on my hands.

          • unsol

            Gosh it can’t be too difficult to find contentious topics -welfare, ME, the greenies & farmers all seem to be things that people (including me!) will happily argue about until the cows come home. Funny because we all know that none of us will ever change each other’s opinions!

            I’m just happy that there is something for me to read & comment on that isn’t MSN or overrun by the left!

          • I can honestly say that I have had moments of “you know what? I hadn’t considered that angle”, and adjusted my views on that basis. But yes, as my beliefs are more and more honed, it happens less and less.

            We would have to get into something like designer babies, or colonisation of the moon, which are new territory, and I haven’t thought that through at all.

            I also hold views which are completely incompatible. It hurts my head when I try to make them be there at the same time. For example: I am a strong believer in property rights. Yet at the same time I resent not being able to go for a walk on a farm, especially when it lies between me and public land. It is a very selfish need for me to walk on those farms that makes me want to dilute property rights. And isn’t that just a great insight into how most of us have some very inconsistent set of “beliefs”?

          • unsol

            I think anyone who said they didn’t have those kinds of internal conflicts at some point or another is lying – part & parcel with what makes us human!

            And I’m the same re property rights..,defend them til the death…until they prevent me from tramping or mountain biking a prime spot :p

            I found in my 20s that I was torn between different sides of view, particularly when I used to run quite deep in church circles. The conflict came primarily from finding what I believed to be true about God to be at absolute odds with what I was seeing & hearing at church. So I left.

            The other period was when I was establishing my preferred ideology. As a poor student being left made sense but as I earned more money & understood when & how it was spent I changed more to the right. The conflict coming primarily in that transitional period of trying to establish what, if any, kind of welfare I believed in. Hard when you see the face of welfare first hand (I did victim support & hubby did ambulance so we saw a fair bit).

            But like you, these days I’m fairly firm in my views bar the odd topic that I may not have given much thought or hadn’t come across before. Generally though I find the more I learn, hear, read & experience the more unwavering my views become. Primarily because everything I believe & do stems from my faith , values & moral compass. I am very gut/intuition driven whereby I declare a view before I understand why & have rarely had to backtrack (bar making the odd wrong call about someone).

          • BJ

            Debating topics is only useful if it is respectful. When disgusting language is used – it is like someone is yelling and they don’t think their argument is strong enough. Take all the bull away and some of the comments are mindshifters. What changes peoples position or outlook are other people talking about their experience or inspirational ideas NOT opinions.

          • Really good analogy Petal, he really was drowning and some days I think he still is. The amount of time left for family and sanity breaks seems to get thinner every day. Hopefully once he breaks the back of the enormous challenge he has on his hands at TRUTH life may ease up a little. Currently he works holidays and weekends. He is a workaholic quite frankly.

          • unsol

            I am not surprised – given the number of posts that boy of yours does I had wondered whether he was getting much time out.

            I can completely understand how a passion can be all consuming, make one tunnel visioned. Great that he now has some help for this (I consider the blog a public service! –

          • StupidDisqus

            What’s wrong with that? Only a unionist could object?

          • BJ

            In all truth spanishbride the world would not stop if all bloggers sites were to cease. In fact society would be better off without the compulsive behaviour that is encouraged by such things. If one is putting all their energy into something that contributes nothing to change the lives of another for the better, least of all their loved ones – maybe its time to walk away and get on with what’s really important in life – loved ones. Do you not think that blogging is very unhealthy? It is not real life at all -only a distraction from the truth

          • I actually think i have made a difference, in fact just the other day someone emailed me to say that my Daily Proverbs had intrigued them, then nagged at them to pick up the bible again…that one email, like that that pops into my inbox every now and then makes what I do worthwhile.

            Another came in over the weekend from someone grappling with mental health issues with their partner..again they were thanking me for helping…again that is what keeps me going.

          • How many NZ blogs/bloggers are quoted or referred to in Parliament, ending up in Hansard BJ?

            I agree that 99.9% of all bloggers are just doing their own special version of solitaire, but this blog is kind of different.

          • BJ

            The concept of marriage is a fundamental category of existence.

            There are two fundamental natures in the world – Man and Woman. Their co-operation and not just mere existence forms that basis of our being. Co-operation between the two will only continue in the future if it is honoured by commitment, ideally in the differences bonding (marriage). This concept is important for the future of ‘Mankind’

            In eastern countries where their religious beliefs ( only anothers original idea taken further) dictate how the whole of society lives, have placed men has being the only important imput to human existence and therefore don’t work cooperatively and respectfully with their opposite (woman) and look where their societies are rapidly heading. I believe they have continual conflict because there are no stops on their behaviour from their opposites imput.

            In the west, by condoning homosexual relationships- within the framework or concept of marriage- as the base level of bonding, will bring about the western equivalent of the easts attitude. When it becomes ‘normal’ for two men to face the world together, using women for their imput into procreation only, men in the west will not be tempered by their opposite anymore. It will tear men and women apart over time and the only outcome from that is war.

            It won’t happen in my lifetime but the future for society that condones the concept of marriage for gays will see the total breakdown of society because the lack of understanding and fear that breeds disharmony and leads to war over religion is heading to our shores because men and women will not be able to work at getting along cooperatively anymore as it will not be happening at the personal level.

            I have tried really hard to articulate my thoughts respectfully on this post – lets see if the debate can stay grownup and respectful on both sides.

          • unsol

            I never thought to ask as assumed that apart from WO & a couple of other right leaning commentators that everyone on here is anti…which seems to be fairly accurate.

            But as moderators it’s irrelevant & I think you guys have proven that – you come across as neutral & I have been impressed with this way you handle the muppets spoiling for a fight.

          • My objective for the WOBH comments is that it’s energetic, lively, and mostly free of inward looking discussions like these.There is nothing more depressing than a blog where everyone comes from the same point of view. I worked very hard, to the point of receiving ridicule from most sides, to get dotcom to drop the surly act and join back in the fun of it all. He bit me as a thank you. Not sure what grumpy was up to today, but it was similarly self indulgent (albeit well within the limits of getting in real trouble).

            I don’t want everyone to be friends and get on. It would make for a very boring place to spend some time. But I do want people to at least limit what they write here to be the same as what they would say to the person’s face if we were all in the same room. That much self control I would like to see,

            With Cam being the final arbiter of who goes and who stays, the role of “moderator” here is pretty much one of encouraging a certain behaviour. If I was allowed to push the red button, those who are intentionally self-absorbed would be gone. There would be no announcement about it, and there would be no explanations after the fact. That’s how I roll.

            Except this ain’t ma blog :)

          • unsol

            Well put & I roll the same way!

            Re people saying on here what they would be prepared to say face to face, of course there are always going to be times where that just does not happen – we all have an inner keyboard warrior, but some go way too far too often which for me makes them cowards with zero credibility.

            Rather than focussing on just face to few, I keep I’m mind our daughter & what she would think of my comments if she was old enough to read them (I naturally consider this blog AO!). My husband also reads or listens to me read my comments out loud which is a great way to get feedback in terms of whether I go far.

            The only thing I really hate about online commenting is the tone does get lost in translation – I’m a zero tolerance for bullshit kinds girl who loves sarcasm yet the likes of starboard for example, apparently makes all tongue in cheek comments…which is something I seemed to have missed when uses such endearments as fucktard etc.

          • Petal is doing a great job, as is TP…I don’t ask that they agree with me and nor do I expect it. We have robust discussion on Skype and in emails…but the important thing is we respect each others abilities and opinions.

  • blam

    If DotCom goes, then surely Alice needs to go as well, that thread was an accident waiting to happen and Alice has to take 65% of the blame there. Notwithstanding that, the rest of the posters who were chipping in calling him ‘gay’, ‘pussy whipped pansy’ need to go for showing their own homophobic colours in using homosexual insults aimed at someone in a derogatory manner.

    This may as well be The Standard if not.

    • grumpy

      Exactly, unless the phantom posters theory has more legs to it than has been admitted.

    • Alice is gone as well.

      • grumpy

        God, it’s an epidemic of burning at the stake!

        • Both Alice and dotcom left voluntarily.

          The block on dotcom was only created when he started a campaign to damage this blog by shopping his problems to other blog owners.

          I am, however, getting sick of your deliberate skewing of everything. You are entitled to your opinions, but one of the things that gets tiresome is the smoke/fire routine.

          One thing I decided with dotcom is that I wouldn’t make the same mistake twice. Move on to another thread grumpy. I’m sick of the dancing.

          • blam

            Sorry, I was mislead by the original blog post in that Cameron stated there were two reasons why he was blocked, you have said there was only one. I’ll certainly take your word for it.

          • There were two…I re-read all his diatribes and conspiracies, lies and threats…and in the calm of a review several days later, rather than the heat of a debate I decided that he had crossed the line….that and his emailing other bloggers insisting that I am evil and should be de-linked.

          • grumpy

            I bow to yourr clearly superior knowlege of what goes on in Alice’s and dotcom’s mind.

      • blam

        Good stuff,

  • Patrick

    So he restarts his ADSL modem, picks up a new IP Address, creates a new GMail account & the fun starts again……how long before he is back in action?

  • Tristanb

    So he said a few nutty comments, no need to publish his real name or IP address.

    He’s allowed his opinion, and you’re allowed to ban him. But it’s a bit discouraging as there are a few of us who do not agree with everything the blog says, and we don’t just want to be part of an echo chamber. Sometimes people will express their opinions, sometimes they’ll overreact, sometimes their humour may not be to everyone’s taste.

    I’m not sure it’s a good idea to have these threats and risks hanging over us commenters.

    • Unless you are planning to kill people in a public toilet because you disagree with something said here just what have you got hanging over you? You are clearly allowed to debate and express your opinion. Trying to damage the Blog by going to other Bloggers is clearly stepping over the line. If you don’t intend to do that just what do you have to fear exactly?

    • It isn’t a threat…proudly skiting that you just beat up two people and left them for dead is actually a crime…and you all know what my view is on name suppression.

      If he did do what he says he did, then he needs arresting, and I will do anything to assist the Police in getting him.

      Plenty of people comment here and aren’t outed…I know who they are and I respect their anonymity and pseudonymity. They stick to the rules, they don’t incite violent acts and they remain as they are…there is no threat, overt or implied.

  • GregM

    That whole thread was appalling. I enjoy other opinions to mine, it helps to shape my view, but the inciting of violence and or bragging about it pisses me off, and is unacceptable.

    Good decision.

    • unsol

      My eyes tend to glaze over when I see a sea of bullshit. Did he actually brag about murdering 2 guys? Good grief, talk about blogging giving a platform to the deranged!

      • Gayguy

        He was trying to make a point and ended up just looking really really bad.

        • GregM

          He actually scored a big own goal. I didn’t realize there was people out there that bigoted and hateful. Now, I am more in favour of equality and the end of discrimination.
          I support the law change.

          • Gayguy

            He scored many many own goals with the lies he told. But yea, that had to be the biggest.

        • unsol

          I assume this was on a different post to the one I last saw you on (when he was rabbiting on about aids etc the Alex went a bit OTT)?

          Interesting that some call you a hater when I have seen worse against you.

          Interesting that the same people will never get how derogatory, belittling & morally repugnant they are when they declare SSA to be akin to perverse sexual acts, that it is bound to

  • TomTom

    I don’t think you could clasify “going out to the public toilets and murdering two guys” as any sort of humour. Or even an overreaction. More appropriately you’d call it a sick fantasy of a deranged idiot. Who the fuck goes out to the public toilets just to go to the loo anyways?

    I actually think there’s a point to be made here – the internet grants us all the ability to say stupid and outrageous things that seriously damages the quality of any discussion/exchange of opinions. DotCom was making the comment sections of this blog pretty worthless for most people who just like to look through and don’t bother to comment.

    You also have to admit that the only opinion that really counts here is Cam’s. That’s because he isn’t anonymous. We can put a face and a name to his opinions, no matter how controversial they might be. He can be ridiculed (or praised) in person for his opinion and probably he so often is.

    • StupidDisqus

      the only opinion that really counts here is Cam’s. That’s because he isn’t anonymous

      No – it’s because its his fucking money paying for this all.

      He could be anon and it wouldn’t matter: it’s still his site to do whatever he wants with. Frankly I think ever damn leftist/unionist/greenie should be banned – from whaleoil obviously, but also from breathing.

  • BR

    In thie interests of consistency and impartiality, why don’t you ban the poster that calls itself “gayguy’ too.

    (s)he is just as bad.


    • Gayguy

      Because fighting for equal rights is just such a bad thing.

      • BR

        What are you talking about? You have equal rights. If you were campaigning to rid the country of legalised Maori privilege (which is another thing promoted by the left), you would have a point.


        • Gayguy

          No I do not have equal rights. I do not have the right to marry who I love, I do not have the right to adopt, I am not allowed to give blood, even though it is clean not like far to many heterosexuals.

          All these things you can do. I cannot.

          • Bunswalla

            You have the right to marry someone of the opposite sex who’s not a close blood relative. You have the right to adopt. I’m not allowed to give blood either, due to being in the UK when the BSE thing was prevalent. I don’t whinge about it.

          • Gayguy

            The typical pathetic argument that is simply bullshit.

            I want the same right to marry the person I love as you have. Not the right to marry someone who is not my sexuality.

          • unsol

            But separate is equal for these people GG

            Amazing how even after pointing out the obvious, the rational & the ethical they can still hold fast to antiquated ideas that, irrespective of whether they are personally religious, stemmed from a Church determined to try & control all aspects of our lives.

            They only reason they can genuinely offer is that they object because it doesn’t fit in with their version of normal; there is no legal, no scientific, no academic & certainly no religious – if you read the Bible in context – argument that can justify the continued discriminate against the LGBT community.

            The good thing about this debate is that it has compelled people to express their bigotry – and well, there is nothing like sunlight to heal a big pile of puss.

          • Gayguy

            They are the sort of people who if living in the 50s USA would have been horrified at the thought of blacks being thought of as their equal.

          • BJ

            Marriage is a fundamental concept – man and women joined – symbolising unity and two different halves put together to make a cohesive whole – balance and tolerance – for the sake of the whole of human existance not just for the instant gratification of any individual.

          • unsol

            Says who? It was brought it to procure status, property & wealth via heirs…no heirs & the marriage was null and void.

            You are putting a romantic sentiment on something that was a business arrangement at best.

            As marriage evolved it became more about choice, love & commitment. That is why the LGBT want to be included; marriage has been refined many times and this just the natural next step. It is no revolutionary.

          • LesleyNZ

            Evolved? I would call it deviations to marriage over the years away from what was originally intended. Natural step? No, the gay marriage push is more of a very well planned and orchestrated step and a very successful world-wide social engineering campaign.

          • unsol

            Such rubbish Lesley, this is all basic knowledge. History 101. Most people in the world don’t believe in the Bible let alone your interpretation of it.

          • LesleyNZ

            My God does not fit into a square box or any box. Christianity is the largest religion in the world and the Bible is still the No 1 selling book in the world.
            After God created Adam and Eve and Adam took Eve as his wife – sin changed everything. The Bible shows us clearly what sin is and the consequences of sin. I don’t ignore any part of the Bible but guess it depends upon whose interpretation of scripture you believe. Please enlighten me to the verses “Your Bible – along with using words such as “piss” spoke of rampant raping of male salves in the time of the Corinthians”.
            As for the social engineering – no hysteria, you must be the one with the blinkers on – the gay marriage campaign has been a very successful worldwide social engineering campaign, organised very much the same way as the man-made global warming campaign. Pres Obama really got the campaign off to a good start. I don’t care who gets married to who or what – I do care that the definition of traditional marriage is being changed and those who don’t want this to happen are being marginalised. if gay marriage gets the green light and most likely it will – it will never be equal to heterosexual marriage – it can’t be.

          • unsol

            Christianity might be e largest religion but most people are not Christian so the Bible, including your version, is irrelevant.

            When Paul was speaking to the Corinthians it was quite clearly in reference to the rape of male slaves by their masters, not consensual, loving & committed relationships. As for lesbians – haven’t found a reference.

            In terms of the Old Testament, it was an ancient code written for the Israelites to distinguish them from the Palestinians. If you take your so-called gay scriptures literally here then why to do the same wit those who mix fibres, crops, get divorced, women who dare to express an opinion (OT & NT state women must remain silent in public).

            In fact in either Corinthians or Timothy Paul declares that celibacy NOT marriage is God’s will & encourages the Corinthians to not get married or remarried if their spouse dies.

            Seems to me the Church has managed to pick & choose what rules to follow & sell it to those happy to take their word for it.

            My version – same bible as you. And I have given verses many times on here as have others so shouldn’t be hard to find. Same with the word “piss” – it’ I’m Romans I think.

            Defending right for the LGBT community to get married precludes ones ability to wear blinkers Lesley as when you do so you accept what you don’t understand.

          • BJ

            Man and Woman are complimentary poles and to hold this paradox in creative tension requires courage and wisdom. If two people of the same sex are in a marriage – this creative tension is missing:

            Lord Acton, the most profound student of human affairs, remarked “Every institution tends to perish by an excess of its basic principal” This statement grasps the whole idea of paradox and polarity.
            “Unless a system or institution includes at least a part of its complimentary pole (a man and a woman), it will die by applying its own single principle too rigorously and exclusively.”

            Understand, MARRIAGE WILL DIE if the institution of marriage loses the necessary compliment of man and woman with a creative tension between them- it will!

          • unsol

            Considering most people choose de facto I am not sure anyone will notice….if it was actually possible for same sex couples to destroy marriage….and I am unlikely to the word of a catholic from the 19th century. Hardly compelling evidence!

            How ridiculous,e that’s ałmost as bad as saying ME will bring about an apolcalypse!

          • BR

            You have the right to marry the WOMAN you love. Same as every other man.


          • Gayguy

            Sigh, strawman.

    • J.M

      Totally agreed.

    • I gave him a holiday once…he learned from that.

  • StupidDisqus

    Banning’s too good for him.

    Cops. Glocks. Yet another problem solved.

    • Mr_V4

      This is where the whole banning people for what are online comments gets stupid.

      In the above comments people crucify someone for talking about murdering homosexuals (as crazy as that is) and then at the same time later in the comments people advocate killing people based on blog comments.

      Crazy world. Surely the best option is to not take the bait of those offensive comments. If we took the bait of offensive/ridiculous online comments we’d all be over at the standard 24/7 engaged in endless bs with colon viper, draco t bastard etc

      • unsol

        So true – online commenting makes keyboard warriors of us all at one point, but to stoop to that kind of level is to loose your grasp on reality & forget it is only cyberspace after all. Unless you are really a pisspsycho in which case guard your identities as who know what the deranged can do.

        I used to comment on left wing blogs, but well there is no point in arguing with fools….it meet makes 2.

        So if I tell off or debate an issue on here with someone who is right leaning en they should always see it as a compliment….as a least I don’t consider them to be fools…..until they prove me wrong of course.

  • The second reason for his banning, as if I ever needed another one, was
    the fact he has been emailing other bloggers and nutting off at them
    about me, and demanding they de-link their sites to mine.

    He hasn’t emailed me.

    • Do you guys use that argument for everything?

      • Well, who did he email? You just say “bloggers”, but don’t mention any names. I’m a blogger and I haven’t been emailed.

        I just think this whole situation is so ironic.

        • grumpy

          Ironic and dodgy. Maybe it was to Farrar, or Cactus, or……..
          None of them are confirming though – very strange. As for Alice “voluntarily” leaving the blog? How does that happen?
          Nope, I’m still of the “phantom poster” theory to boost hit rates.

          • Have to disagree with the phantom poster theory to boost rates. A person who uses multiple psudonyms just to harass annoying commenters, now that seems far more likely to me.

          • Pedro Salmanca

            Boop on the nose.

          • Pedro Salmanca

            I forgot the email I used. I assure you I’m not gayguy and I can assure you I am indeed human and not a phantom.

    • GregM

      “He hasn’t emailed me”
      Well bugger me with a big splintery gatepost, why doesn’t that surprise me.

    • Gayguy

      And your point is?

  • 4077th

    After wasting my time with this thread and it’s shameless use of a subject to increase ratings and is plainly against the views of the majority of viewers I too have better things to do with my time.