Not a "ad hominem attack" but based purely on what has been observed on the internet for past couple of years or so. Can be backed up by the way. Most will recall the plethora of user/poster names anyway.
Draws breath and runs through as many as I can recall from reports from the Swiss mob over a period of just two and a bit years
Each "name" below has been banned from the C+ board and other boards for abusive posts. A search through archives of many of those sites will pull up some of it and we gather that some of the web site owners in question kept the data at one side for comparison because of the abuse of their rules with regard to constant re-registers and apparent use of internet cafes and proxified accounts from this person on their audit trails.
Each account opened by this person posted as many as 80 posts per day on one site and between 10 and 20 on some of the others - in addition to other surfings and apparent lurkings on the motoring enthusiast sites
The current persona has notched up almost 900 posts in just under 3 months. That - with posts on some other local news fora and lurks on here amounts to a lot of time spent at a computer keyboard.
Especially if you add up the thousands of posts made on those other sites gives a picture of someone who sadly does not seem to get out much
It does not give the impression of someone employed as no boss would sanction this. It does not give the impression of someone "productive at his job because he cycles to work" either.
The person does not ever give a location in any of these profiles either or when it does - it's a "made up one"
like "The Gabon" or "london/bath/norfolk" As for its e-mail? "martincrowe of norfolk and "howard woods" who could not make up its mind whether or not it lived in "bath" or "londoninnit" does not exist either.
Any more than Charles Napier or Ben Potter or alex snelling or Cathy Brown a widowed mum cum estate agent from norfolk.
So how the hell could anyone take it seriously?
smeggyin reply to spindrift/toomey/Cathy Browne/ales snelling/bimbly/tabernacle/wavey daveygravy/charles napeir/maritng crowe/ben potter/snakes on a plane/na/few others and now rothbook wrote:
If I may:
Unless you have contributed to the material on the main site outside of these forums, no-one can consider you to be part of the Safespeed road safety group, which is as much as I consider most others to be (supporters, debaters of and potential inspiration for: yes of course). Your assertion that any (hence all) forum posts contribute to or reflect the "road safety group" is inherently false; otherwise would lead to an obviously unsolvable paradox.
As for the 'fake coppers' claim (violates forum rules?): this has been repeatedly made by trolls on other sites without any evidence whatsoever to backup their claim (I’ve really tried to get this out of them) – they even supposedly filed a police complaint of which nothing more came from (despite a supposed response from "ACPO Chief Constable" promising an investigation).
Ah! that's about as valid as its e-mail to a Swiss newspaper when it argued with the eldest Swiss girl called Klaril on a forum run by an East Anglian newspaper. She was based in Cambridge at the time. She's since returned to the USA. The argument in question was about cannabis being downgraded to a C drug and legalisation of drugs. Spinny claimed to work with drug addicts and believed these drugs should be made legal. Klaril disagreed because she knew of some on-going research - the research which is now being considered as a reason to re-classify it to a B drug again
She posted up in retaliation to a spinny post that the Swiss had zero crime because of their very tolerant attitude towards drugs. She quoted articles from the local press there which gave a very different picture of the so-called idyllic Swiss society.
In an discussion on road safety - Klaril posted that each winter the Swiss press remind them (with stats) of the dangers of incidents at high altitude - such as black ice . Spinny retaliated with the "L" word
and then claimed he had contacted the paper concerned. It was in English and purported to have a reply in English. There were no references to key headers in his "e-mail" which was just basically the normal "blaggarding" of his style. No editor would reply with
his alleged e-mail which Klaril printed out from the EDP thread at the time wrote:
"Dear mr crowe. Thank for your enquiry. no such article exists!"
in any case
So I would take the alleged "e-mail" etc with a pinch of salt. We did see this daft exchange. To be taken seriously spinny would have to come clean about who he is and how come he's posting to these sites in any case
and given the history of melodramatic vulgar abuse towards anyone who fails to share his view - even cyclists (the altercation with posters called Spen and Patrick (allegedly lawyers) was pure
- doubt anyone in right mind could take this person seriously.
As for the BiB posts in general on these boards - they all refer and even quote from teh Highway Code and the - Craft series. So according the spinny - these books are "garbage" then - which seems to indicate he has not read these books either
But then anything which does not toe the spindrift line is "garbage".
Pot Kettle Black!
To the Stanley Hill guy again - be careful with this person. He ain't in the slightest bit interested in your concerns over what's happening down your roadway.
smeggy in reply to the man of many names wrote:
If I remember the thread in question correctly, your description of it is incorrect: there was no such description of the victim.
Indeed. In fact the thread still exists in archives. So the incorrect posting of his can be easily checked out
smeggyin reply to the man of many names wrote:
Your description of the safespeed campaign and its founder is offensive and in clear violation of the forum rules. For that you can expect to be banned – but not because you expressed dissent (which other posters manage amicably). It is unfortunate that there is a large correlation between those who don’t wish to want to accept the arguments put forward by the campaign and those who make offensive posts.
Critics are allowed and questions are welcomed, so long as the intent isn't destructive; it is clear what your intent is!
Very clearly so
. In fact Petrol Ted's parting shot when he booted him out from PH was very reasoned, polite, clear and very firm. He basically told him that he had allowed him free reign to put forth his points of view, but that it was clear to him that he was not prepared to debate but only to brand everyone who disagreed with him with some abusive terminology and for the sake of restoring harmony and tranquillity to his forum, he was showing him the door!
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
He's my -t-t-t
He will get barbed wired up 
rudey word.
who can do something about it. So.. it there ist call on all the motoring sites und also by some MPs including Ruth Kelly und Mary Williams und Roadpeace (per their own PR) that we need more 
- then this really what we need to tackle the real menaces out there.