Wednesday, 1 December 2010

When Allegators Are Crocodiles

"When Allegators Are Crocodiles"

On the topic of “allegators”:

“I deny the allegations, and I defy the allegators”

On the topic of “crocodiles”:

“You know what you are? You’re a fucking crocodile. You know what a crocodile is? A low-lying creature with little arms and a big mouth”
- Anon (I heard it from a soldier in 3 PARA).


So, various allegations made against me recently, most of them untrue. I’ll address here, why this is happening, and what I do and don’t intend to do about it.

Firstly, we have Richie Arnold, a cook from the Assembly House pub in London, who generally posts on the backwaters of the internet as “Jill Pleasuremodel”.

As for why the gender-bending pseudonym, he explains it in his public posting here:

“So What, you think i want hide behind the identity of a sexy japanese sexbot - who doesnt to be part of the sexbot scene”

No criticism from me here, just a quotation to provide an explanation for my readers, as I’d hate to misrepresent someone. While the sexbot scene is not my cup of tea personally, I think that this particular point of Pentagonal Revisionism has its worth - either for those who cannot get human partners, or who want to do things that would generally not be permissible with human partners, or who just want to not have to consider someone else’s feelings - I think it’s great for such people.

Richie is, amongst other things, what I call “a Sneeze”. By this, I’m making reference to how when one sneezes, one closes one’s eyes and opens one’s mouth. Richie does a lot of this, so he falls into this category.

Thus, a Sneeze will generally do a lot more talking than listening, and a lot more writing than reading; their overall output is far greater than their discernible input.

In Richie’s case, any input that comes his way seems to give him a bad case of logorrhea.

This in and of itself would not be so bad; after all, the internet is full of people who want to share their opinions on topics about which they know nothing.

However, Richie has a very special epistemology; if something that comes to his attention supports his argument that those involved in the field of human cryopreservation are criminals, then he will believe it and publish it. If, on the other hand, it suggests the contrary, then he will steadfastly disbelieve and ignore it.

The only other example of a comparable epistemology that comes to my mind is that of “Creationist Science”.

A Transhumanist organisation to which I belong has the motto “Test Everything; Believe Nothing”. I like this motto. Alas, in Richie’s case, he seems to prefer to “Test Nothing; Believe Whatever Is Most Titillating”.

As such, if you would believe Richie’s postings:

* I am salaried by Cryonics UK (Reality: I am paid nothing by Cryonics UK, never have been, and in fact pay the same member contributions as anyone else, and have been known to be amongst the first to volunteer participating in a whip-round if funds are short and something is needed)
* I am paid expenses by Cryonics UK (Reality: I am paid nothing by Cryonics UK, never have been, and in fact have been known to pay other people’s expenses).
* Cryonics UK is a bogus charity (Reality: Cryonics UK is a mutual-assistance organisation, which receives equipment and suchlike funded by the Human Organ Preservation Research Trust, a registered charity, to which Cryonics UK members, including myself, pay a small monthly standing order)
* I am involved in pyramid selling schemes (Reality: I have never received any money for somebody else’s sale of anything)
* I engage in illegal sexual practices (Reality: I abide by the law in every aspect)
* Cryonics organisations own 200% of any money that changes hands as a result of a cryopreservation agreement (Reality: Alas, we are unable to defy mathematics like that).

Please note: The above is a non-exhaustive list of such foundless claims that are pretty easily controvertible.

Note to Richie: I realise you’ve invested a lot of time and energy into pursuing this, and reality probably hurts. The simple fact is, you’ve been used and lied to by people who know the reality but have a vested interest in lying to you.

Mostly one person, actually. Which brings us right on to...

Gabriel Galeano, who also usually poses as an oriental woman on the internet, under various names, most commonly Lu Yang, or some variation on that theme.

As for why, he’s not so forthcoming as Richie regarding his motivations for choosing his fake identity, though a logical assessment would be that it’s an assembly based on Lu, the name of his girlfriend, and Yang, referring to a masculine counterpart, though in his varying online postings he has self-identified as a woman, and used his girlfriend’s image as a profile picture for a while.

Note to the curious: to those who’ve seen or varyingly reposted a group photo of thirteen people in front of some iron gates, of which I am the sixth from the left, Gabriel is the second from the right (yes, the short guy holding a bottle next to the tall gentleman wearing sunglasses).

This may beg the question as to how it is possible for me to know that it is Gabriel making all these posts; well, as “Lu Yang” has repeatedly posted information and content to which only Gabriel ever had access, it’s pretty obvious.

Since about April, Gabriel has seemingly devoted his life to me. I wish he wouldn’t. As stalkers go, I much preferred the one who sent me flowers, chocolates, and love-letters for about a year.

Contrast that with Gabriel, who spreads two temporarily private truths, and a Hell of a lot of lies about me. For the record, the two truths are:

I am a member of the Church of Satan. This is a well-established international organisation of atheistic rational hedonists (contrasted with the traditional Christian view of life as bad, death as good, etc) who have as central tenets such ideas as “responsibility to the responsible” and generally call for harsher treatments of criminals (contrasted with the Christian ideal of “Jesus loves them anyway”). Enjoys satire, and an outrĂ© aesthetic.

I am a member of the Temple of the Vampire. This is also a well-established international organisation with a focus on Transhumanist development and the pursuit of physical immortality. For those afraid of scary things like the V-word, I point you to the ToV’s disclaimer: “Within lies fact and fancy, truth and metaphor: discriminate with care”.

While never denying either of the above affiliations, I have generally avoided allowing them to be public knowledge since I became involved with other Transhumanist endeavours, such as human cryopreservation. Human cryopreservation attracts enough misunderstanding as it is, without throwing two very easily misunderstandable extra things into the mix, by association.

And his lies? They are too numerous to mention, but are chiefly puerile personal attacks.

To give an example, within hours of me publicly announcing my wife having given birth to our first child last week, Gabriel had already made and published online a crude animated video about it, making lewd sexual comments about our several-hour-old baby.

I don’t use the word “sick” to refer to many people unless they have the plague or something, but Gabriel is exhibiting some pretty sick behaviour.


Now, while I don’t consider these two people (Richie and Gabriel) to be at all similar, I did consider taking the same action against them both, since it seems they’ve both broken the same laws; by my counting, I’d suggest the list to be something like: libel, defamation, slander, harassment (this latter in at least Gabriel’s case). Obviously there’s copyright theft too, some images etc, but that’s nothing compared to the foregoing.

Oh, and Gabriel has also impersonated me in enough online places, in an effort to put words in my mouth. I forgot to discuss that one with the lawyers; it just occurred to me now that there is probably some law about that too.

So, I considered simply taking them both to court. Both would, as far as I and several lawyers can tell, be fairly obvious open-and-shut cases, given the wealth of evidence against them.

But, for once, Richie actually talked some sense on his hodge-podge of a website. The fact that they are both ostensibly without any meaningful assets means a legal case would simply be expensive to me, and that’s money I could better spend on the field of life extension, or my family, or generally more productive endeavours than making an example of an obsessed cook who thinks he’s Sherlock Holmes, and a bitter failure of a man who devotes his life to seeking new depths to which to go in a vendetta against someone who was only ever a friend to him.


So, there you are. Not the general purpose of this blog, but something that needed addressing regardless, and something that by being addressed in such a fashion will free up more of my time for more meaningful endeavours.