HERE'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DEAL WITH INFANTILE MINDS...

Recently, another Blogger made what I regard as offensive remarks about me in the comments section of his blog.  Wouldn't have bothered if it hadn't been clear he was referring to me.  So I emailed him and insisted that he remove his biased, inaccurate and inflammatory insults immediately, otherwise there would be repercussions.  Obviously, any intelligent person would interpret this as 'legal' repercussions (and much unwelcome publicity on my blog), but I've since received an email from this deluded, pathetic individual informing me that he's reported me to the police.  My initial thoughts are confirmed - the man is obviously of severely limited intellect.

What's worse, however, is that in his own account of the event, so eager is he to imply sinister intent, he attributes the words "dire consequences" to me - words I never actually used.  Yet more proof, if any were required, that he's not shy in twisting the facts to suit whatever distorted picture he's trying to paint.  I previously described him as someone with no regard to accuracy - I now don't hesitate in calling him an outright stranger to the truth.  (To reality, in fact.)

What is it with some comicbook geeks?  Are they mentally retarded, or what?  The question remains though - just who's going to report him for wasting police time?  (Assuming that he has actually reported me - which I doubt.)  And to think - all this nonsense simply because he got his facts wrong three times in a row and resents me for merely supplying corrections.  (Prima donnas, eh?  Who needs 'em?)

Error #1: He claimed his Dandy scans came from the 1978 Chimera-Posner book, D.C. THOMSON FIRSTS.  No they didn't.  When he finally admitted I was right, he said that he was given the wrong information by the supplier of his scans.  What?  The guy doesn't know what it is he's scanning from?  A likely story.  Then he claimed such details aren't important.  (So why does he get uptight about it?)

Error #2: I also pointed out that his Beano scans were four pages short.  Not so, said he, claiming that several unidentified experts confirmed his assertion that he'd posted the complete comic.  (Obviously also a bit of a fantasist.)  So I emailed him the four missing pages.  No acknowledgement or thank you until over a day after I'd drawn his attention to the fact on my blog.  Then he eventually posts a grudging "thank you" and later tries to imply it was posted earlier than it actually was.

Error #3: He also mis-attributed his Beano scans to a different source than they actually came from.  Talk about sloppy 'accountancy'?  Once more, it wasn't 'til I had again identified the actual source that he tried to imply that he'd known all along and had simply mis-typed.

He's done this sort of thing before.  A couple of years ago, I pointed out an error in something he wrote.  He went back and sneakily amended the mistake, then claimed he'd never made it to begin with.  Without a screen-grab of his initial version I couldn't prove anything, so I didn't make a fuss, downplaying the situation by saying I couldn't understand what'd happened.  Given his constant squirming and dismissal of detail as being unimportant - when he gets it wrong that is - it's clear he has a massive hang-up about being seen to be mistaken about things on which he considers himself an expert.

Now he's going 'all-out' over on his blog, trying to misrepresent the facts and playing the role of the victim.  When a detractor of mine turned up on his blog erroneously endorsing his claims, he also took a sly dig at me, to which I responded.  (Strange that said detractor only visited the two posts I'd remarked upon and missed the subsequent ones.  Let's put it down to coincidence, shall we?  Even though they both know one another as members on a comics forum.  No doubt we also believe in fairies and honest politicians.)

Sadly, this was the only excuse he needed to try and wrest some kind of perverse revenge for having been shown to be wrong, seizing the factual content of my reply to said individual as an excuse to ban me from his site.  (Perhaps he's aware of the 'history' between myself and this person and is exploiting it for his own ends - as well as striking a blow on behalf of his comics forum cohort.  It's worth noting that, out of the four links (now five) on his blog to other sites, two are his own and one is my detractor's.  Something sure smells fishy in Denmark.)

Well, it's all a bit dramatic, but it's certainly one way to ensure not being picked up on all the errors one makes - ban anyone who spots them.  He likens himself to a seafarer, does this sad and 'stormy' soul - but all I see is a capricious Captain of an unseaworthy ship, adrift on troubled and turbulent waves.

"Argh-h-h-h! It's 'im!"

******

Update: This person has now deleted his provocative remarks from his blog in order to minimise his outrageous behaviour and to allow him to claim a "calm and dignified" reaction.  (Must be nice to have such a flexible perception of reality.)  Divorced from the context in which they were made, some of my comments may seem unduly forthright, though it should be remembered that I'm simply responding to smears, insults and outright lies.  I have no interest in whitewashing the facts and therefore won't be removing my posts.