Obsession…

It’s good to be loved, but when your suitor doesn’t get that it’s not reciprocated, it can get a bit creepy as it drags on.

Two months ago, I wrote a blog about growing discontent amongst the political right. It got singled out on Blogotariat and elsewhere (I don’t keep track of these things too well) and since the initial posting only got a few small blips of interest.

This past afternoon/evening since the stats clock clicked over, this turned up in my figures.

So what?

Now, I know this isn’t an enviable piece of traffic. That’s not the point. If I were that obsessed with having large numbers I wouldn’t be writing the kind of blog that I do (the word-count of the posts, if anything, keeps people away.)

123 hits on a single post from two months ago within half a day, is by the standards of this blog, a reasonable spike in the figures. It grabs my attention.

So what was the reason for the spike? Ohhh…

I don’t think we need to feed him much more attention by naming him.

See, for me, now it really stands out. On the occasions that I notice this guy linking to me, it’s when the stats are low at the start of a new 24 hours and there’s a couple of links from him. On a slow day he’ll stay on the list of incoming links at something like 9 hits. A spike of 119 (there were 20 hits from before the clock clicked over) speaks to me of a lot of “back button, click-link-forward” repetition.

All because I pointed out some of the misogyny he posted on his blog was misogynistic. Over two years ago.

There’s anger management for you.

Maybe he’s found a typo or something. He seems to find them unusually important and can divine all sorts of (spurious) conclusions from them.

Maybe he’s done one of those partial-quotes-followed-by-ten-words-to-take-the-quote-out-of-context-style posts that I suspect is the mainstay of his blogging. (It seemed normal in about all six or so of the short memos blog posts of his I’ve seen over the past couple of years – yeah I know, hasty induction.)

I couldn’t be bothered looking. He’s written something.

I guess you would have to check his stats for confirmation of the nature of the traffic he’s sent my way. But if one of the blogs on my blogroll is anything to go by, the last time he published his stats (which are more detailed than mine), it was embarrassing. Lots of comments by a lot of sockpuppets impersonating bloggers that our obsessive friend has had tiffs with.

The IP for a number of the sockpuppets was allegedly that of an account belonging to a noted News Ltd conservative opinion-maker, who seems to have an affinity for our obsessive little friend. The sockpuppetry may of course have been undertaken by someone other than the said opinion-maker – co-occupants, pet cats, split personas and insecure wireless offer a number of alternate explanations – I make these caveats because the lawyers have already been brought out with gag-orders and I don’t want to look like I’m being too hasty.

So how a small number of sockpuppeting readers managed to crank up 120 odd hits when usually it’s about 9 max, I don’t know. Still reeks of obsession though. Which is understandable considering the agitation our friend’s been getting from some quarters of late.

For the time being at least, I’m going to refrain from naming (or nom-de-pluming at any rate – he’s anonymous) and shaming him with the specifics of his antics (not that he has shame.) I’d like to call it an olive branch but really it’s because I couldn’t be stuffed.

I’m only writing this out of a passing Facepalm feeling of amusement. Surely if I’d been pwned into oblivion for the one mere criticism of misogyny, surely if he’d had his victory, he wouldn’t have to keep trying.

But no. If I’m not laughing then I’m not interested in what this guy’s peddling. And I’ve got other things to do now other than laugh, so I’ll be off.

If you were wondering where “Wot” came from on the Growing discontent post, I suspect you’ve got your answer.

~ Bruce