Sitemeter only tells you who was on your blog at the time that someone posted a comment. It doesn't say who posted the comment.
So if I visited Jane's blog at say 09.00, and left a comment at 09.15, Jane's SiteMeter would confirm that at approx. 09.15 someone from Essex was on her blog. However if Douglas also visited her blog at 09.10, and remained there for 10mins, then Jane's SiteMeter would confirm to her that at approx. 09.15, (when I left my comment from Essex), someone from Edinburgh was on her blog.
If you check Jane's blog for Jan 30th, you will see that Douglas and I, did indeed post comments close together, and I was constantly going back and forth to see if my comments had been approved, (I would probably have left the page open at some time and just clicked on the refresh button), so it's very likely that we were both on her blog at the same time. Therefore it would have been easy for Jane to have made a simple mistake, and believed that Douglas posted a comment when it was actually me, (and vise versa). But if she had bothered to check her SiteMeter just a little bit closer, she would have also seen that at the time the comments were left, there were two people on her blog, (one in Essex, one in Edinburgh); confirming that our two different ip addresses, were being used at exactly the same time; you can't do that from one computer!
At the time I didn't even know what SiteMeter was, and I don't think Douglas did either, (he probably still doesn't), so I didn't know what information it held, or how to see that information for myself, and now that I do know, it's too late to confirm, as that information is no longer available for Jan 30th. I do recall at the time asking Jane to check her findings though, (on more than one occasion too, as did Douglas), which Jane has confirmed on her blog on Feb 2nd, (confirming that we asked, but not that she'd checked).
Initially Jane's lie, (on Jan 30th), 'could' well have been a genuine 'mistake' by her, but after mine and Douglas's strenuous denials on the same day, surely she would have checked her facts, (any normal person accused of lying would), and she would have known she was wrong with in seconds. Yet she continued with her lie, knowing that at the time Douglas and I were too computer illiterate to expose her, and knowing no one else in this community would doubt her, and check for themselves.
To me that's a deliberate lie, not a mistake!
Now Jane complains of Cheadle's blog;
"All this blog is achieving, along with the discussions which have resulted from it, is to stir up more and more unpleasantness and anger"
Jane, you caused the unpleasantness and anger, you lied when all you had to do was admit you'd made a mistake and apologise for it. Strange how you now show concern when it's your credibility that's on the block; I can't remember you ever showing any concern for unpleasantness, when you chased down any one who showed support for Douglas, or while accusing Douglas of having mental health problems, citing me as just a figment of his deranged mind.
I bet you wish I was now!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Every thing Doug and Jane say always sounds so plausible, doesn't it. So plausible that nobody ever doubts them and nobody ever checks.
ReplyDeleteCheadle stated on 26 Feb;
"He's [Douglas] written a series of disturbing posts on his own blog in which he accuses us both of lying (these focus on Jane's findings that he and William Shears were posting from the same IP address, and my confirming those findings with my own Sitemeter readings)."
How exactly did he confirm them with his own SiteMeter readings when he didn't add SiteMeter to his blog until 1st Feb., two days after I left a comment for him.
Cheadle on 1 Feb.
"I've now added SiteMeter to this blog"
The only comment I've left on his blog since he added Sitemeter was on 26 Feb., which Cheadle's SiteMeter confirmed came from a different IP address from the one Douglas had posted from; and was also left almost 2hrs after he had claimed his own SiteMeter findings confirmed those of Jane's, so he couldn't have been referring to that one.
The FACTS are there if anyone bothered to take a look, but no one does, which is what they both rely on.
And if you think about it logically, if it was true, (which it most definitely isn't), and Douglas and I were one and the same as claimed by Jane Smith on 30 Jan, surely the last thing we would do is protest our innocence, while at the same time committing the same 'mistake' which apparently caught us out, (posting from the same IP address/same computer). I can't speak for Douglas, but I'm sure he wouldn't be that stupid, and I know I diffinitely wouldn't!!
Get real, Doug!
I see Cheadle has done a disappearing act leaving Jane Smith alone to carry the can for their lies. That's not very gentlemanly of you Cheadle, but probably just as well though, as his ill thought out lies were becoming increasingly more of a hindrance than a help to Jane.
ReplyDeleteI received another anonymous comment today, (always anonymous!),
ReplyDelete"don't you think that now "Doug Cheadle" has shut his/her blog down, this one should go?"
Not sure of your logic there, Cheadle was a lying scumbag and I proved it. Jane Smith also lied about my identity, and I proved that too. Her lies are still there for all to see though, (and for idiots like you to believe), so why should I remove my truthful blog, while her lies remain? I think you should have directed your question to Jane not me.