The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

A #GamerGate Oddity

Posted on | October 21, 2014 | 20 Comments

The troll @MMashItMatt popped up in my Twitter timeline Tuesday to call me a “piece of sh*t doxxer.” Now, there are two kinds of trolls: The worthless pests I block, and the potentially dangerous creeps I don’t block because I want to keep an eye on them.

See, I figured out that not every Twitter troll is just a random kook. Some of them are dangerous criminals and some of them are Neal Rauhauser who, if he is not a proven criminal, is arguably the most evil online operative I’ve ever encountered. Rauhauser once boasted that he had created more than 100 different accounts. And nobody has deleted more online content than Rauhauser, whose habits of secrecy and deception I’ve described at some length. And if you have read the dossier on Rauhauser, you can understand my suspicion that he must be operating somewhere in the shadows around the #GamerGate controversy. But I digress . . .

“Don’t feed the trolls” is good advice, but there are times when I deliberately call attention to a troll, so that my thousands of Twitter followers can see what kind of creepy evil is out there. And when I did this to @MMashItMatt, he said:

“You silenced a Palin critic by telling them you would
release their info. You are scum of the highest order.”

Oh, you mean “Audrey,” eh?

A small group of trusted people know the whole story of “Audrey” who, far from being merely “a Palin critic,” was in fact one of the most hateful and dishonest of the notorious “Trig Truthers.” The very last time “Audrey” posted to her blog in August 2009, she directly accused Sarah Palin of faking her fifth pregnancy — stated this as a fact in a post with the headline “Who’s not your mama?”

“Audrey” was one of several bloggers who latched onto the “Trig Truther” bandwagon that the vile Andrew Sullivan got rolling, and you can see how she squealed with pleasure the first time Sully linked her in November 2008. When “Audrey” stopped updating her blog in August 2009, some of her readers were mystified by her silence. And then on Sept. 12, 2009, this appeared in the comments:

Hi faithful readers and friends, Morgan here.
Many of you have written expressing concern over Audrey’s absence from her blog. Several of you have heard rumors that she was threatened.
Those rumors are, unfortunately, true. Audrey has been threatened. She and her husband took the threats seriously enough to seek legal advice and have decided after consulting with their attorney to suspend posting for the time being.
She has asked me to convey her deep appreciation for the good wishes and support she has and continues to receive from all of you.
[email protected]

Well, I knew that to be a complete lie, although perhaps a necessary lie, because the crazy readers of that once popular anti-Palin blog needed some explanation, and when Dan Riehl brought that note by “Morgan” to my attention, I wrote on Sept. 14, 2009:

Hey, “Morgan”: How about you grab yourself a nice hot cup of STFU, sweetheart? You’re not doing “Audrey” or her family any favors with inflammatory rhetoric like that.
A wise concern for mercy ought not be taken for granted because, in case you haven’t noticed, some of our regular readers were intensely curious about the mysterious end of this investigation. And the content of certain comments (some of which I’ve had to reject as hinting too obviously) indicates to me that these commenters are also capable of research.
Some other research-savvy bloggers might not be as scrupulous as Dan and I have been, “Morgan.” Your insulting comments could make those other bloggers angry, and who knows what might happen then?
Mmmm. The delicious flavor of fresh STFU . . .

It would be unnecessary and unwise for me to explain too much more than I explained at the time. But let me tell you, I was this close to hitting the “publish” button on an article, and decided against it:

Her carelessness confronted me with a very difficult dilemma, and I hesitate to think what might have transpired had some unscrupulous, selfish, vindictive person been in my position. . . .
As Dan Riehl and I discussed between ourselves, there is no reason to believe “Audrey” has been guilty of any legal wrongdoing, merely careless in her online choices.
As our research advanced, and sources provided further information, however, matters reached a point where I had to ask myself, “Do I really want to publish this?” This same research indicates that “Morgan” knows exactly what I’m talking about . . .
It would have been unnecessary cruelty on my part to have published without having first contacted “Audrey,” which I did by means of a courteous and quite friendly e-mail message to her husband (whom she had referenced at Palin’s Deceptions as a sort of in-house “expert”).

Everyone remembers how Dan Riehl and I exposed the perverted anti-Palin blogger Jesse Griffin, but that was different: Given the sick stuff Griffin had written about pornography, children and masturbation, there seemed to be a matter of public safety involved.

In the case of “Audrey,” however, it was different. Before I finally decided against publishing a thoroughly documented article full of screencaps, etc., I had already dropped a few hints on the blog, just to gauge the reaction. What would “Audrey” do if she realized that her separate online personas had been connected, and that I knew everything about the real person behind both personas?

Silence. She must have been scared shitless, as well she should have been. Let me see if I can explain what I mean:

  • X — Hateful and dishonest anti-Palin blogger “Audrey.”
  • Y — Reputable human being with a real life in a small town.
  • Z — Other embarrassing online behavior.

Now, imagine you are Reputable Human Being Y. For many years previously, you engaged in Embarrassing Online Behavior Z under a pseudonym that had never been penetrated. Y thinks to herself, “If nobody has figured out that I’m secretly Z, then Internet anonymity is very simple.” However, no one had very much of a motive to try to connect Z to Y; it’s a different matter when Y decides in 2008 that she is now also going to become X, telling lies about the Republican vice-presidential candidate who, as of August 2009, looked like a potential contender for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012.

There might be all kinds of people who decide to take an interest in discovering the identity of X, and one of those people might drop me an anonymous e-mail saying, “Hey, look at this.”

Ask yourself this obvious question: Why didn’t “Audrey” (X) use her real name (Y) to do her anti-Palin blogging? There is no law against being a “Palin critic,” after all. But she wasn’t a “Palin critic,” she was promoting the hateful insane lies of Trig Trutherism.

Do you want to know what the GOP vote margin was in the county where “Audrey” and her family live? I could look it up. Trust me, if her neighbors had discovered she was behind that wicked blog, she would not have been the most popular mom in the PTA.

Oh, but what about Embarrassing Online Behavior Z? If connecting X (“Audrey” the anti-Palin hate monger) to Y (the real person in the GOP-leaning small town) would have been hurtful, connecting Z to Y would have been thermonuclear destruction. Trust me.

And I was this close to hitting the “publish” button on that blog post, OK?

That unpublished post is still sitting there, five years later, in draft.

Some people criticized my decision not to publish that. “She’s a vile and despicable subhuman monster! What’s wrong with you?”

Trust me, I made the right decision. I’d seen the sudden silence at her blog after I started dropping hints, and I could imagine the panic. In fact, once I’d dropped a few hints, some readers searched around and figured it out for themselves. “Audrey” had been careless, and if I could connect X + Y + Z, her anonymity was not secure. But still, that question: “Do I really want to publish this?”

Hit “publish” and you destroy somebody. For what? For politics?

No, it’s not worth it. And I would not want to be known for that.

We know the denouement. I sent a polite email to Y‘s husband, explaining that the secret (“X + Y + Z“) was no longer secret. I suppose  “Audrey” decided that continuing to write wicked lies about Sarah Palin was probably not a good idea. (Smart decision, ma’am.) And, of course, Sarah Palin did not run for president in 2012; the wicked lies of Trig Trutherism were just a waste of time, anyway.

Did I “threaten” anybody? No. I don’t threaten people. I made a choice not to publish, and “Audrey” made her own choice. To see my choice criticized by @MMashItMatt, however, makes me wonder if mercy was the wrong choice. What are we to do with these insane, hateful and ignorant people who confuse mercy with weakness?

@MMashItMatt had better contemplate the consequences of attempting to impugn my honor with his dishonest accusations.

Mercy has its limits, and I am not always merciful. Selah.

Somewhere out there online, Neal Rauhauser must be lurking in the shadows of #GamerGate. If you find him, let me know.



20 Responses to “A #GamerGate Oddity”

  1. RS
    October 21st, 2014 @ 11:22 pm

    “Don’t feel the trolls” is good advice . . .

    Undoubtedly true, but I think you meant “feed.”

  2. Adobe_Walls
    October 21st, 2014 @ 11:34 pm

    Feeling the trolls is really bad, probably makes the hairs stand up on the back of ones neck.

  3. A #GamerGate Oddity | That Mr. G Guy's Blog
    October 21st, 2014 @ 11:37 pm

    […] A #GamerGate Oddity. Funny how these trolls suddenly appear for a brief moment, then disappear back into the woodwork like a bunch of Cockroaches. […]

  4. Mike G.
    October 21st, 2014 @ 11:40 pm

    Feeling the trolls makes me want to throw up in my mouth.

    Slightly OT. Clark at Popehat has a great piece up ostensibly about GG, but correlates it with the culture wars of the last millennia. Very interesting theory he has posited..

  5. Adobe_Walls
    October 21st, 2014 @ 11:42 pm

    Unless you had a concern for innocents such as their kids I’d say you choose poorly. No good deed goes unpunished and you’re being accused of doing the deed anyway. Not that it will get much traction.
    More importantly, while there may be exceptions, though none come to mind, destroying evil is always the right thing to do. Did you ever ask yourself what she’d do under similar circumstances? The answer is probably obvious.

  6. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    October 21st, 2014 @ 11:50 pm
  7. robertstacymccain
    October 21st, 2014 @ 11:51 pm

    Damn typos! I blame the patriarchy!

    (Thanks for the correction.)

  8. AwD
    October 21st, 2014 @ 11:59 pm

    “Your political beliefs are unacceptable and therefore we will ruin your life over it” is par for the course for leftists. So I really don’t think they should be whining when a conservative REFRAINS from doing the exact same thing that they do ALL the time.

  9. DeadMessenger
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 12:02 am

    The answer is obvious what she’d do. Which is why he couldn’t. And can’t. And because Selah.

  10. Adobe_Walls
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 12:40 am

    After stopping to think about it, my conclusion is of course the same. Destroying evil is always the right course. People like Audrey are not mere bad people doing bad things they are leftists doing bad things. They. Are. The. Enemy. Of. Humanity.

  11. Adobe_Walls
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 1:43 am

    Thanks; it was a good read.

  12. John_LC_Silvoney
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 5:44 am

    I strongly suspect “Audrey”, like most off-the-scale Palin haters, was a male homosexual.
    The white hot hatred they display toward her is bizarre and ugly.

  13. RS
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 7:53 am

    By definition, mercy is undeserved by the recipient. Granting it is its own reward.

  14. Quartermaster
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 8:08 am

    A libtard masquerading as a Journalist would have hit publish. The “greater good” or “higher law” is the standard appeal. Their true goal is greater glory for themselves. Beyond that, nothing matters.

  15. texlovera
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 8:41 am

    Lil’ Matt needs to be a bit more careful with his twitterspew. Tugging on Stacy’s cape = bad, bad idea…..

  16. CNN Blinked From Dish Network | Regular Right Guy
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 12:34 pm

    […] A #GamerGate Oddity […]

  17. Adobe_Walls
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 1:10 pm

    Not exactly a compelling prescription for ridding the world of evil.

  18. Mm
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 2:30 pm

    I was just thinking about Matt, I mean Audrey, just a couple weeks ago, and wondered what had happened to her. Also, if you are unaware of @/NicoleBonet1, she/he is either Neal or one of his cat lady harem.

  19. Steve Skubinna
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 5:46 pm

    Once again we see progressive projection at work. You want to know what they do, how they think, watch what they accuse others of.

  20. theoldsargesays
    October 22nd, 2014 @ 10:39 pm

    It’ll get you killed every time.