They lied and lied and lied: Roger Stanyard's Departure - Part 3
Earlier this week, I revealed that Roger Stanyard had had a fall-out with the BCSE, and walked out. What I didn't know at the time, was that the efforts made by the BCSE to effect a reconciliation were on the brink of success - and that Stanyard was almost back. (The walk-out was about a fortnight before).
Now, that's unremarkable enough in itself. The BCSE could have simply said "Yes - so what?" or chosen to ignore the story entirely.
What they did instead, though, has turned this story into a major event. The BCSE leaders Michael Brass and Ian Lowe decided that they were in a strong position to absolutely rubbish my story, and me - and they went ahead and did right that. Brass began personally e-mailing me, and Brass and Lowe together put together some extremely strong words on the BCSE forum. In short, they called me an utter liar who had made up a story with absolutely no basis in reality - and they kindly offered their readers some psychoanalysis of me to boot to explain how I could do such a thing. According to Lowe, the only reason that Stanyard hasn't been on the BCSE forum lately and why his contact details were removed, was simply because he had Internet connection problems for a bit. A little later, Stanyard himself turned up, to confirm this alleged fact. According to Lowe, I owe them an apology.
http://community.bcseweb.org.uk/viewtopic.php?p=10480#10480 (Later deleted by the BCSE in an attempt order to cover up the matter ...)
The problem for the BCSE though, is that I actually had far more evidence for Stanyard's walk-out than I showed in my original post. What this does is to turn this story from something of a non-event (Stanyard falling out, then making up) into something else entirely: prima facie evidence of an utterly cynical willingness to lie and slander openly and repeatedly - evidence of the sheer nastiness and deceitfulness of the BCSE's mode of operation.
I invite my readers to tour the thread on the BCSE forum on which this all plays out. Here are some things to look at (http://community.bcseweb.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1116 - access since blocked by the BCSE):
So... have you got the picture here? At least four BCSE committee members have strongly affirmed that my story that they fell out with Roger Stanyard and that he, for a time, walked out, is absolute rubbish, and evidence of my wickedness. If I can prove the contrary - then the BCSE are about to look very bad.
And, I can... and they are.
So, here it is. Here is what really happened, which Ian Lowe strongly affirms is nothing more than Stanyard losing his Internet connection (and Stanyard confirms), and which Michael Brass calls "crapola":
Lowe said, in the forum post referred to above, "And what I will say is that it's blindlingly apparent that he doesn't have all of the information at his disposal... and he's not going to either". Really? Let's see...
Here's Ian Lowe talking to BCSE member Chris Hylands, writing in a website discussion on the 13th of June - a website discussion that he didn't realise was being indexed by Google. Compare the above with what Lowe said below, when he thought I wouldn't be listening, and really hoped I wasn't. The level of concern over "BCSE Revealed" is encouraging to me too: it shows that my revelations have really hurt them. This is worth reading twice to let it sink in.
Chris Hyland: I wonder if Anderson is going to notice that the BCSE main page has been changed and no longer includes Roger as a comitee member.
Ian Lowe: Damn.
I wish he had not done that.
I got an email earlier in the day about Roger removing himself from an old committee mailing list that we have - it looks like about 5 minutes later, Roger edited the Homepage and Contacts page to remove all mention of himself.
I removed Roger's admin rights on the BCSE forum, but didn't change his access to the website - largely out of respect for Louis's desire for reconciliation.
This does however bring up the possibility fo scrutiny, which means that rather than BCSE announcing the merger and being fully positive about it, Roger's departure can easily be seen to pre-date the merger.
This is the same situation as we had with leeds - thinkfully, not legal this time, where Roger went off and edited every mention of "Leeds Uni" to say "Name witheld for legal reasons".
If we are *very* lucky, Anderson will not notice (not much chance, as the little weasel indexes our site every other day) and we can keep control of this.
a general question - if Roger is coming along with a thought of reconciliation, why is he removing all mention of himself today?
I'm concerned by this, and would really welcome some other (probably more rational and level headed) input!!
http://www.justscience.org.uk/wiki/tiki-view_forum_thread.php?forumId=5&comments_parentId=2129. [Get it whilst you can - I'm sure they'll delete it from the web asap. As ever, I have copies available for verification for your research purposes. Update a few hours later: Yup, it's gone].
Did you get that? Lowe, Brass, etc., in public strongly affirmed that nothing happened with Stanyard, and that I made it all up as a wicked liar. This page from Google, though, records that two weeks ago Lowe was talking with his fellow BCSE members about Stanyard's departure, possibilities of reconciliation, and talked about how to "keep control of this". In public, Lowe and Brass pretend that my story was total nonsense and that they don't care what I write; in private, they are petrified about what I might know about what they're really up to.
They lied, and lied, and lied
According to Ian Lowe, I owe the BCSE an apology for making up a story about Roger Stanyard, which is evidence of my psychological flaws. Lowe is someone who nobody involved with the BCSE who in any way cares about truth will ever work with again.
According to Stanyard, he was away for those two weeks because he had a problem with his ISP. Stanyard lied through his teeth and has destroyed his own credibility.
According to Brian Jordan, my story was "imaginary" and evidence that I have no moral standards. Jordan, being on the committee, must have known that this was a deliberate deception and attempt to smear me; but he joined in anyway.
The BCSE could have just ignored my story, or said "yes - we fell out; so what?". Instead, they allowed Brass and Lowe to persuade them that I wouldn't be able to prove my allegation, and that it was a good chance to rubbish me. Brass and Lowe persuaded their fellow committee members that for the price of a few whopping lies, they could make some capital. Those fellow members bought into the strategy. That strategy is in tatters now, and so are the reputations of Michael Brass, Ian Lowe, Roger Stanyard, Brian Jordan and various other members of the BCSE.