Inaccuracies in The Register article…
Just a quick post about an article The Register published this morning.
After promising an opportunity to review the article prior to its publication, this failed to happen and my request for anonymity was ignored when the article mentioned me by name. Having had previous dealings with the press, I pre-empted this happening and gave a false name, which has now been part-removed.
The article makes it sound as if money is my primary motivation. This is based on a line from a private email used out of context, so to clarify - it’s not.
My motivations are:
- Public shaming/revenge on Plumpy by publicising both his crimes and his ‘actions’ with my laptop, the latter usually involving a wrist, maybe making wannabe future thieves think twice.
- Expose the Police failings in my case and maybe by doing so prevent this happening to someone else in the future (probably being a bit delusional here, b’hey…).
- Gain some closure for myself whilst providing some entertainment for you lot, it has been very therapeutic and I can now actually listen to my bank’s on-hold music without the usual involuntary shudder.
This whole incident did cost me a lot of money, both directly and in loss-of-earnings, so whilst I have no qualms about putting ads on the site, the sum total of ad revenue currently stands at under £100 - far less than I’d earn in a normal day’s work. Clearly I’ve spent longer than that working on this blog, so it’s hardly a lucrative use of my time.
Well I’m glad we got that cleared up, now back to the show!