How the net retains traces of your (non) petulant past…
I picked this up on Twitter earlier… It’s a column by Ivan Yates in the Examiner who not only gives Damien a great mention but virtually channels his content for a good chunk of the article… Interesting since Mulley who was until recently a ubiquitous presence on Twitter has since made himself scare having stopped tweeting about five weeks ago (presumably to give his highly successful consultancy the time it needs)… It’s a good example of how making yourself scarce online can make you even more valuable offline… When Googling for the original tweet though I came across this less than kind remark by Damien regarding Mr Yates on Twenty’s blog (warning: not for the faint hearted)… But then again, maybe the old fogey will never find out… PS: He’ll never find out if I can’t learn to link properly!!! H/T Damien Update: Ach, now Twenty tells us it’s not the same Damien at all…
Hey Mick, want some training on how to link to stuff on the Internet? I won’t charge your new english bosses that much…
Is that an offer I can’t refuse? Nice of you to turn up for a change.
Corrected.
“That fuckstick Ivan Yates only has his self interest at heart.”
Different Damien, Mick. He’s a semi-regular contributor to the site but definitely not Mulley.
Happy to provide screenshots with IPs, email addresses, if you feel you need them.
Nope, I’ll take your word for it Twenty. Satirical channelling?
No, just another guy called Damien. As per here, for example – http://twentymajor.net/2009/11/20/depressing/#comment-69178
I think it’d be fair enough to suggest that a comment from Mulley would have linked back to his site like the one he left here …
That’s a pretty feeble retraction and apology (not) for a totally wrong accusation against Mulley.
Remember – The net also retains traces of your petulant present and future …
Here’s the thing Fealty – you’re a cunt!
Dobharchu, it’s a considerably more robust retraction than Damo ever engages in. Those former YPD wannabees, they do love their righteousness heh! Just look at his supposed recant on some nonsense about Paul Gogarty. And I too recall some choice comments from Damo about Ivan getting the gig on Newstalk but sure who has the time to go trawling back through that wasteland, not us old fogeys. Still at least this is an interesting inverse of his last political infatuation where he went from cheerleader for the Greens and Eamon Ryan in particular to apparently burning him in effigy and stalking their every on-line utterance.
There must be a research for dummies book out there somewhere.
Rule number 1: make sure you are talking about the right person! Just because someone has the same first name does not mean they are the same person.
Think an apology is needed.
so too does it hold a record of your past interest in him, Daniel… just in the interest of full disclosure http://www.danielsullivan.ie/blog/?s=damien+mulley&submit;=
also, it would probably be useful to learn from this that it is better to take the time and back things up when you’re making wild assertions
An apology is needed; the piece was lazy and still sits here, it should at least have a full retraction rather a mere addendum that’s rather unnoticeable
Charles, I’m well acquainted with the standard for retractions. Editing an existing post, while keeping the bulk of the content of the post and striking through the incorrect text, yep that’s really noticeable.
http://www.mulley.net/2008/04/20/green-td-paul-gogarty-clap-harder-gays-clap-harder/
Or why not another in the line of making up stuff which all comes to a dull stop when someone calls for some actual evidence to be presented. And then it’s left just there.
http://www.mulley.net/2008/02/27/ul-young-fine-gael-now-threatening-me-with-legal-action/
and Charles if you’re into full disclosure how come there is nothing forthcoming on your side; you’re hardly claiming to be a random punter now are you?
I’m sure most people are well aware that I’m not a massive fan of how Damien operates, nor are people that surprised when they read why. Making up tales of harassment to boost traffic is not a road I would ever be encouraging people to go down. Or for that freaking out about organisation A/company X/person Y before then meeting them, getting some contacts/business and then saying how great they are now that they “get it”. Next you’ll be saying that he’s never had a bad word to say about Ivan Yates before meeting him.
This post is pathetic.
I started the post to point out just how far the boy has come, not as a wind up. I only came across the post on Twenty’s blog after searching for Adrian Weckler’s original tweet.
It was an honest mistake, because that’s pretty much the way he talks about folk. In fact if you’ve known Damien as long as I have, you’d know it’s just how he does things.
So he has a tribute band. Who knew?
Mick,
The longer this goes on, the worse it’ll get.
You bite the bullet, admit the balls up publicly and then move on.
Then Damien’s little army of lookie-likies will clear off back to their own world of shouting and touting for business.
(and Damien can put your scalp on his shallow victory wall)
Somehow, I don’t think so Mark.
Thanks for this item. It’s now part of a third level social media curriculum in the Republic.
Excellent Bernie. There are lots of harmonics in it. Not least the suggestion from Ivan Yates that all you have to do to find Mulley is to put Damien in Google. Now we discover you MUST be a lot more careful than that.
And for me, retraction online is about additionality, not subtraction. If you get caught in the wrong you offer greater value in return (even if that’s only the open facility of the comments zone to critics). The analogue alternative is for both to head towards ground zero.
As Shane Richmond has argued none of this is about being in stone: http://url.ie/301w
In the process new things get discovered and the original material is given wider and deeper context. I generally fight tooth and nail over the redaction of material. The exceptions are when there is a question of a breach of law (in which case it comes off immediately), or it’s a plain breach of the site’s golden rule: play the ball and not the man. (More on some interesting technical developments on that later: http://url.ie/301y).
There is also the question of identity. Not being part of Twenty’s daily readership I was not aware there was another Damien Mulley. That I mistook him for such was: one, the name; and two his behaviour. I got it wrong. But at least the readers (in some documented detail) know that now. And they also know why.
In case readers are interested, the nic @damianmulley is still available for acceptable use on Twitter.
While it is hardly of the same quality standard as the contribution of the original Damien (how must it be for Twenty’s Damien that some think he’s not the original and the best) I’d leave it up to people to decide if it counts as petulant or not.
“Claire and Ger gone then? He’ll put everyone to sleep”
http://twitter.com/damienmulley/status/1502472781
Not being part of Twenty’s daily readership I was not aware there was another Damien Mulley.
There were two Damiens, not two Damien Mulleys. How odd.
I see I’m getting a moderately deserved roasting over on Damien’s site: http://url.ie/323g...