After the alleged Telegraph take-down of her blog, a number of people are doing the "I'm Spartacus" bit in solidarity with Nadine Dorries.
Your humble Devil is afraid that he isn't particularly sympathetic. Mad Nad is pretty much the personification of the stereotypical blogger: self-serving and self-obsessed, stupid, pointless, vacuous and prone to throwing out wild—and demonstrably false—allegations that would already have landed most people put in court.
Her behaviour throughout the last few months has been, frankly, pathetic and concisely documented by Bookdrunk, as he points out that Nadine Dorries might like to admit the fact that she has happily smeared people, that she also seems to have been economical with the truth (whilst believing that she has cleared herself), that she seems to spend little time in the country, that she has failed to answer pertinent questions, that Dorries is a massive fan of hyperbole, and that maybe she should have seen what was coming and that she seems to have no sense of proportion and that even ConservativeHome readers appear to have realised that she is a mendacious little shit. True, Bookdrunk also expresses disquiet about the take-down of her blog but, given how quick Nadine was to wheel out the lawyers over Smeargate, perhaps the poor dear might have taken a crash course in defamation?
As many have noticed, Mad Nad really is the gift that keeps on giving. Which is why Bloggerheads is able to publish a long article detailing why Nadine has broken the ACA rules. Oh, and again. Oh, and maybe Nadine should update her Register of Members' Interests entry: surely it must be kept up to date under "the system"?
Tim also asserts that Nadine Dorries is "no blogger, and no blogging hero" and I am inclined to agree.
I have written this post to show solidarity with those who believe that the libel laws in this country are a fucking joke, and that they should be reformed as soon as possible. I have written this post in order to point out that I do not agree with those who pull down blogs at the slightest provocation.
I have not written this post in order to show solidarity with Nadine Dorries. Not only is she a vacuous moron, but she brings the whole blogosphere into disrepute; and not even because of what she says—there are plenty of bloggers with whom I disagree (including Bloggerheads and Bookdrunk, much of the time).
However, there is a code of blogging—netiquette, if you like. These rules include technical aspects such as having proper permalinks, but they also include taking comments and replying to them. They also include linking to your sources when you make allegations or cite data.
So, I stand here to defend blogging, but I couldn't give two shits about Nadine Dorries or her fucking "blog". She's a fucking disgrace, frankly.
As your humble Devil has recently opined, the WHO is not fit or purpose —its original mandate of public health having been perverted by sing...
Short answer: no. Slightly longer answer: Vote Leave did play fast and loose with the actual definitions—hey! it's marketing. And in...
Sorry, I've not been on my best form recently. I have suspected for some time that the realtionship was not going to last, even to the d...
With the CRU emails having been examined, it seems that some people—mainly techies—are really starting to dig into the data files. These fil...