‘Jezerna Roza’ once posted on the Herald, however the terms and conditions of that publication demand that people who leave comments do so under their real names. ‘Jezerna Roza’ is not a real name. It is therefore evident that ‘Jezerna Roza’ was misrepresenting herself, a point which she herself has conceded by her admission that ‘Jezerna Roza’ is not her real name. I understand she has admitted that she was banned from posting on the Herald for breaching the publication’s terms and conditions and misrepresenting her identity.
It is therefore disingenuous of ‘Jezerna Roza’ to complain in the comments section of the Guardian that others have speculated as to the nature of her misrepresentation, as I did in an article published several months ago – at a time when readership of this blog scarcely broke into double figures.
I can assure ‘Jezerna Roza’ that she is quite mistaken as to the intention behind the publication of the original blog piece. I would ask her to reflect upon the impossibility of embarking upon a vicious personal attack against an impersonal online ID and the fact that it is logically and legally impossible to defame an anonymous indvidual. My “modus operandi” was not, as she claims in the Guardian comments, to embark upon a vicious personal attack against her. I am afraid that I am in fact considerably more sleekit than that.
My “modus operandi” was to speculate on the limited amount of available information about ‘Jezerna Roza’s’ motives, and thus provoke her into revealing further information which would allow other below-the-line commentators to gain insight into the motivations behind her copious running commentary exclusively on articles about a small and distant country she clearly knows little about. This would then allow them decide for themselves whether ‘Jezerna Roza’ was a political sock puppet, or someone who apparently obsessively projects their own emotional issues resulting from the traumatic and violent breakup of Yugoslavia onto the very different circumstances of the Scottish independence debate.
‘Jezerna Roza’ not only took the bait, but also identified herself as the same individual using other online IDs such as ‘Albiesalba’. I have made no mention of those other online personas. The responsiblity for linking these IDs publicly to ‘Jezerna Roza’ lies solely with the individual concerned. If the online credibility of these other IDs has been compromised, ‘Jezerna Roza’ has only herself to thank for it.
However I would like to thank ‘Jezerna Roza’ for her description of me as “the Guru of Scottish Yes supporters”. I had thought that the aches in my knees were due to arthritis, I now discover it is in fact a product of typing blog posts while sitting in the lotus position. If I have attained the lofty heights of gurudom, it is in no small measure due to the sterling efforts of ‘Jezerna Roza’ in publicising this blog. I urge ‘Jezerna Roza’ to look up the meaning of the English idiom “to make a rod for one’s own back”.
Political sock-puppetry is morally reprehensible, however it is a perfectly sane and logical tactic, and is the only conceivable rational explanation for the motivations behind ‘Jezerna Roza’s’ comment history – which now runs into hundreds of thousands of words. But a sane and logical political sock puppet in the employ of a party would not have republished a link to a blog article exposing their sock puppetry, ensuring that the article gains a far greater readership than it otherwise would, and giving this blog considerable traffic from the pages of the Guardian – at a time when blog readership exceeds 110,000 page views monthly.
I am sorry that my attempts to seek rational and logical explanations for ‘Jezerna Roza’s’ online posting behaviour have distressed her. I now see that I was incorrect and thank her for pointing this out. But since the rational and logical explanations for ‘Jezerna Roza’s’ online posting behaviour have been ruled out, that leaves only irrational and illogical explanations.
I would not presume to lecture the inhabitants of Slovenia about the constitutional future of their country, even though I am considerably more knowledgeable about the history and culture of Slovenia than ‘Jezerna Roza’ is about Scotland. (A long time ago before I met my partner, I had a Slovene lover. Funnily enough all the Slovenes I ever met were wildly enthusiastic about Scottish independence. It saddens me greatly that the image of this remarkable and beautiful small country has been sullied in the Scottish media by the obsessive postings of ‘Jezerna Roza’. In my experience, she is not representative of Slovene opinion.)
If ‘Jezerna Roza’ does indeed have a valid contribution to make to the Scottish independence debate, then I urge her to do as I have done – to have the strength of her convictions and publish her views under her real name. Otherwise I will continue to be of the opinion that ‘Jezerna Roza’ is merely an unfortunate individual who is projecting her own post-Yugoslav traumas onto the future of Scotland, and from a position of emotionally charged ignorance is lecturing the inhabitants of a country she knows little about.
Failing that ‘Jezerna Roza’ should be dismissed without further consideration as an object of pity. I shall therefore return to skipping over her comments without reading them.