I’m not expecting much sense from Psychwatch; primarily due to the site’s author Steve Taylor. While an individual practitioner who self-appoints as a lone watchdog of their peers sets off the lone nut warning light, he may have a point on the issues – I don’t know. But Steve Taylor’s last public outing was a truly credibility destroying exercise.
Last local body elections Taylor contested the Auckland mayoralty for the Direct Democracy Party. Aside from being part of a party led by a conspiracy theorist and revolutionary wannabe, Taylor also provided considerable unintentional comedy across the blogosphere.
22 responses so far ↓
psychwatchnz // 12 July, 2008 at 8:17 pm |
Right, so I was a candidate for the Auckland Mayoralty – correct; I ran on a new ticket – correct; debated issues on a blog – correct.
So, aside from an ad homenim attack on me, the point of your post would be…………..
Thought so.
Richard // 19 July, 2008 at 7:00 pm |
The point of the post is quite clear, it’s about your credibility based on past performance. It’s interesting you’ve chosen to just complain of a personal attack rather than address the specifics.
As for your checklist your second and third points are a little disengenous.
Direct Democracy wasn’t a new ticket, it ran in the 2005 general election and apart from Alp it contained a number of menbers of the National Front and fringe eccentrics such as Robert Thankyoufornotbreeding Atack (actual name). You also didn’t just run on the ticket, you were deputy leader of the party. As our grandmothers would have said, you are judged by the company you keep and Kelvyn Alp and friends, plus their (actually your’s as you were deputy leader) policies on the treaty, fiscal and monetary policy were just nutty.
As for debating the issues I’d love to see one example of you doing so. As in the Kiwiblog and Whaleoil links above you did little more than unrestrained yelling on the internet, that wasn’t debating the issues. Also in an unfortunately deleted blog of Aaron Bhatnagar’s you were caught out posting fake reponses seeking to support your other comments. That made you look very foolish and you cannot deny that that behaviour was deliberately deceptive.
psychwatchnz // 20 July, 2008 at 2:16 pm |
Hi Richard,
I suspect that you are guilty of confirmation bias, and I am certain now that you are guilty of lying.
You don’t have to like me or my world view – but at least tell the truth.
psychwatchnz // 20 July, 2008 at 2:24 pm |
Tell you what Richard, post your full name and contact details to me, and we can test your claims via legal protocol. If you want to engage in conflict with me, lets do it transparently and out in the open. You have defamed me in the above post, so bring your cheque book and a good lawyer, and lets get to it.
Steve Taylor
Psychwatchnz // 20 July, 2008 at 6:38 pm |
Hi Richard,
Still waiting………
Richard // 20 July, 2008 at 6:58 pm |
Well you were still waiting since I’m not sitting at my computer all day.
There’s nothing in my post or my comment that meets any legal test for defamation. Feel free to get your lawyer to email me.
If there is anything that is incorrect I’m happy to be corrected. What is it in particular that you take issue with.
Che Tibby // 20 July, 2008 at 8:19 pm |
steve,
i think what they call your actions in this thread is “bullying”. no judge in his right mind would hold up a defamation case from the post above, and you know it.
Richard // 21 July, 2008 at 8:21 pm |
Like being bullied by an emo dwarf. You know you’re safe under all circumstances and he doesn’t get how funny it all is.
Defamation cases go to jury trials I think, although a judge would no doubt rule favourably on ann action to dismiss or at least grant security for costs upfront.
psychwatchnz // 24 July, 2008 at 6:54 pm |
Richard, email me your details as I have requested to 24-7@maxnet.co.nz.
Richard // 24 July, 2008 at 7:50 pm |
I’m not indulging you Steve.
I’ve asked you what you take particular issue with – you’ve not responded.
I’ve said I’ll correct anything that’s incorrect – you’ve not responded.
You’ve accused me of lying but not identified anything that’s untrue.
Matt // 24 July, 2008 at 9:43 pm |
I don’t know I’ve seen some pretty vicious dwarves in my time. But generally they have a good sense of the ridiculous and don’t take themselves too seriously.
Matt // 24 July, 2008 at 9:45 pm |
…and leave off the emo’s – they inherit the earth.
psychwatchnz // 25 July, 2008 at 8:01 pm |
Richard,
Your aversive response, and repeated refusal to identify yourself simply affirms that your post about me contains demonstrable falsehoods. I have the courage of my convictions in this matter (and am prepared to put my money where my mouth is) hence I have no need to hide.
You are thus little more than a coward.
Richard // 26 July, 2008 at 1:17 pm |
Steve,
It’s simply illogical to conclude that my refusal to identify myself affirms that anything I’ve written in the original post or my comments is untrue. It simply demostrates that I’m disinclined to engage in a pointless legal dispute with you.
You have had and still have the opportunity to refute or correct anything I’ve written. I am, however, getting a bit tired of being called names. Unless you are going to take the opportunity to address the points that you take issue with, I am going to block you from commenting on this blog.
Evan // 30 July, 2008 at 1:21 am |
Richard
Could it be that Steve D Taylor knows that your remarks are right on the money.
As for defamation .. can he demonstrate any material loss he has made because of some uncomplimentary posting on some obscure blog?
Is there anything published here that either would not be publicly known, or at least publicly expected, from an aggressive idealogue such as Steve D?
Richard // 30 July, 2008 at 10:14 pm |
Obscure? I’m in Tumeke’s top 100!
That’s a very good point – even if I had defamed him I’d only need a chequebook for my own legal fees.
For Steve to consider my remarks on the money would require him to have doubts about his credibility. I don’t see his antics as suggesting that degree of self awareness.
psychwatchnz // 5 August, 2008 at 10:14 pm |
COWARD.
Richard // 5 August, 2008 at 10:43 pm |
/sigh.
As previously noted Steve I’m not going to indulge you in pointless legal action. If that was an attempt to goad me into engaging with you then it was a poor one. Don’t you claim to be an effective mediator and counsellor? Your antics on this thread wouldn’t be described as exemplary behaviour in terms of conflict resolution would they? If you truly believed this post unfairly harmed your reputation you would have sought to have its content corrected or provided a reply debunking my claims. Given that you haven’t, it appears to me that you are more motivated by a desire to publicly grandstand.
Also, since you first threatened me with defamation you clearly haven’t sought to find out anything about defamation law. As internet publications are considered to be news media, you had 5 days upon becoming aware of the post to request a retraction or the opportunity to reply if you wished to seek damages from me; that deadline lapsed a while ago. So all your bluster has been a waste of keyboard time, notwithstanding there’s nothing here that actually defames you.
Anyhoo – as I said before you haven’t asked for a correction or rebutted my points so you’re blocked.
Bye bye and thank you for making my friends laugh.
Eugene // 16 December, 2008 at 1:09 am |
For somebody watching out for psyches, based on this conversation thread alone, it sounds to me like Steve needs one himself!
Randomx // 16 December, 2008 at 3:12 am |
psychwatch is a front group of one person
that is a front group of CCHR , which is a front group for The Cult of Scientology.
Scientology policy states that it is there mission to take over the the judiciary, the media, education, religion, politics and the field of mental health.
There is an army of people protesting scientology around the world.
http://www.whyweprotest.net/en/
Tarns // 13 January, 2009 at 9:30 pm |
Everyone can sit back and criticise Steve Taylor but he’s the only person brave enough to try and make a stand. There are over 50o people killing themselves in NZ every year. The state of our Mental health services and residential facilities are appalling. Try talking to some mental health consumers and their families and see how they feel about psychwatch. The mental health community have had a gutsful of being treated like crap. It’s time for a change.
Steve Taylor is a bloody legend as far as I’m concerned.
gogarth // 17 February, 2009 at 6:39 pm |
Tarns,
you have a point, in as much as the service user’s of mental health provision need a voice. I speak from direct experience of this. But service user’s should be represented by someone who knows what they are talking about, who are credible and have no personal agendas. They need objective support, not loose cannon challengers. In a sense, Steve Taylor is fighting the right fight, but he comes across as too invested in his own mission, to show real integrity to the cause that is stated. The responses to ‘Richard’ above, are all that are needed to know that he gets too fired up, too easily, to be projecting a reasonable and measured cause for people in need, even if his intentions are, from his perspective, true.