The Censor in RTW Speaks Again

[JGD]

I had a negative view of you and his other critics.

Oh how most people, who have not encountered one, are sceptical and smile or laugh when the concept of red-mist attacks are explained to them for the first time.

The laughter stops when it happens to them. Most times for the most minimal or imperceptive of reasons and at such speed they don't see it coming.

Mr Beach has twenty to thirty interlocutors recounting and sharing their experiences of these forms of attack at his hands on these pages and on other local forums. Most have the good sense, often conducted in acts of self-preservation, to disengage quickly and make no further contact with Mr Beach.

Their now cynical laughter is testament to perhaps why the communities have to find the wisdom to prevent this predator from harming it further.

Alternatively everyone who is not an acolyte walks away and lets all Mr Beach's platforms die on the vine.

[DickWynne]

I really don’t want to have to go back to the police about her behaviour, but I will if necessary, and this time I will elect to press charges rather than have the police issue a warning as they did last time.

I don’t often get here but just dropped by and I see Chris Beach is still demonstrating that the only thing worse for him than being talked about is not being talked about. I’m hardly even a bit player in the Nic saga — my intro to it was being taken by Chris as an idiot looking for a village in his forgeing of police reports regarding her (see somewhere in the sockpuppets thread). To give him (dubious) credit, he can be quite convincing and it worked for a few hours. Anyway let me put on record here that it was me who accompanied Nic to the police station to help her get to the bottom of these ‘reports’ and I was there when, after an exhaustive search, the police confirmed that no complaint against Nic by Chris had ever been recorded by any force, let alone any warning being issued. I think we can believe the police in this matter. I forget whether an online utterance can be slander or libel, but Chris’s repeated assertion that Nic received a police warning would appear to be one or the other.

[25.7.20] Chris has pounced on the above post by email to me in terms predictably both flattering and patronising (to someone some 30 years his senior*) and accusatory of my apparently being duped by Nic. I don’t know Nic, having met her only once, and I have no interest in the ill-advised online shenanigans of both of them, but I am interested in Chris’s betrayal of the community he purports to serve with such probity on se23.life, and his apparent falsification of evidence. He now claims his police report is supported by that established organ of legal record, Twitter. Not sure what happened to the redacted, official-looking document and email he tried on me before. I have not engaged with him other than to request he delete my se23.life account which I stopped using over a year ago and which he used to PM me.

* I should add that wisdom does not always come with age; sometimes age comes all by itself.

[JGD]

To give him (dubious) credit, he can be quite convincing and it worked for a few hours. Anyway let me put on record here that it was me who accompanied Nic to the police station to help her get to the bottom of these ‘reports’ and I was there when, after an exhaustive search, the police confirmed that no complaint against Nic by Chris had ever been recorded by any force, let alone any warning being issued. I think we can believe the police in this matter. I forget whether an online utterance can be slander or libel, but Chris’s repeated assertion that Nic received a police warning would appear to be one or the other.

Good for you Dick.

And for the solid reinforcement of Nic's honest protestations that Mr Beach's falsehoods were an utter fabrication formed in his warped imagination.

Given the confession made by him that he fabricated the account using that Flava Baker name and Mr Beach tried to justify why he lied and continues to lie about what he published using that account, it is astonishing that any or either of the police services he allegedly engaged with, did not choose to examine whether he was at least (or best), wasting police time.

There may be matters to be examined by police that scrutinises whether a criminal case can be made where a predatory stalker used a platform of lies fabricated by him to persecute someone with whom he had a disagreement and contrived to falsely incriminate that person. There is a long track record of examples of his previous and ongoing behaviours of false fabrications, concoctions, persecutions and intimidations of others with whom he has had even the slightest of fall-outs. The forging of police reports which were not in fact made and the showing to others of forged copies of the falsified reports, would certainly not stand well if the police were to become aware of the actualite and investigate events.

For those who still consider themselves a friend of Mr Beach or at least retain some affinity for him, they would serve him best by telling him to stop.

Of course in normal circumstances, a reasonable person would respond directly to the many appeals to stop that have already been made.

As you observe Dick, the only response is the issue of further empty and futile threats by Mr Beach.

[JGD]

I have commented elsewhere that it would seem Mr Beach has joined a mass exodus of like-minded British Twitter malcontents flocking to a fringe social media company that is becoming a haven for Twitter's ousted right-wingers called parler.com.

Mr Beach in a tweet a few days ago reveals his right-wing alternative outlook on all the leftist mobs and editorialised trending topics that he alleges (without a scintilla of evidence) exist in Twitter. (Perhaps he is just another "alt-right" naif who cannot make an impression on his new Royal Tunbridge Wells neighbours.)

https://twitter.com/chrisbeach/status/1 ... 30026?s=20

All with Mr Beach's stated disapproval of these features in the many channels that are open and used by our friends and neighbours in the modern world. Without any evidence and irrespective of the fact that he hates the views of others being freely expressed where he cannot attack or vilify or suppress the posters with his usual venality and without consequence to himself.

Fear not community members, Mr Beach tells us how he plans to resolve his dilemma.

Mr Beach will move it all to parler.com !!

Just when you thought there was nothing Mr Beach could do to make his forum less manageable or palatable (to the rest of us that is), he plans to put it on a platform that will enhance his ability to enforce his singular views with even greater ease. It might be wondered what parler.com's policy is on dealing with stalkers with a track record of falsehoods.

He banned me originally for a thousand years from three of his .life creations - perhaps he has a fiefdom with that duration in mind - how unoriginal I hear you say.

In his inimitable style of "let me delete the evidence" he may remove the tweet of course - but worry ye not - we have the screen-shot safely stored.

[broken_shaman]

"Man fed up with cancel culture wants to quit platform because he doesn't like other opinions."

[JGD]

Mr Beach is off again on a rant.

This time a repeat of an attack by him on the work of Nathan Bowen on Perry Vale suggesting it is "questionable"

What on earth can Mr Beach see as being questionable and doesn't he realise his unstated implication is futile. Or is it a reflection of his own prejudices which a lot of people have experienced and suspect he has many.

Great to see a very robust post rebutting his venal ambiguity and futility.

[vbsydenham]

Hugo Rifkind wrote a particularly good piece on Parler, and speficially on the type of right wingers who go there:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/soci ... 092034a61a

This is not the marketplace of ideas. Instead, it is a safe space for people who have shown they cannot function in the marketplace of ideas. All of us, if we’re honest, believe some things that some other people would find offensive. If you argue to convince, then upsetting others is always going to be an impediment; a problem to be solved or circumnavigated. Sometimes it will be unavoidable but the moment you start lusting for it, you are doing something else. You’re not even debating. You’re just trying to beat people up.

The people on Parler represent nobody’s failure but their own. Otherwise they simply couldn’t stand to be there. They have not tried to bridge divides, and they have not agonised about their inability to do so. They were always in the cesspit. It just took the rest of us a while to notice.

[JGD]

Great post @vbsydenham and astute observation by Hugo Rifkind.

[stuart]

Parler do "open dialogue" except it's all hidden from plain sight - unlike Twitter. I assume inside is a bit like the Breibart comments on steroids. I thought I would open an anonymous account to check. Except I found you can't join without disclosing your phone number - they check it via SMS.

A bit creepy and not necessary for the stated purposes. So I walked away. Feels like a perfect honeypot - but for whom?

I really can't see Chris selling this one to many of his followers. Just as he didn't sell SE23.life or close SE26.life.

His wording on his rants is also revealing of his early 1950s colonial worldview in his concept of race. I hope a good friend might buy him a copy of Adam Rutherford's "A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived" for Christmas. Otherwise he is welcome to borrow mine.

Stuart

[Robin Orton]

Do you know who currently owns SE23.life, Stuart?

[JGD]

I really can't see Chris selling this one to many of his followers. Just as he didn't sell SE23.life or close SE26.life.

There may be more than two ways of looking at the no-sale outcome, but here are some starters.

First, Mr Beach could not stimulate any serious interest from any party who had the wherewithal to take over and run SE23.life or SE26.life.

Not surprising that ordinary community members would see both forums as being poisoned. SE26.life has no moderators and those formerly appointed seem to perform those roles no longer. A direct pitch in his announcement post to SydSoc, inviting them to consider taking it over had all the appearances of being hollow and of going nowhere.

Whilst SE23.life has moderators, it would seem they cannot exercise any moderation that is in anyway effective upon Mr Beach's predatory attacks on other forum members and politically motivated rants. It should be noted that where Mr Beach has made questionable pronouncements recently, there are fewer and fewer "likes" applied to his posts by mods and acolytes. Indeed some have taken to openly applying "likes" to posters who oppose Mr Beach's views.

But this is not a substitute for effective or meaningful moderation.

Second, Mr Beach probably had, and has, no serious intentions to make a transfer or sale of either forum.

They are now some of the only outlets where he is permitted unfettered abuse of others - without the risk of banishment or other control measures being applied to him.

To paraphrase Hugo Rifkind, Mr Beach has not tried to bridge divides, and has not agonised about his inability to do so. He was always in the cesspit. It just took the rest of us a while to notice.

With an added insouciance whereby Mr Beach has a dire need to ensure he was seen to be able to "best" any poster who holds an opposing view.

It is certain that others can add to this list.

[stuart]

Do you know who currently owns SE23.life, Stuart?

The domain is registered to Brighter Code Limited.

Brighter Code is CB's service company. He has described himself in many places as 'owner' of the forum. I have seen no evidence of any change, Only an apparent wish to sell to a party he trusts. So i guess that rules me out

HTH,
Stuart

[Robin Orton]

Thanks, Stuart. I misread your earlier post as implying that the sale had actually happened. (Thought you were being ironical!)

[Nic]

This time a repeat of an attack by him on the work of Nathan Bowen on Perry Vale suggesting it is "questionable"

He went running to Network Rail and Global to snitch on Nathan (questioning whether Nathan had sought permission). Oh but conveniently "doesn't remember" contacting Network Rail

Funny, he didn't seem to mind Nathan's work - or its guerrilla nature - until it featured "angry black men" in a statement piece about black oppression...

[JGD]

Heard confirmation from multiple other sources that Mr Beach, not only now as Censor-in-Chief-for-Forest-Hill but also Chief Snitch on SE23.life had written to NR demanding confirmation that Nathan Bowen had the requisite permissions from the site owner, despite Mr Beach's recent online denial that he had done any such thing.

Can't Mr Beach tell a simple truth ?

It looks as if Mr Beach is undecided about whether he approves or disapproves of Mr Bowen's work - see the Chris Beach "like" applied here. This is the image from Nic's post from a January post about Mr Bowen's work.

[Nic]

Heard confirmation from multiple other sources that Mr Beach, not only now as Censor-in-Chief-for-Forest-Hill but also Chief Snitch on SE23.life had written to NR demanding confirmation that Nathan Bowen had the requisite permissions from the site owner, despite Mr Beach's recent online denial that he had done any such thing.

Imagine complaining to Network Rail and a billboard company about a piece of street art (described by him as a "massive piece of graffiti") that's located in an area that you don't live in and (I assume) don't even frequent? Despite a majority of people who actually live there and see it regularly IRL reacting favourably to the piece?

It looks as if Mr Beach is undecided about whether he approves or disapproves of Mr Bowen's work

I present to you more conflicting data:





No complaints from him about Nathan's work as far as I can tell until the "I Am A Man" piece. He's gone from "loving Nathan's work in general" in June to "preferring a blank hoarding" just a few days ago, despite signifying his approval of a number of pieces in Nathan's signature style on local hoardings in January.

Edit: I can't seem to figure out how to add images!

[JGD]

Nic's images.

[JGD]

It has been brought to my notice that Mr Beach in another of his multiple (and not-too-secret) guises in Twitter is expressing his view that local trolls are poisoning what he describes elsewhere as "competing forums" in our locality.



It is evident that it is a major frustration to Mr Beach that admins on other forums will not ban these alleged trolls.

Just as Mr Beach has endured being banned by every admin from every forum that he does not own for miles around us here.

From Mr Beach's hyperbole it is also clear that he has failed to grasp that his accusatory use of the word trolls is mis-applied somewhat. Some may argue the contrary - it is not trolls, Mr Beach, who are tired of you, it is the wider, more sensible members of the communities whose forums you have poisoned that tire of your expressions in the form of incessant whingeing and unrepresentative and dogmatic views.

A series of valid questions arise.

Why does Mr Beach have so many identities on Twitter?

It is reported that there are 20 to 30 accounts which Mr Beach controls. We know from his public statements that he alleges he created sock-puppet accounts to enable him to find out what issues another user may or may not have been posting about. This self-confessed self-justified act may have had in fact a different purpose for Mr Beach. Has he fabricated this scheme as an act of entrapment based on Mr Beach's construct of a fabric of lies created only by him? Does he still believe he was justified? Does he still hold to the false belief that the police issued a warning based on his fabrication?

Even Mr Beach's acolytes are now mainly silent when he continues to repeat the false allegation that he is still under an attack that in fact never existed except in the warped mind of a poisoner. Evidence perhaps of the diminution of the support he - and all of his dying .life forums - has in a community that is reaching the conclusion that it is prudent and wise not to listen to someone who cannot lift himself out of the cess pit.

For all Mr Beach's public condemnations of the "leftist mobs" (can he possibly mean us) why is it he feels he must have so many different identities on a media stream he has such manifest distaste for? Could it be the case that his multiple identities are used to generate inward links to his failing .life handiwork thus falsely inflating the traffic-counts to make them at least appear viable? Mr Beach's forum being deemed credible is a different matter within the target communities. Is there anyone left who still sees that as being achievable?

Why is it Mr Beach chooses to set hares running by suggesting there is something questionable about Nathan Bowen's art (and does not have the courage to define what Mr Beach means by questionable)?

Why is it Mr Beach cannot answer a question accurately when he was asked about him writing to Network Rail requesting information on whether permissions had been granted for their site to be used for that art? Did Mr Beach contact NR? To the rest of us It's a simple yes or no answer.

Perhaps it is because this unreliable man knows no better and fails to see the need to desist and "does not agonise about his inability to do so".

[Nic]

You know what JGD, Chris Beach makes out that it's just a tiny handful of people who are vocal about this, like you and me, that have problems with him and his modus operandi. And that we're the "trolls", he's a victim. Does he really believe that? Because I'll tell you what, I've had messages from DOZENS of people who DETEST the forums, detest what he's doing to our local area. I even bumped into an important community figure yesterday, they too stopped me and said they hated the damage he does to the community. "Detest", "hate" are strong words, right? But it's no exaggeration, this is the language that's being used by dozens of people who don't speak out publicly, but have contacted me and spoken to me privately. (And I have all the DMs, all the emails, all the evidence if he wants to start throwing around the predictable legal threats etc in one of his hissy fits.)

He talks about the forums being "successful". I wonder what his measure of success is exactly? How much havoc he can wreak on a community from afar? Because over the years since 2016, all I've heard is how much people are really, really angered by the damage he wreaks; how they refuse to use his forums Just Because Of Him.

A friend told me this morning that Chris posted something on a local Facebook group yesterday, with a link driving traffic to SE23.Life, and someone responded saying that they were interested in the subject matter but had no intention of clicking on the link to read as they won't touch the forum with a bargepole because of Chris and his nasty brand of politics. According to my friend, Chris played victim, claimed this particular woman had attacked him before, all the usual predictable stuff we're all so used to (yawn), and the post has subsequently disappeared... I have no idea who she is, and never got to see the conversation for myself.

My point really is, JGD, that we & a couple of others get singled out, we're targeted and labelled by him as a pesky, troublesome, vindictive minority (because we speak out) - but I can assure you that there are many, many more people behind the scenes who feel just the same, stronger even, although they may not vocalise it publicly.

I wonder if he ever really started the forums as a business, or whether they were just a Chris Beach vanity project where he could pretend to himself that he held some sort of power and control, where he could say what he liked without censorship (having been banned from so many other community forums)? Because - seriously - just how bad can someone be at business? How can a businessman take a decent product and brand and completely fail because they weren't smart, humble or self-disciplined enough to stick to their strengths and not allow their weaknesses to destroy what could have actually been a good thing? How can a businessman keep repeating the same mistakes, time and time again? How can a businessman so completely fail the potential users and beneficiaries of their product? How can a businessman not see it as a significant failure that they set up a community forum and the legacy left is a large proportion of members of that community saying they detest what they've done to the area?

[Holaquease]

there are many, many more people behind the scenes who feel just the same, stronger even

Me for one. I'm prepared to admit that I'm a bit scared of him. I certainly wouldn't want him to have access to my email address.