From Junican, in the comments to the previous post:
Leg Iron, I hope you do not mind me making the following post which is a copy of one I have made on Taking Liberties - it is off topic, but interesting...
I hope that you do not mind me using this thread to issue a plea for help. I’ll be as quick as poss.
In these pages (I think), some 3 months ago, someone mentioned that the BMJ had started a blog asking for new words with which to attack Big Tobacco. I had a look at this blog.
I decided to have some fun, and submitted a list of really horrible words (like diarrhoea). Needless to say, my contribution was not published.
Being up for a challenge, I decided to make several comments which seemed reasonable, but were in fact rather over the top. Clearly, tongue in cheek if one read between the lines. I noticed Pat Nurse had a go there too.
Believe it or not, they have accepted one of my ideas as one of the best six!!!! They have now published it to be voted upon, and, I suppose, I might just win the prize (a subscription to the Tobacco Control journal)!
Here is the URL for the original BMJ blog:
And the new blog for voting:
DP has made a comment on that blog.
My problem now is-
What would happen if I won??? Should we try to help my comment to win so that I can disown the whole thing in due course? So far there have been 111 votes. If one votes, one is taken to a page which shows the breakdown of votes to date. Mine has 17% so far; the leader has 40%. The leader wants newspapers etc to stop using the word 'smoker' because it implies 'a right'.
Anybody got any ideas? Oh, my name is James Watson, so it is easy to work out which comments are mine. (One of my comments has the first letter of each sentence spelling out the word ‘propaganda’ – which amused me and has not been noticed).
I hope that Rollo Tommasi does not see this, but I doubt that he would be interested in Forest Eireann.
I am going to copy this post to others.......""
I've been over and voted for the option presented by 'jwatso'. They have 112 votes so far, including mine. That one vote move the jwatso option from 12% to 14%.
This blog gets 600-800 visits per day. We have the ability to ram jwatso's impossible demand (that the government stop other countries selling tobacco to us) right up their jacksis and twist it.
They will cry, they will scream, they will bleat and they will howl.
The BMJ's anti-tobacco blog has found 112 voters since the 27th October. Including me! This little backwater blog gets that many visits in two to three hours. Blogs like Old Holborn get that many in minutes.
Go on. Vote for the jwatso option and watch the idiots screech.
Break their toys. And laugh at their tears.
They like to laugh at us while we shiver outside. Have no mercy.
We have seen none.
Update: 1 hour 20 minutes after posting, the jwatso option is up to 22%. There might be an interesting turn of events by the morning.
Update 3 am: They have 134 votes now. It took them a week to get 111 and about three hours to get the last 33. Our man, jwatso, is now in second place with only 4% of this minimal vote to find.
They won't ever manage to grasp why their antismoker vote is so small compared to smoker and 'don't smoke. don't care' nonsmoker votes from a few little blogs. I won't waste time leaving a comment there. If I get the urge to headbutt bricks, I have a wall here.
It already has suitably accommodating dents.
3:25 am Our man is now five votes away from the top spot. It took the entire might of the BMJ a week to put their twisted point across. It has taken a few small smoker blogs less than four hours to mount a response. In the middle of the night. No organisation and no management. Just some people talking. That's against the admin machine of the BMJ and the smokophobe collective.
Will they see what it means? Not a chance.
3:35 am: Three votes. Break those toys!