Critical reception (From York Press)
Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
Critical reception
9:32am Wednesday 2nd January 2013 in Letters By Reader's letter
I HAVE a New Year message for all those anonymous critics who regularly attack me on The Press website following any article or letter in which I feature.
Thank you. The more agitated you become, the more I know my comments are successfully hitting home.
It is your continued and predictable reaction which will encourage me to carry on my contributions throughout 2013.
Matthew Laverack, Lord Mayor’s Walk, York.
Comments(17)
Buzz Light-year
says...
11:18am Wed 2 Jan 13
capt spaulding wrote:Really?
I think he means you Buzz
I'm pretty sure I've never attacked Matthew Laverack never mind regularly and I certainly never get agitated by anything on this site.
The Great Buda
says...
11:19am Wed 2 Jan 13
/kev/null
says...
12:35pm Wed 2 Jan 13
Prob
says...
12:56pm Wed 2 Jan 13
Don't feed the troll, etc etc
Prob
says...
12:57pm Wed 2 Jan 13
please don't mention this in your next letter Matthew, or you make me cry.
Scarlet Pimpernel
says...
1:15pm Wed 2 Jan 13
I look forward to more of the same in 2013.
Keep up the good work, mate !
PS I am NOT Matthew Laverack ;-)
Scarlet Pimpernel
says...
1:17pm Wed 2 Jan 13
Buzz Light-year wrote:Not even about James Alexander's restrictions on freedom of speech ?
capt spaulding wrote: I think he means you BuzzReally? I'm pretty sure I've never attacked Matthew Laverack never mind regularly and I certainly never get agitated by anything on this site.
Think you forgot about that one!
Buzz Light-year
says...
1:25pm Wed 2 Jan 13
Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:Ok, I'll rephrase - I never get agitated by anything *written* on this site.
Buzz Light-year wrote:Not even about James Alexander's restrictions on freedom of speech ? Think you forgot about that one!capt spaulding wrote: I think he means you BuzzReally? I'm pretty sure I've never attacked Matthew Laverack never mind regularly and I certainly never get agitated by anything on this site.
The restrictions on freedom of speech were a result of jma1982's actions separate to anything published here.
Buzz Light-year
says...
1:36pm Wed 2 Jan 13
Something that he has often been bothered about and something jma1982 is bothered about too.
Radio 4 has been playing a series of programmes called "Belle de Jour's History of Anon"
Highly recommended listening. Check it on iplayer.
Jane Austen, the Brontes, Jonathan Swift all used it.
It has allowed and continues to allow people their right to speak out against oppressive political regimes, the Arab Spring being the obvious.
Anonymity has held a valid place in many contexts for a long time and rightfully still does today.
Scarlet Pimpernel
says...
1:50pm Wed 2 Jan 13
Buzz Light-year wrote:What about the fact that comments are disallowed on JA's letters in addition to Press articles that involve him ?
Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:Ok, I'll rephrase - I never get agitated by anything *written* on this site. The restrictions on freedom of speech were a result of jma1982's actions separate to anything published here.Buzz Light-year wrote:Not even about James Alexander's restrictions on freedom of speech ? Think you forgot about that one!capt spaulding wrote: I think he means you BuzzReally? I'm pretty sure I've never attacked Matthew Laverack never mind regularly and I certainly never get agitated by anything on this site.
capt spaulding
says...
4:31pm Wed 2 Jan 13
Buzz Light-year wrote:Im sure your right Buzz but your effigy didnt get pride of place on the Lord Mayors Walk Gibbet for no reason.
I notice Mr L uses the word "anonymous" to describe his critics.
Something that he has often been bothered about and something jma1982 is bothered about too.
Radio 4 has been playing a series of programmes called "Belle de Jour's History of Anon"
Highly recommended listening. Check it on iplayer.
Jane Austen, the Brontes, Jonathan Swift all used it.
It has allowed and continues to allow people their right to speak out against oppressive political regimes, the Arab Spring being the obvious.
Anonymity has held a valid place in many contexts for a long time and rightfully still does today.
Buzz Light-year
says...
9:24pm Wed 2 Jan 13
capt spaulding wrote:Yeah funny you should mention that, I'd say it was equal billing rather than pride of place. Weird as it was.
Buzz Light-year wrote: I notice Mr L uses the word "anonymous" to describe his critics. Something that he has often been bothered about and something jma1982 is bothered about too. Radio 4 has been playing a series of programmes called "Belle de Jour's History of Anon" Highly recommended listening. Check it on iplayer. Jane Austen, the Brontes, Jonathan Swift all used it. It has allowed and continues to allow people their right to speak out against oppressive political regimes, the Arab Spring being the obvious. Anonymity has held a valid place in many contexts for a long time and rightfully still does today.Im sure your right Buzz but your effigy didnt get pride of place on the Lord Mayors Walk Gibbet for no reason.
Funny how easy it seems to be to ignore all the times I've agreed with Mr L's letters on these pages.
Trying to agitate readers, going to the trouble of nailing effigies to the outside of your shop, singling people out - it says a lot more about the author than the so-called critics.
Not sure there even are any actual direct critics to be honest.
Maybe Mr L enjoys the notoriety, perhaps he gets off on the criticism?
This letter would suggest so.
The search box might do so too.
Buzz Light-year
says...
9:36pm Wed 2 Jan 13
Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:That The Press feels pressured to shut down comment on anything related to jma1982 and others is more disappointing than annoying.
Buzz Light-year wrote:What about the fact that comments are disallowed on JA's letters in addition to Press articles that involve him ?Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:Ok, I'll rephrase - I never get agitated by anything *written* on this site. The restrictions on freedom of speech were a result of jma1982's actions separate to anything published here.Buzz Light-year wrote:Not even about James Alexander's restrictions on freedom of speech ? Think you forgot about that one!capt spaulding wrote: I think he means you BuzzReally? I'm pretty sure I've never attacked Matthew Laverack never mind regularly and I certainly never get agitated by anything on this site.
The disappointment lies squarely with the journos not the politicos. They don't have to back down so easily.
Anyone can apply pressure. Standing up to pressure is what counts.
It wasn't like that before everyone was so scared of litigation.
As long as people from all walks and disparate ideologies can see this and all speak up about it then readers will see for themselves that what is removed says more than it did when it stood, what is disallowed says more than it could if allowed.
Unlike you, it's not personal or political for me.
capt spaulding
says...
9:41pm Wed 2 Jan 13
Buzz Light-year
says...
1:22pm Thu 3 Jan 13
Yorkman11
says...
8:23pm Fri 4 Jan 13
There are those who write to express a word of thanks and appreciation to those who have rendered a service.
There are those who very occasionally feel the need to raise a point of genuine concern to them selves.
Then there are the very few, like Matthew Laverack, who tell it as it is.
He is not emotional: he is factual. He is not a politician: nor is he cowed by them. He does not grind an axe other than those against profligacy, bureaucracy, a lack of common sense and bigots.
Matthew - you are a breath of fresh air and you are not afraid to look into dirty corners. Keep up the good work and shame those who are working for themselves and not for us, the honest tax payers.
capt spaulding says...
9:38am Wed 2 Jan 13