About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editor
Mike Hoefer

Editors
elwood
susanthe
 William Tucker
The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch paper
Democracy for NH
Granite State Progress
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Pickup Patriots
Re-BlueNH
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
New Hampshire Labor News
Chaz Proulx: Right Wing Watch

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes

Campaigns, Et Alia.
NH-Gov
- Maggie Hassan
NH-01
- Andrew Hosmer
- Carol Shea-Porter
- Joanne Dowdell
NH-02
- Ann McLane Kuster

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Rockpuppet

by: Dean Barker

Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:41:02 AM EDT
(Bumped by Laura -- you can also read the Granite State Progress demand for an apology.)

Update: From some of the comments I've been seeing on threads from other places, it's clear that some are either not bothering to read the post, or else are intentionally misreading it. RockinNH was not banned from this site because she was an anonymous user who was in favor of NHAC. We welcome anonymous users of all partisan stripes, although it's pretty obvious from our logo and description that this is a community of progressive politics.

RockinNH was banned, because she claimed, among other deceptions, to be an undeclared voter who had no knowledge of who ran NHAC, and to our surprise turned out to be, from abundantly public information, a Republican activist and State House candidate who is also the Executive Director of NHAC.
End Update.

Last Thursday I wrote about a Granite State Progress action during Concord's Market Days that was intended to highlight opposition to the NH Advantage Coalition's town by town anti-tax initiative. Four more NHAC and/or tax-related posts later, and suddenly Blue Hampshire found itself with a number of new users who were aggressively pushing the NHAC agenda, writing what has amounted to hundreds of comments back and forth.

So we took a step back and looked at the initial one, from a user who had signed up on our site right after that first post on Thursday, RockinNH. In looking over the comments, the detailed knowledge expressed about the right-wing NHAC in some of them fit poorly with other ones that suggested someone not associated with it. This aroused our suspicions, and we did a little digging.  

I should perhaps note here that despite our previous brushes with unethical sockpuppets and recommend astroturfing, we don't normally take such steps (nor could we possibly have the time).

However, when there are users out there who may be  abusing the anonymous nature of blogging to dishonestly portray themselves as something other than what they are, and to do so to pursue an agenda, we have a responsibility to clean our house of fakery.

So. When we did a simple Google search of the email address used to register RockinNH, we were surprised and disappointed to discover that it led to several publicly available web sites showing it to be the email address of Tammy Simmons (one example here with name and the address in question). As this article from Foster's shows, Ms. Simmons is the Executive Director of the NH Advantage Coalition.

(More below the fold...)
Dean Barker :: Rockpuppet
Now, there's no reason why the Executive Director of anything can't participate on Blue Hampshire, regardless of partisan leanings. But we clearly state in our Getting Started page:
Full Disclosure
Paid campaign staffers, workers, and elected politicians' staffers are very much invited to join the conversation here with comments and diaries, but are asked to provide full disclosure.  A good place to do this is in your Comment Signature line which can be updated in the Profile section of your user page.  If you post a diary with no intent to comment, then provide disclosure somewhere in the text of the diary.
Ms. Simmons, the Executive Director of an anti-tax advocacy group, in essence equivalent to a paid staffer for a political campaign, nowhere made that disclosure during her time here. Indeed, that appears to be the very idea.

What's more, another new user who signed up after RockinNH, Friends of NHAC, did so using the same IP address as Ms. Simmons.  Double-dipping with multiple accounts is an obvious violation of standard blog practice.  That in and of itself is a bannable offense, especially when utilized to employ more than one voice on a comment thread, as was done in this case. Of course, it could be two separate individuals using the same computer, but given the fact that the first one is already a sockpuppet, we are less likely to be give the benefit of the doubt.

Why is it important to ferret out situations like this when they arise? Because, as is clear from a cursory review of RockinNH's comments, a dishonest player can make a mockery of the communities we are trying to build in good faith in this New Media experiment of the blogopshere.

For example: when Ms. Simmons, under the guise of RockinNH, called the staffers at Granite State Progress, "idiots" in her very first comment, she did so referring to the NHAC's policy as "their position." Again, she refers in another comment to "their petition," instead of "our petition."

The deception gets deeper. Here Ms. Simmons describes what she learned about NHAC, the organization of which she is in real life Executive Director :

What makes someone not from NH  (4.00 / 1)

I thought I had read on thier website who exactly was involved with NHAC, but it's not there anymore. From what I could get out of the website (namewise) and from googling I see only NH people. I guess they could be getting some money from outside the state - but who doesn't? I mean the NHDP gets a tone of it's money from out of state, right?
by: RockinNH @ Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 20:47:16 PM EDT

Perhaps the most egregious example, however, is when RockinNH pretends she doesn't know Simmons' own job title:

And where does it say she is executive director? I couldn't find that on the website anywhere.

The character of "RockinNH" deviates from its owner, Ms. Simmons, in other ways as well. For example, here RockinNH says:

Who is Dan McGuire?  (0.00 / 0)

Everyone keeps throwing names around and I cannot keep up! Who was attacked in this postcard? Isn't the only free stater elected a democrat? I think he's from here in Manchester.
by: RockinNH @ Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 15:58:21 PM EDT

Well, RockinNH may not know who Dan McGuire is, but Tammy Simmons should.  After all, she was interviewed by Dan on Capitol Access just two months ago.

That's not all. A simple Google search tells me that Ms. Simmons is a Republican candidate for the State House in Manchester (District 17) and also the Treasurer of the Manchester Republican Committee.  But according to her sockpuppet, RockinNH, she is an undeclared voter who is "Not a Bush Fan" and who also doesn't "really like" Republican presidential nominee John McCain.

As a result of this sockpuppetry, which appears to have been done on behalf of pumping up NHAC and their anti-tax initiative, RockinNH and Friends of NHAC have been banned from this site, as well as some others who signed at the same time and we suspect were brought over here for the same purpose.
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Rockpuppet | 39 comments
Here's another one (4.00 / 3)
I found funny:
regular Granite Staters outraged by taxes" sniff test  (0.00 / 0)
what exactly is the "regular Granite Staters outraged by taxes" sniff test"? And how does who someone's funding comes from have to do with whether or not they are doing what they feel is best for NH taxpayers?

What does Simmons's running for state rep have to do with her being executive director? And where does it say she is executive director? I couldn't find that on the website anywhere.
by: RockinNH @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 09:45:00 AM EDT



Funny how when Republics try to use the intertubes (4.00 / 1)
it comes back to bite them in the ass.
LOL

...the Doo Dah Man once told me you've got to play your hand. Sometimes the cards ain't worth a dime if you don't lay 'em down.
Sock it to 'em (4.00 / 1)
Tax The Puppets !!!!!!!!

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
Who says it's not a big truck? (0.00 / 0)
It is.

Nice work, Dean & co.

Tammy Tell Me Not So True (4.00 / 1)
This makes me smile.  Does the E.D. of NHAC really think it is an effective use of her time and the out of state donor money they are reaping to post under a nom d'blog at Blue Hampshire?  If yes, excellent - that means their judgment is really, really bad.  Plus, it makes me smile to know that as Tammy was posting some of her posts, she was probably thinking she was being a clever Tammy, when in fact she was being a very silly Tammy, hanging herself with a lot of rope being provided to her.

Good job, Dean - the explanation of why they were all banned is important, because Ms. Tammy probably and her fellow puppets probably didn't read the rules.  This isn't about closing the discussion, it is about trying to mislead the community.    




"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

I just can't get over (4.00 / 3)
that someone would think they were going to put this over on us. Of all f'ing people.
Ha! (0.00 / 0)
An alternative advantage in New Hampshire might be a computer-literate population. Or maybe even just a literate population, given one would only have to read the dozens of articles written on sockpoppets being outed.

NHAC doesn't seem capable of leading that charge though, apparently.  


Pronounced "enhack" (4.00 / 2)
To nhac a blog is to attempt to infiltrate it under false pretenses with a purpose of spreading misinformation. Usually carries a connotation of failure.
btw (4.00 / 1)
I just got that... IndyMac reminded you vaguely of IndyNH,
in so far as they were both frauds.

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
At the risk of being tedious, (4.00 / 2)
let me take this opportunity to say that people who want to cut taxes to reduce government services are very likely lazy and cheap.  What they'd prefer is for someone else to do the necessary work to keep our society functioning and for them to do it for free.
This does not strike me as a moral attitude.
I think we need to redefine "moral" in terms of socially responible behavior, rather than personal behavior.
Perhaps, but. . . . (4.00 / 1)
I agree with the sentiment, but not necessarily the motivation.

Not all conservatives are bad people.  Some legitimately believe that a weak government is in the interest of all citizens.  Real conservatives, for example, are repulsed by the Bush Administration's wanton encroachment of civil liberties, and by its efforts to deny women control over their own bodies.

I also respect leaders like Jack Kemp, who will go to his grave preaching the virtues of enterprise zones and school choice.  Regardless of what one thinks of the approach, it's hard to deny Kemp's genuinely held conviction that such policies will ease poverty.

I welcome the debate.  There's nothing immoral about being wrong for the right reasons.  And it strengthens our arguments when we show the error of theirs.

[ Parent ]
The BIG Lie of the thinking conservative (4.00 / 2)
I agree with you, DD, but there's one very big problem with that, and this really goes to the core of why I believe in economic liberalism.  The big lie of conservatism (real conservatism, not this neo-con crap) is that "smaller" government means more freedom and "bigger" government, no matter what it does, means less freedom.  That's just not true.  A "bigger" government (and I reject that terminology because of the visceral implication) that acts responsibly, democratically, ethically, and efficiently makes for more individual freedom than any other system, more than drown-in-a-bathtub government, and more than anarchy.

But at least traditional conservatives have a thought-out philosophy and aren't just drinking the kool aid and accepting whatever the RNC advocates as "conservative".

--
Hope > Anarch-tea
Twitter: @DougLindner

[ Parent ]
Right. If government is the people, then, if there are more people (0.00 / 0)
the government is going to be bigger.  It stands to reason.
Republicans are convinced that government is an entity separate from themselves that's designed to tell them what to do.  So, of course, not wanting to be told what to do, they want this entity to be as weak as possible.  That makes sense.
So, it all depends on where you're coming from--what your prejudices are.  People who see government as an institution to do THEIR bidding, want it to be as large as they want it to be.  But, they mainly want it to do things.  
People who see government as a super nanny who's trying to get them to conform and do things, want the nanny to be shrunk.  The problem is that shrinking government won't get it to do the right thing.  Government doesn't interfere with people's personal matters because it's big; it interferes with human rights because it's misdirected.
[ Parent ]
Government, at its best, ensures that other factors do not infringe on people's rights. (0.00 / 0)
And by the way, if you believe that government is the only threat to freedom, voting for right-wingers is exactly the wrong way to approach that problem.  Anybody else notice that the Libertarian Party's Presidential nominee voted for the Patriot Act?

--
Hope > Anarch-tea
Twitter: @DougLindner
[ Parent ]
'Tis a failing, I admit. I haven't paid attention to libertarians (0.00 / 0)
for decades.

I am a pro-government person.  I expect the agents of government to perform the tasks WE assign them.  "Protecting rights" is not one of those tasks.  If they attend to business, individual rights will be protected, but that's an ancillary consequence, not an objective.

[ Parent ]
Checks and balances are an assignment to protect our rights. (0.00 / 0)
Members of Congress are not bureaucrats, and it is wrong to say they don't protect our rights, because some do, and some do not.  If it is your job to make law, it is your job to make responsible law and see that it is respected.  They're not paper pushers.  If you think Congress should impeach President Bush and should stop efforts to grant FISA immunity, it's hypocritical to say that protecting our rights isn't a task.

Meanwhile, the Ron Paul rEVOLution made libertarians relevant, and polls that include self-proclaimed Libertarian Bob Barr, who voted for the Patriot Act, show Obama with a greater lead than 1v1 polls.  The only real poll is the ballot, and Barr's name will be on that.  By the way, no matter what you think of Ron Paul, can somebody explain to me what love (r-love-ution) has to do with his get-off-my-lawn platform?

--
Hope > Anarch-tea
Twitter: @DougLindner

[ Parent ]
I don't consider myself lazy ... (0.00 / 0)
...let me take this opportunity to say that people who want to cut taxes to reduce government services are very likely lazy and cheap.

Let me take this opportunity to say that I can't afford higher taxes. That's why I want a tax cap in Concord and that is why I have support and supported "the pledge."

While I was born in Concord and raised in Concord and a few other communities, I have spent most of my adult life in Massachusetts. I also currently work there. I can tell you that limiting property taxes via a tax cap works. I can also tell you that supporting the pledge works too because I have seen first hand how sales and income taxes lead to waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption. You don't have to believe me but it is the truth.

The tax cap doesn't "cut taxes" - it limits tax increases. There is a difference. The pledge doesn't "cut taxes" - it keeps new taxes from being created. There is a difference. There are many, MANY Democrats who support the pledge, including our governor and our president of the Senate. I don't know if many Dems in Concord or other towns are supporting the tax cap but I imagine that there are some.

The tax cap also encourages new development and growth in order to spur the economy, increase revenue, and raise the levy limit. In other words, bringing in more tax revenue without punishing current taxpayers.

I don't consider myself lazy. I work a 50-plus hour week and spend eight to 10 hours commuting to that job every week. As a father of two, I can't - and won't - take on a second job just to pay for higher taxes. I don't know how I would even juggle it with my schedule with a second job. But if the pledge is broken or property taxes continue to go up at 6 to 12 percent rates, I will have to get a second job. So, if it is being lazy to not want to take on a second job to pay for everything - and everyone - who will receive the extra revenue the government collects, well, I guess I'm lazy then but I don't consider myself to be so.

I will admit that I am cheap sometimes. But I have to be. I'm in a serious profession [journalism] that unfortunately barely makes ends meet. We aren't getting a raise this year, despite taking on more work. But everything is going up. So, I have scrimp, save, and be miserly with every darn penny.

I support putting a tax cap on the ballot in Concord and I will vote for it because we need to restrain spending in this city. If other communities don't want to do that, that is fine. I'm not going to tell them what to do. But Concord's "leaders" have and continue to waste a lot of money. I have noted just some of the most obvious examples on this blog and my own blogs.

So, before anyone so blithely throws out words like "lazy" and "cheap" in attempt to attack people who would like to keep a bit more of their own money - because they have to - let's be a little more considerate. The fact is that there are a lot of folks struggling out here who can't afford to pay more.

Lastly, this is my real name. I'm not anonymous and I don't work for any campaign. I'm just one guy out here, a father and a husband, trying to make ends meet. And I just can't pay anymore taxes.  

Politizine.com

[ Parent ]
Tony, (0.00 / 0)
I didn't say that.  Hannah did.  Reply to her.

--
Hope > Anarch-tea
Twitter: @DougLindner
[ Parent ]
When the agents of government carry out their jobs as (0.00 / 0)
directed and don't abuse the powers they have been given, then one consequence is that our rights are not violated nor diminished.  But, a consequence (something that follows in a sequence) is not the same as an objective.  The agents of government are tasked with upholding and protecting the Constitution.  They are not tasked with protecting (much less giving us) our rights.
[ Parent ]
Democracy has entropy. (0.00 / 0)
You give too little credit.

--
Hope > Anarch-tea
Twitter: @DougLindner
[ Parent ]
I would just add that (0.00 / 0)
bluestater77 is, while maybe not directly linked to these guys, a needless distraction as well
Well Done, Deano (4.00 / 1)
I would actually welcome conservative voices on Blue Hampshire -- would spice things up a bit, and allow us to administer some good ass kickings.  (Now that Burt Cohen is off the Bash Shaheen bandwagon, I miss that . . . )

But intellectual honesty is an essential component of a site like this.  Thanks, Dean, for serving our community so well.

Sigh... I had hoped that 'RockinNH' (4.00 / 3)
was Steve Tyler, or maybe John Sebastian...
I have a question... (1.14 / 7)
Since when is it unethical to hold an opinion different from yours as it relates to tax caps?

I've heard stories about people who claim cutting taxes is 'racist' or  'immoral' but this is ridiculous.

Intentionally not reading the diary? (4.00 / 1)
That isn't the issue, troll.

Energy and persistence conquer all things.


Benjamin Franklin


 
[ Parent ]
Simmons always struck me as dishonestly opportunistic... (0.00 / 0)
My first impression I remember of her was at the Manchester budget hearing in '06 at Memorial. She complained about teachers being paid too much, since, ya know, they get summers off. She was roundly booed. So this year she spoke about how great she thinks the teachers are and about the amazing things they accomplish under extraordinary circumstances. She eventually got booed again once she started complained about the administrators that get paid too much. "They're all paid even more than Mayor Guinta." (One man yelled out "and they should!"). Simmons reiterated "but I think the teachers are doing a great job".

Why did Simmons have such a change of heart in two short years regarding teachers?

I think the biggest flaw of she and the NHAC/GOP/Crazies (which will ultimately lead to their demise) is that they make huge errors in judgement and perception of public opinion. The citizens don't want this stupid tax cap any more than they want their kids in a classroom with 30 other kids.  

It's simple, she and the state GOP and the NHAC want their taxes low and their government small no matter what they have to do to accomplish that, and no matter what the consequences may be on local government.

Let Tammy be Tammy. She may scream at the teachers when they think it'll be popular (it wasn't), they may scream at the principals when they think that will be popular (it isn't) and she may fake their identity on Blue Hampshire (which got her caught).  

A word to would-be posters of all stripes, (4.00 / 3)
We're not a hostile bunch.  We're not out to get you, and we don't hate you for disagreeing with us.  But please keep several things in mind:

1. While it is extremely important to me (and I would bet most BHers) that anonymity, particularly on the internet, continue to be available and respected, anonymity is not a license to lie about yourself in serious discussions.  What it is is a license to speak freely but respectfully about the issues, no matter your positions, without revealing anything about yourself, and without fear of retribution.  It's even okay to have multiple accounts (or create a new account in order to change your blogging handle), as several distinguished BHers do and/or have done, as long as you make it clear that that is the case, and refrain from abusing them by voting twice in one poll, recommending the same diary twice, rating the same post twice, etc.

2. Some free advice to Republican frequenters of BlueHampshire:

  • We welcome you as long as you don't violate the first item, and aren't just here to antagonize us. Really, we do.
  • Bloggers and New Hampshirites; two groups of people who tend to be better-informed and more likely to 'do their homework' on things than the general population.  Those two groups converge here.  If you lie about yourself or conceal your status as 'professional Republican', we'll find out, we'll announce it, and it'll be in the papers.  You will come off as both incompetent and unethical, and your organization/candidate/party will suffer for it.  And they'll rightfully blame you.
  • Blue Hampshire is a hotbed of extremely well-informed activists, but during a General Election, it's probably not the most efficient way to reach undecided voters, and certainly not an efficient way of getting out the Republican vote. Was it worth it?


--
Hope > Anarch-tea
Twitter: @DougLindner
I agree with Doug, but. . . (4.00 / 1)
I have no problem if conservatives try to antagonize us.  Bring it.  Just don't lie to us.
[ Parent ]
"we welcome you as long as you...aren't just here to antagonize us" (0.00 / 0)
I was referring to trolls who are just here to cause trouble.  Anybody who wants to talk to us is fine, it's the ones who want to talk at us that aren't.  Scarboroughs are fine, Hannitys are not.

--
Hope > Anarch-tea
Twitter: @DougLindner
[ Parent ]
I still can't fathom (4.00 / 1)
the psychology of either sockpuppet or troll. What's the motivation? Trying to spread seeds of FUD where none are likely to grow? Attempting to suss out some "secret strategies" that none of us possess? Seeing their own "clever" comments in print online? Exposing themselves? Feeling the thrill of "getting away with it", like a shoplifting kid? I'm totally mystified. There's probably a doctoral dissertation in there somewhere.

It sure ain't the way to engage in a responsible dialogue with the opposition; if you got something to say, just say it. Show a little integrity.

One thing for certain that disproves the old rule: on the Internet, Dean knows if you are a dog (pretending to be a Hamster). Well done!

They. Don't. Care.
We do.
Rinse, repeat.

Hamsters vs. Rats (4.00 / 1)
Don't be libeling dogs.

--
Hope > Anarch-tea
Twitter: @DougLindner
[ Parent ]
No libel intended (4.00 / 1)
I was thinking of this cartoon and it resulted in that misbegotten mixing of mammalian metaphors. It won't happen again.

Say, isn't this the Year of the Rat? Hm.

But, it so happens that the Year of the Rat is over just five days after inauguration day...

And, if any are given to credit such augury, then begins the Year of the Ox, which also happens to be the birth year of Barack Obama (1961).

Hold on while I tighten my tinfoil a little...

They. Don't. Care.
We do.
Rinse, repeat.

[ Parent ]
Year of the rat? Not in America. (4.00 / 1)
Year of the Crow



--
Hope > Anarch-tea
Twitter: @DougLindner

[ Parent ]
King Rat (4.00 / 2)
the Year of the Rat is over just five days after inauguration day...

Which, not coincidentally, is just how long it'll take to pry Cheney's fingers off the doorjamb of the Oval Office.

[ Parent ]
Motivation (4.00 / 1)
I agree on basic troll motivation -- I don't get it, and never will.

But in this case, my guess is they were trying to provoke people into saying something they could cite and/or misuse later.

[ Parent ]
Point well taken (0.00 / 0)
but I am perfectly capable of saying plenty of dumb stuff with no provocation whatsoever, although I guess they probably weren't looking at me as an opportunity.

They. Don't. Care.
We do.
Rinse, repeat.
[ Parent ]
Me too n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
They're delusional (0.00 / 0)
They really think they have the ability to change our minds.

It's a horrible sense of judgement, as I said earlier.

[ Parent ]
I can change my mind (4.00 / 6)
If I am confronted with logic and rational discourse, voila. Of course, Simmons showed up with niether.

Growing is not a character flaw in my book.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
Rockpuppet | 39 comments

Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox