Oh dear...

The backlash has begun..
http://www.sevenstreets.com/city-living/feature-city-living/total-eclipse-of-the-heart-mann-island/

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/architecture/is-liverpools-world-heritage-status-in-ruins-6260430.html

"Honest John Motors" said on the Independent site:

Wayne Colquhoun (O'Loon as he's known locally) is a bitter, twisted anti-development extremist who lives in a fantasy world where everything built after 1900 is rubbish and
Liverpool is perfect like Florence. He does not represent
the opininon
of Liverpool people who know we need jobs more than anything and that
the historic north docks will continue to rot if we don't develop them.
He has no real alternative plan. As a rampant egotist he seeks only to
derail and attack and lives to be quoted by naive national journalists.
His Trust doesn't even exist as a Trust, it's just him and about three
friends. He's such an extremist the local Civic Society will have
nothing to do with him. Independentdent, don't give him a platform! Ask
people on the street in Liverpool what they think of the Liverpool
Waters plan. New and old buildings can exist together in harmony.

"Chas" on Sevenstreets said:

Liverpool preservation trust, HELLO Wyane is that you all on your lonesome my god man how do become a trust all by yourself. we are a growing dynamic city not an antiques shop get it.

"kj" said:

me, and many others like me are sick of cranks like Wayne O'loon determined to drag our city back into the dark ages. Since when has margy Clarke been an arbiter of taste? The trouble is people who like these buildings are usually too busy getting on with there lives to post in things like this, so bitter old weirdos like Wayne dominant the debate.

"Ellis" said:

Liverpoolpreservationtrust, you really are a boring troll.

There's extremes to everything, you're a little left or right of centre and everything is okay, you hit either end of the horseshoe and you're just another blinkered idiot.

You're just as bad as those who want to knock down everything and turn the space into ugly new-builds. I'm admittedly not a fan of Mann Island (I am of the new museum though) but hell you hate everything!

(I've a horrid feeling that's my ex-friend, Ellis Woodman, who used to publish anything I said to Building Design magazine...)

How dare they!!!
I'll have you know I have my own footnote on page 22 of the UNESCO report (which finds little wrong, but doesn't like Liverpool Waters - who does?), where I'm "WC = Wayne Colquhoun". How apt.

Florence Gersten was there at the 30 minute meeting I had with them, she was credited as representing "Save Our City", which unlike the LPT, really does exist.

Sadly there wasn't time for UNESCO to mention the Liverpool Preservation Trust, or all my hard work in flying to Paris and storming into their meeting room to tell them to hot-foot it up to Liverpool and save the city from survival. Ooops, sorry, from staying alive.

I'm now reduced (since the local papers have rumbled me) to waiting to be asked by the likes of the world-renowned "Liverpool Confidential to supply rentaquotes to the masses (all of whom are far thicker than me).

www.liverpoolconfidential.co.uk/News-and-Comment/Unesco-tells-city-to-think-again-over-Liverpool-Waters


Oh, I'm so important, despite being so wrong...

How to succeed in blackmail...

1. Make sure your victim's "guilty secret" actually is:
a - guilty, and
b- a secret.

It doesn't help if you yourself have revealed the "secret" to the public over a year ago.

2. Don't accuse your victim of stalking you when:
a - stalking isn't defined in law
b- they aren't stalking you

3. Don't confuse fair comment on, and legitimate questioning of, your motives, methods and legitimacy with stalking or harassment

4. Don't engage in making claims of stalking and harassment, with threats of legal action, when you yourself have:
a - a proven record of making malicious communications to your intended victim, and
b - a publicly visible record of making repeated threats of physical violence against your intended victim

Bully for Me!

Extraordinary scenes over at the always fascinating "Yo! Liverpool" Forum.

http://www.yoliverpool.com/forum/showthread.php?14066-Liverpool-Preservation-Trust/page2

Someone dared to question my Liverpool Preservation Trust, and my little David Swift, and is now reaping the rewards:

Quote - "Back in February 2011, a user calling themselves "Quentin Hughes" (who has otherwise made no contribution to Yo Liverpool) sent me this PM via YoLiverpool - somehow I've only just picked it up. I can't think of a better thread to share it on. The signature is interesting, as is the language:

Originally Posted by quentin_hughes
How's it going xxxxx/xxxxxx xxxxxx ...

Do your employers [he names them] know about your ****-stirring using [their] computers during office hours ?
I suggest you disappear from this website and any other sites connected with the Merseyside region.
Wayne"

Take that as a warning, anyone else who doubts the power of Wayne. Cross me, and I'll get you sacked, or at least send you threatening messages, demanding you revere the Great Wayne, OR ELSE.

Sadly a later poster, called Ged, has called me "Loupy Lou". He's next.

But continuing from the Yo! Liverpool post:

Just as a matter of purely coincidental interest:
The Theft Act, 1968 defines blackmail as follows:
(1) A person is guilty of blackmail if, with a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces; and for this purpose a demand with menaces is unwarranted unless the person making it does so in the belief: (a) that he has reasonable grounds for making the demand; and (b) that the use of the menaces is a proper means of reinforcing the demand.
(2) The nature of the act or omission demanded is immaterial, and it is also immaterial whether the menaces relate to action to be taken by the person making the demand.

the word "menace" is to be liberally construed and not as limited to threats of violence but as including threats of any action detrimental to or unpleasant to the person addressed. It may also include a warning that in certain events such action is intended.

I see it carries a maximum sentence of 14 years, but hey, I know I won't get that much, not with my record of exposing fraud and corruption in high places. Still -lucky I'm not as pretty as I was. Pass the soap.