The Dom Post have published a story on the news that Rob Goulden has been making up fake identities to push his own agenda…
Wellington city councillor Rob Goulden used fake internet identities to issue a homophobic insult, personal attacks, and push his message that he’s a good, hard-working bloke.
But Mr Goulden – who is seeking re-election to the council in the local body elections, which close at noon today – said he had used pseudonymity like other bloggers and had done nothing wrong.
There are some real gems, in particularly…
That remark had been taken out of context, Mr Goulden said. “It is a funny remark and I object to you calling it homophobic. I’m not homophobic at all. I’m very accepting of those sorts of people.”
“those sorts of people”? Really Rob?
WCC Watch 
Aren’t you s brave little man?
Hiding behind your tacky little blog, throwing shit at everyone – where no one can reach you.
If you had the balls that you were born with you would front up and tell us:
1. Who met with Burgess of the Dom Post yesterday?
2. Who runs this blog?
3. Who you are?
It is one thing throwing crap around on a blog and quite another for this shit to be staining page 3 of the Dom Post this morning.
You realise you’re only embarrassing yourself, right?
You forgot question 4:
If this is such an unimportant article, why did Rob Goulden comment and offer his explanation to the reporter?
Surely a simple “declined to comment” would have been better?
Because the game was up?
Just provoking a response – obviously it is working – are you who you say you are or are you too going to feature on the pages of the Dom Post on Saturday morning for using a faked identity on an anonymous blog?
Everyone on this blog has a fake identity. What makes Goulden different from each and every one of you?
Simple answer really (simplicity seems to be laking in your rantings).
Goulden is an elected official, working for and paid for by the Electorate.
He should therefore represent himself in a true and correct manner – not posing as someone else simply to support his cause.
Get real – it’s a crappy blog in the middle of nowhere.
Your preciousness is astonishing!
A group pf bloggers on this site beat him up and he retaliated.
He did not hit them hard enough (in my humble opinion)
Where is your sense of fun?
Anyway right now he is not a councillor.
Council has been dissolved – we have an election on today!
Since you have already run off to the Dom Post (refer Richard) – to bleat – it would be good if you could follow it up now with a complaint to WCC – so we will know who you are when it comes time for litigation over the Dom Posts defamatory article.
Can you explain to me exactly what is defamatory in this mornings article?
It seems people of your ilk use the defamatory threat quite a lot without following through, particularly when you obviously have no clue what “to defame” actually means.
Or are you just being “provocative” again?
Calm down!
Running for cover – again?
As I suggest lay the complaint! (as a ratepayer)
Go on – that way we will get this thing out in the open.
Clearly the provocation is working!
Why would I bother laying a complaint about such an insignificant person?
And can you answer the question – whats defamatory about the article?
I also think you may have me confused with someone else.
For the record I only stumbled across this blog today, I don’t even live in Wellington (but in another Wellington region council electorate)and I am not associated with any candidate or their relevant political party affiliations.
I am commenting on here simply because I cannot get over your idiocy.
Because what he did was wrong? Yeah right!
I have you confused with nobody else!
If you don’t live here why then are you wasting time commenting on it?
I am associated with no one – just like you
Your idiocy i can not get over either – you butt in to a situation that you know nothing about and then expect to be taken seriously.
God give me strength!
@v – funny – you talk about people having balls, then you say all Rob Goulden did was retaliate on an insignificant blog to people who were “beating him up”.
So I guess you are therefore saying Rob Goulden didn’t have the balls to retaliate using his real name, but only had the balls to hide behind a fake persona.
Keep digging mate – you make yourself and, by association, Rob Goulden look like right plonkers.
He used his real name.
Rob!!!!!!!
Then followed it up with James and Kerry.
So what – he would not be the first person to do that on here.
Very clever – surely you do not think that truth features very highly on WCC Watch- or do you?
I note your name is Common Sense.
Is that a fake personality or your real name?
Of course it is not my real name “V”, any sane person would know that.
He used his real name huh? Rob (yep, I guess thats true)………James…….Kerry……..which is it? Or do we have a serious care of personality disorder?
Did he or did he not – his name is Rob! yes or no?
The he grabbed to other names James and Kerry to support his case.
I thought it was a master stroke!
Anyone with any clues having observed the writing style knew it was Goulden – who else could it have been?
v: If this blog is so tacky why are you spending so much time on it?
Also, if you are so interested in openness how about going first and saying who you are and what is your relationship with Goulden.
The only person responsible for this making the Dompost is Goulden himself. He started abusing people and he was the one playing pretend with false identities.
Curious – to know who is behind it – I guess.
In terms of openness i would suggest that going first is your priveleged position – clearly somebody went to the press- who was it?
Are you telling me that it was none of you fellas – but Goulden himself?
“The only person responsible for this making the Dompost is Goulden himself”.
On an anonymous blog everyone has a fake identity – so what?
Your crowd started it – remember – 86% attendence rate at council – or had you forgotten?
Actually his 85% attendance record at council is fact. he was responsible for his attendance record. and this was reported by the City Council in its annual report. nothing anyone said justified his abusive responses. he has finished his political career this week by attacking members of the public for doing nothing more than repeating facts from the council’s annual report.
you, tom cranney, have helped Rob Goulden end his career, and i expect that you’ve eroded any credibility you thought you had. now please sod off.
You’re appearing disingenuous with that quote. I said Goulden is responsible because he was the one who started abusing people and sock puppetting.
You’re wrong again about how it started, it started here, with this abuse from Goulden. https://wccwatch.wordpress.com/2010/10/06/capital-times-best-of-wellington-2010/#comment-541
Hi V. I am out and about enjoying my sunny weekend. But for the benefit of other readers I would like to set the record straight about how this all got started. Cllr Goulden went off at someone, a commenter, for saying he/she thought the Cllr ranked in the bottom 3 of all Cllrs. That was it. He went off. When I saw that exchange I thought I’d check the attendance records in the annual report. As simple as that.
“No surprises, all three are well known for their hard work. How about a bottom 3? Much more competition here. I’d go Wain, Goulden and Cook. At least Pepperal adds comedy value.”
Rob October 6, 2010 at 1:58 pm | #2 Reply
“Richard (Dick for short) and Johnny (Come lately)
Why don’t you have the courage to give me a call and perhaps we could discuss your pedigree as well, instead you like to remain faceless coawrds hiding behind snide comments about people on websites.
Inotice neither of you are game enough to stand for Council or anything else. You probably both still wet the bed and are under achievers in all aspects of your pathetic lives.”
Not the way I saw it – and i watched it all unfold
I’m off out. Check the dates and times. It’s all there. I saw it unfold too.
You picked the fight and got beaten up and then went howling to the press!
Thomas Eckley – you are bloody amazing.
Wcc Watch beat up Goulden over his record even though he told you that his record was not 100% due to the death of his father.
I must be amazingly powerful in that I can finish the councillor’s career in two days – wcc watch did that not me.
How?
They ran to the papers.
I will ask the question again which of you ran to the papers?
if you read the article and the posts there is no doubt about who it was, Tom Cranney.
i hope Rob Goulden thanks you for helping end his career as you have done. you owe him an apology.
So are you saying it was me – all I require is yes or no answer.
If not me then who? One of you?
So if there is no doubt about who it was then go ask Burgess who it was – he will tell you it was not me.
“WCC Watch provided information to The Dominion Post about Mr Goulden’s comments because it believed making up false identities “to try and drum up support for his erratic behaviour does not cut the mustard”. – dom Post
I have nothing to do with WCC watch.
You owe me an apology
work it out for yourself. and what does it matter, anyway? what Rob and you did is a matter of public record. you two made an embarrassing public display of yourselves attacking voters for repeating a simple fact about Rob Goulden’s attendance record. it’s not like anyone leaked a secret. anyone can come to this blog site and read the abusive rantings of Rob Goulden and v aka Tom Cranney and make their own judgements. and that’s all the Dom did this morning — it repeated facts. if those facts show Rob Goulden in a poor light, that’s a reflection of his behaviour and nothing else. and you owe him an apology for egging him on and helping to wreck his career.
Another classic case of don’t answer the question.
Wcc Watch “wrecked” his career not me!
Retaliation is different to attack – look in the dictionary.
My “rantings” on this blog are as abusive as anyone else’s – its called free speech!
People died to preserve it.
Councillor Goulden needs no egging on – he is good to go all by himself.
Back to the question – which of you went to the paper?
i suppose there are two people in the world who share the opinions you express – Rob Goulden and Tom Cranney – and the rest of the world is wrong.
Tell the punters who went to the paper?
Free speech. Good. Free media. Good. This blog is public. 1,500 people read it the other day. What has transpired since resulted from what comments were posted.
So it must be a super powerful blog then uh?
One that causes thing to happen?
Get real.
Goulden beat you blokes up in retaliation and you ran to the paper!
Tell the punters who went to the paper?
Burgess had nothing else to write about yesterday until WCC Watch turned up – he loves beating Goulden up in the press. Look at the way he has treated Goulden in the last 3 years.
Anyway on to more important things.
Brown won the Mayoralty in Auckland.
Good bye John Banks
Goulden beat you blokes up in retaliation and you ran to the paper!
What did Rob/Kerry/James do or say that came close to beating anyone? The only thing that took a beating was Goulden’s already tattered credibility. Even Whaleoil thinks he’s a dick. http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz/2010/10/09/what-a-dick/
i really do find Whale Oil a distasteful, childish idiot, even when he’s right.
The Dom Post contacted us.
How did they do that?
pigeon post, i imagine.
Email. Well, that and a combination of smoke signals coming from the Eastern Ward.
Very funny – are you sure the smoke signals were not coming from “your offices” in newlands?
So Burgess rang you?
Can’t see the phone number on the website – where is it?
Oh, he must have done it by email!
So Burgess was sitting on your blog and just happened to stumble across the stouch and emailed you?
Yeah right!
I’m not sure how Burgess first found out, but as a political reporter based in Wellington it’s reasonably likely he reads this blog, and he almost certainly would read Kiwiblog which also covered the incident and linked to us.
And he did then email us on Friday morning, and we were able to provide a reasonably quick response. It’s that simple really.
Perhaps the truth is that you contacted Burgess, but I will take you at your word.
The Kiwiblog story sounds more plausible though.
Thanks for the response.
Yeah right is to fine a response – bullshit is a better one!
Why don’t you move on. I am sure Whaleoil would be happy to discuss the Cllr with you. http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz/2010/10/09/what-a-dick/
Because the question has not been answered – that is why!
I think the only relevant question is, will the Wellington ratepayers have to fork out another $65k pa to put up with Rob’s inanities for another 3 years? Thankfully the answer to that is no.
Has he not been elected?
He has not.
what other results do you have – can’t find results anywhere
friend who was at council for announcement. ahipene-mercer, gill and marsh in eastern. Probert 4th, Goulden distant 5th.
Blogging ethics discussed by NZ Conservatives. Who the hell are they. http://nzconservative.blogspot.com/2010/10/blogging-ethics.html
Pingback: Fisking the #Wgtn2013 Candidates – Northern Ward | WCC Watch·