Home   Blogging topics   Blog   Curiouser and Curiouser … Connolly and (il)Literati

Curiouser and Curiouser … Connolly and (il)Literati

Mike Krempasky has more and more on Strumpy in a revealing string of posts starting here. Mike takes fisking on this meme to a new level.

Earlier, someone claiming to be Amanda, of the Strumpy blog, posted a comment here using the IP of 24-136-10-126.hnc-bsr1.chi-hnc.il.cable.rcn.com.

Mike Driehorst did a fine job by fisking out the connection of Brian Connolly to that IP address in past online activities.

…nothing you email or post online is private and most people know that…

Well, Mike Krempasky now posts that Brian Connolly is posting comments on his blog using the IP address of 24-136-10-126.hnc-bsr1.chi-hnc.il.cable.rcn.com.

Add to this, Doc Searls directs us to a news story about Brian Connolly’s past online escapades. (Note: Kirstin, in comments below, suggests we be skeptical of some of the sources in the news story I have linked to here. I don’t know which sources she refers to, but – as with anything you read anywhere – a healthy dose of skepticism is required until you find / learn, as best you can, the trustworthy evidence.)
Hmmm? Isn’t this all a bit interesting?

RCN Cablevision offers static IP service and I imagine that someone in the hosting business would likely appreciate having one.

Mike Krempasky goes further suggesting that The Literati Group and Connolly are involved together in this uncrafty ruse. Connolly is in business providing hosting and he doesn’t realize that IPs get tracked? Hmmm?

Connolly stated to me that he has dynamic IP service. He stated to me that he is not the Strumpy blogger. He did imply that he knows who it is. Hmmm? Based upon Connolly’s past history, do you think he could have been giving just enough half-truths to make the story sound believable? I don’t know. Krempasky’s post spells out the possibility quite clearly.

Could it be that Connolly and the illiterati group are synonymous with arrogance and ignorance? Or, is this too easy to track? Again, I don’t know.

An easy way to check it is for everyone that received an Amanda comment, and everyone that received a Connolly comment, to all post the IP addresses that the comments came from on their blogs. That should settle this quite easily – or at least get us closer to a conclusion.

I wasn’t all that interested in seeing this through to a final end, but that was before I received a phone call today. I would not call it a phone conversation, because I had to ask for opportunities to speak. Brian Connolly was quite adamant in wanting to deter any efforts to dig deeper into this. Further, he expressed a remarkable disdain for transparency. Isn’t there a saying about those that “dost protest too loudly…?”

Ya’ know, yesterday I called Brian originally to be nice and clarify what was being written. I think that is the proper path to follow. When I learned of the new connections, I re-instated Mike Driehorst’s comment. I wrote to Brain today, again out of courtesy, to let him know I was reposting the comment. He called me and something about that call left more questions than answers. I understand he’s called other people today. Guess they are all thinking about this, too. So, let us see where it goes.

I have truly tired of this.


  1. I know you guys are tired of the Strumpette thing, but if you can’t stand one more item, here it is:

    I blogged about “Amanda Chapel” only yesterday because I noticed some similarities between “her” word usage and sentence structure and Brian Connolly’s. Connolly commented on Mike’s blog; a bad move for someone trying to pretend, because he/she failed to change his/her writing style.

    Strumpette may not be Connolly, but the person who commented on Mike’s blog is probably the same person blogging at Strumpette.


  2. Steve, I’m sure you are. 😉

    La Shawn, great work. I believe you are on to something there.

    And Phil, you win. Also, thanks for the further confirmation of the IP address. My only remaining interest is to see if others got the same IP in their comments.

  3. be awfully careful to qualify the sources contained in that link from doc searls. with much respect to doc searls, that link references a few notably fallacious sources.