He’s not the first person to inadvertently reveal more in an online post than intended:

“To make his point, [if he even had one] Robinson shared a screenshot of a supposed YouTube advert. The alleged ad was advertising a website for “gay love” that has “no age limit.”

….

Immediately though, many pointed out to the far-right agitator that adverts on YouTube are personalised to the user based on their activity online.”

The algorithm knows!

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/tommy-robinson-deletes-self-own-tweet-about-youtube-adverts-402230/

Do you hatefully misname people of the left? Ill bet you don't, it is a serious crime btw - when the victim of tge hateful misnaming is a lefty.

Sir 2 tiers legacy

He was quite open about it

19 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Do you hatefully misname people of the left? Ill bet you don't, it is a serious crime btw - when the victim of tge hateful misnaming is a lefty.

Sir 2 tiers legacy

Gaslighting again.

Yaxley Lennon is his name.

It’s the name he gave when asked in court and under oath to state his name.

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Gaslighting again.

Yaxley Lennon is his name.

It’s the name he gave when asked in court and under oath to state his name.

Of course. Not as if there are numerous brainwashed lefties wanting to off him, his wife and children. Oh, wait🤣

He's not the brightest biscuit in the barrel. 🤣

16 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Of course. Not as if there are numerous brainwashed lefties wanting to off him, his wife and children. Oh, wait🤣

From gaslighting and ridiculously false claims s of hate crimes to going off on a complete tangent of unsubstantiated nonsense.

18 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

He's not the brightest biscuit in the barrel. 🤣

Less of a biscuit and more of a ‘short bread’.

19 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

From gaslighting and ridiculously false claims s of hate crimes to going off on a complete tangent of unsubstantiated nonsense.

So, intentially mis-naming/doxing somebody due to being consumed with hatred for them(in this case due to him being factually correct on the rape gangs and the lefts vile failed attempt to cover it up) is most certainly criminal. Or are you literally claiming the left have different legal system(which is true)?

2 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

So, intentially mis-naming/doxing somebody due to being consumed with hatred for them(in this case due to him being factually correct on the rape gangs and the lefts vile failed attempt to cover it up) is most certainly criminal. Or are you literally claiming the left have different legal system(which is true)?

Again more nonsense.

His name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, it’s the name he gave in court when asked to state his name.

Had he given any other name he would have been committing the crime of ‘perjury’, possibly the crime of ‘perverting the course of justice’ and likely the crime of ‘fraud by false representation’.

Referring to Yaxley-Lennon by his real name is not ‘misnaming’ and it’s not ‘Doxxing’

There’s only one legal system, and I’ve explained which laws under that one legal system Yaxley-Lennon would be breaking if he gave any other name under oath when instructed to ‘state his name’.

His name is Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon.

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Again more nonsense.

His name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, it’s the name he gave in court when asked to state his name.

Had he given any other name he would have been committing the crime of ‘perjury’, possibly the crime of ‘perverting the course of justice’ and likely the crime of ‘fraud by false representation’.

Referring to Yaxley-Lennon by his real name is not ‘misnaming’ and it’s not ‘Doxxing’

There’s only one legal system, and I’ve explained which laws under that one legal system Yaxley-Lennon would be breaking if he gave any other name under oath when instructed to ‘state his name’.

His name is Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon.

If Tommy Robinson posted on here calling you by your real name, would you complain about it ?

21 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

If Tommy Robinson posted on here calling you by your real name, would you complain about it ?

In the first instance, that would be a clear breach of the forum rules, as is any discussion of members personal details that they choose not to share.

But why would you want to try to change the subject of discussion from Yaxley-Lennon to me?

Yaxley-Lennon is a public figure, I’m not.

Yaxley-Lennon is the subject of this thread. I’m not.

Said it before not a fan of the shouty' man, but tell me what he gets wrong in what he says whatever name he goes by 🤔

21 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

In the first instance, that would be a clear breach of the forum rules, as is any discussion of members personal details that they choose not to share.

But why would you want to try to change the subject of discussion from Yaxley-Lennon to me?

Yaxley-Lennon is a public figure, I’m not.

Yaxley-Lennon is the subject of this thread. I’m not.

So, if Tommy Robison joined this forum, you would then have to call him Tommy Robinson .

I am going to send him message and ask him to sigh up here

4 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

So, if Tommy Robison joined this forum, you would then have to call him Tommy Robinson .

I am going to send him message and ask him to sigh up here

If somebody joins this forum under the name Tommy Robinson then that is the only name I would refer to them when responding to anything they post.

And why not, doing so would be compliant with the forum rules and I would in any case have absolutely no idea if they had another name.

However, I don’t believe Yaxley-Lennon is a member of this forum; he nevertheless is a public figure who has on numerous occasions adopted different names; far easier and correct to refer to him by his actual name ‘Yaxley-Lennon’.

12 minutes ago, sammieuk1 said:

Said it before not a fan of the shouty' man, but tell me what he gets wrong in what he says whatever name he goes by 🤔

A string of false claims regarding his part in prosecuting rape gangs is a good starting point.

Maybe he's pretending to be straight like the guys who like LBs but claim to be straight

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He’s not the first person to inadvertently reveal more in an online post than intended:

“To make his point, [if he even had one] Robinson shared a screenshot of a supposed YouTube advert. The alleged ad was advertising a website for “gay love” that has “no age limit.”

….

Immediately though, many pointed out to the far-right agitator that adverts on YouTube are personalised to the user based on their activity online.”

The algorithm knows!

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/tommy-robinson-deletes-self-own-tweet-about-youtube-adverts-402230/

So what if he is gay? He has not attacked the gay community.

Seems to me that you are indulging in a bit of online bullying, some good old gay bashing.

4 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

So what if he is gay? He has not attacked the gay community.

Seems to me that you are indulging in a bit of online bullying, some good old gay bashing.

And the evidence of ‘gay bashing’ is what exactly?

I reckon there's confusion between Tommy Robinson , the far right nutter, and Tom Robinson, the rock singer, famous for his song 'Glad to be Gay' and others, way back.

Better change your activist name, Tommy, to avoid further confusion.

How about Swiss { Family} Robinson? It has a more wholesome feel to it.

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

nd the evidence of ‘gay bashing’ is what exactly?

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And the evidence of ‘gay bashing’ is what exactly?

Would you lose respect for Tommy if he came out as a bender ?

6% of the UK follow Islam ... many of the 93% thick Brits (not all) believe that the 6% are to blame for their life problems. Not energy companies making huge profits, not the inequality in wealth, not the rampant corruption with our money, not the state of the health system - but the 6% (most of whom are like us all good apples and a few bad apples). He's living it up as a career. What's his job by the way ?

Last i saw on X he was donning around in muslim majority Dubai a few weeks back. Thought he didn't like muslims or Sharia Law? You'd think he'd boycott with anything out there.

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A string of false claims regarding his part in prosecuting rape gangs is a good starting point.

And the real reason the left have their daggers out for Tommy 🤣

So very predictable(we were supposed to "keep our mouths shut for the sake of diversity" & the Pakistani muslim male rape gangs were a "right wing conspiracy theory") aged well hey Chomps🤣

49 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

we were supposed to "keep our mouths shut for the sake of diversity"

Ah, this hasn't been trotted out for a while. By posting it you are either deliberately trying to skew things or you are actually dense and genuinely believe it.

https://fullfact.org/online/naz-shah-diversity-quote-tweet/

It was a parody, it was not supposed to be taken literally, it was being ironic. But you knew that. It was up for eight minutes before she realised that knuckle draggers were twisting her meaning and she took it down. One group even quoted it and called her "a grooming gang apologist" which is amazing given her history of working against grooming gangs, unlike Yaxley-Lennon who only jumped on other people's bandwagons.

From the link above:

In 2020, Ms Shah successfully sued the campaigning group Leave.EU after it called her a “grooming gang apologist” in a 2019 Facebook post. The group apologised and accepted Ms Shah was a "vociferous campaigner for victims of grooming gangs", said their post was “ill-judged and untrue” and paid her damages for libel. 

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And the evidence of ‘gay bashing’ is what exactly?

making the presence of a gay themed ad into something it isn't. Why should it matter or be relevant if it was gay themed?

37 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Ah, this hasn't been trotted out for a while. By posting it you are either deliberately trying to skew things or you are actually dense and genuinely believe it.

https://fullfact.org/online/naz-shah-diversity-quote-tweet/

It was a parody, it was not supposed to be taken literally, it was being ironic. But you knew that. It was up for eight minutes before she realised that knuckle draggers were twisting her meaning and she took it down. One group even quoted it and called her "a grooming gang apologist" which is amazing given her history of working against grooming gangs, unlike Yaxley-Lennon who only jumped on other people's bandwagons.

From the link above:

In 2020, Ms Shah successfully sued the campaigning group Leave.EU after it called her a “grooming gang apologist” in a 2019 Facebook post. The group apologised and accepted Ms Shah was a "vociferous campaigner for victims of grooming gangs", said their post was “ill-judged and untrue” and paid her damages for libel. 

Dog ate my homework🤣

14 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A string of false claims regarding his part in prosecuting rape gangs is a good starting point.

A string of spot on claims more like🤔

10 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Would you lose respect for Tommy if he came out as a bender ?

Who’s Tommy?

You’re posts in this thread suggest you are confused on the matter.

10 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

And the real reason the left have their daggers out for Tommy 🤣

So very predictable(we were supposed to "keep our mouths shut for the sake of diversity" & the Pakistani muslim male rape gangs were a "right wing conspiracy theory") aged well hey Chomps🤣

Utter nonsense.

Yaxley-Lennon is a convicted fraudster, violent thug, a racist and a grifter.

In short (pun intended) he’s a detestable wee scroat.

What’s this codswallop claim of a ‘rightwing conspiracy theory’?

8 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

making the presence of a gay themed ad into something it isn't. Why should it matter or be relevant if it was gay themed?

I didn’t make the presence of a gay themed ad into anything.

I can’t answer why Yaxley-Lennon thought it mattered, but seems to have mattered enough to him that he very promptly deleted his posts when it was pointed out to him it revealed what the algorithm knows about his online search history. That wasn’t by me either.

I think we can put it under the heading ‘over sharing’ or as I remarked in my OP

“He’s not the first person to inadvertently reveal more in an online post than intended:”