iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

That’s Patrick to you Tony. I haven’t “gone back to X” I’ve returned to planet earth after a short interlude on this hell hole. You should try it.

4210

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

No I did not you ridiculous man, stop lying.

3000

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

where does Sam or me refer to black people being stupid (your words that you attribute to me) or Jews being shrewd (your words that you attribute to me)?

900

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

ffs Jonathan stop lying about me. I have not once said anything about Jews being shrewd (in quotation marks no less) or black people being stupid. That is a slander and you should withdraw it.

1700

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

So, yes, you have clearly been attributing words and meanings to me that I did not make, putting words into my mouth. That is it for me now, I'm going to watch the football and enjoy the remainder of my sunday.

300

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

It does not say that every academic who encounters a claim has a duty to engage with it. It also says “other academics should be free to criticise or repudiate those claims.”

400

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

It says that disagreements should be settled through free inquiry and open discussion rather than by seeking to have academics dismissed for expressing controversial views.

700

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

It says such disagreements should be settled through free inquiry and open discussion, not that any particular academic has a duty to engage with any particular claim. It explicitly says academics are free to repudiate them.

100

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

No. The statement refers to disagreements about Cofnas’s empirical claims. It does not say that “academics like me should engage them”. Those are your words, which you continue to falsely attribute to me.

200

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

with Cofnas' specific claims about Jewish peopole to be putting words in my mouth that I did not say.

700

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

Oh so not the one Rebecca Sear circulated that you referred to. That was part of my confusion. But yes, I do see your extrapolation from signing a general statement about how disagreements should be settled into a specific statement that I explicitly instructed you to engage >

500

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

You are very mistaken if you think I am defending Cofnas’ AF because I agree with him or like him personally. AF must be viewpoint neutral or it means nothing. Are there other topic areas that you think should be banned from investigation by academics and who should decide what these are?

4130

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

I guess it is for sad little anonymous weirdos like you.

000

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

It's high quality material and you're getting it for free.

100

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

Great catch, well done. But did I say I was leaving permanently? Doh!

200

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

you have no interest in what I actually think about AF and how it relates to the Cofnas case. You deliberately contort and put words in my mouth I haven't said then gleefully retweet your results to your army of moron followers. You truly are the one eyed king in the land of the blind. Retweet that.

4310

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

You retweeted it to create a pile on from the mob and succeeded. You knew perfectly well what you were doing, you may be a prat but you’re not stupid.

2620

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

So you’ve read his work and are critiquing it but propose that others shouldn’t do this? And you agree with his position on academic freedom?

1600

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

Ow I can see why Jonathan was so upset at me calling him a prat (correct spelling this time). He’d never use language like that on here.

101220

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

To come to this conclusion you have either engaged with his work in a way you are arguing shouldn’t be done on moral grounds ex ante of you are critiquing his position without having read hi work.

1010

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

It’s really about how people engage not who they are. You must surely have the self awareness to realise how many reasonable people have found your modus operandi on here/Twitter to be beyond tedious.and not worth engaging with.

1210

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

Sorry I upset you with this observation Tony but my brief foray back here only confirms my original observation. It really is worse than X and that’s a high bar.

2100

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

I was replying to Sam Freedman not you Jonathan.

1910

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

On here though it is impossible to make a defense of viewpoint neutral academic freedom without getting mobbed by Portes fanboys saying you’re a racist right winger. So I’m off.

151130

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

How about refuting them on theoretical and empirical grounds? That is kind of how science works. It doesn’t work by calling people names, refusing to engage with their claims and attempting to get them fired.

305192

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

If you’re looking for Prof Portes’ publications you may have a harder time as there aren’t many of them.

600

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2026

Try googling my name. Not very hard really.

900

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 22/08/2026

Certainly worth reading if you enjoy tedious tendentious arguments advanced by self-absorbed toddlers.

8172

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 22/08/2026

Jonathan you are a Pratt. A Pratt who thinks he’s far smarter than he is. And moreover a Pratt who doesn’t understand or support the essential principle of Academic Freedom. I see little point in engaging with you further.

231100

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 22/08/2026

I did not explicitly tell you that at all. But I do agree that we should engage with people with whom we disagree rather than have them fired which you appear to favour.

6360

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 22/08/2026

What on earth are you talking about? I’ve never said you should engage with anything.

7170

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 22/08/2026

What relevance does your being Jewish have on whether or not you support academic freedom?

8120

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 22/08/2026

Disappointing to see academics at Brunel university don’t understand what Academic Freedom means.

112273

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 23/08/2025

Financial Fair Play in the Premier League doesn't work and they should just get rid of it.

110

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 16/08/2025

It was an incredibly poor performance and result. Terrible team selection, tactic and substitutions. Big call to start Hermansson which backfired. He’s under huge pressure now.

010

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 16/08/2025

I can already say with some confidence West Ham are getting relegated this season. 2-0 down to Sunderland on day 1 and Potter brings on Callum Wilson and Andy Irvine. We lose 3-0.

410

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 14/08/2025

I wouldn't see that, he blocked me.

010

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 14/08/2025

As I said, Twitter is awful, a total cesspit. Bluesky is nice but boring, liberal people agreeing with eacher other. like being a Guardian reader in the 90s, although you didn't get punishment beatings for wrongthink then.

100

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

I'm not sure that would be very helpful if you were prosecuting these 2 people in a court of law.

100

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

I mean that if a bunch of left-wing liberals flee X to Bsky because X is too rightwing then follow a heuristic of "block jerks, don't feed trolls", it's a recipe for very boring ideological conformity. This is why Bluesky is boring and rapidly losing subscribers.

811

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

the big problem is when you move beyond banning what is unlawful (not itself unproblematic given many laws), how do you decide what can and can't be said? That is how you end up with Twitter banning women from saying there are only 2 sexes.

100

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

do you also think that banning legal speech is problematic, i.e. once the threshold moves beyond what is lawful?

100

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

And that pressure can result in lawful speech being banned, such as women expressing gender critical beliefs on pre-Musk Twitter. Making perceived harm the threshold is therefore highly problematic for free speech in a democratic society.

110

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

So who gets to decide whether these tweets, that you presumably selected as being egregious examples, are a "coded incitement to violence" or observations?

100

Patrick Sturgis @patricksturg.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

Haven't been on here for a while but popped over to take a look because Twitter is so awful. Some interesting discussions going on but I'm mostly struck by the rigid ideological conformity and thirst for punishing those who indulge in wrongthink. Should I try Threads?

2192