|
Post by Telemachus on Mar 2, 2018 15:13:07 GMT
I just have been back to review. This was the third reply in the thread: “What else would you expect from someone related that vapouring old fart 'Ray T ' off the Clueless World Forum ? Her old aunt, Daphne March, who worked a single motor called 'Heather Bell' during WW2 was a totally different sort, . . . this stupid cow, and Ray T must be some sort of genetic abberation.” Do you contend that this is addressing the issue/ opinion, as opposed to insulting and ridiculing the person? If so, you and I are far apart on the meaning of words. But never mind, Jenlyn-bot liked it! incorrect Bargemaster liked it the post you refer to was queried by BillS on was replied to several pages later where the "why" was explained. thunderboat.boards.net/post/102555as regards comparing her to a comedic character ..... anyone who gets into politics ..... and that is what she has done, using her position to promote her views. is fair game for satire ...... or maybe you don't think the targets for spitting image were fair game. No, Jenlyn liked it. I was referring to your recent post. But the point is that the picture you portrayed earlier of how the thread ran, was a false or distorted one. By your reckoning, anyone who publishes an opinion on the internet is “into politics” and thus fair game for ridicule as opposed to a respect for their view even if disagreed with. I consider such an approach to be nasty.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Mar 2, 2018 15:14:17 GMT
<iframe width="20.08000000000004" height="2.9200000000000017" style="position: absolute; width: 20.08px; height: 2.92px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 0px; top: 0px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_27909376" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="20.08000000000004" height="2.9200000000000017" style="position: absolute; width: 20.08px; height: 2.92px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 943px; top: -122px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_18726198" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="20.08000000000004" height="2.9200000000000017" style="position: absolute; width: 20.08px; height: 2.92px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 10px; top: -29px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_29391397" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="20.08000000000004" height="2.9200000000000017" style="position: absolute; width: 20.08px; height: 2.92px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 943px; top: -29px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_25146164" scrolling="no"></iframe> Bet you did... As in, I didn’t read to the end of the thread before composing a reply, which then looked silly in the light of later posts.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Mar 2, 2018 15:16:53 GMT
Looking silly has never stopped you posting before.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Mar 2, 2018 23:54:47 GMT
incorrect Bargemaster liked it the post you refer to was queried by BillS on was replied to several pages later where the "why" was explained. thunderboat.boards.net/post/102555as regards comparing her to a comedic character ..... anyone who gets into politics ..... and that is what she has done, using her position to promote her views. is fair game for satire ...... or maybe you don't think the targets for spitting image were fair game. No, Jenlyn liked it. I was referring to your recent post. But the point is that the picture you portrayed earlier of how the thread ran, was a false or distorted one. By your reckoning, anyone who publishes an opinion on the internet is “into politics” and thus fair game for ridicule as opposed to a respect for their view even if disagreed with. I consider such an approach to be nasty. your view ....... there was a handful of posts when the person concerned was ridiculed but there was five pages of posts before you jumped in. Your premise of "my reckoning" is false ....... anyone who publishes a private view on the internet is entitled to hold whatever views they wish. Anyone publishing their views on the internet as the head of The South East Sub Boating Group is indulging in politics to promote a private view
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Mar 3, 2018 7:54:06 GMT
JohnV, not quoting your post as you’ve messed it up with too much white space. But yes, there may have been several pages after the abusive posts before I read and reacted, but so what? Have you decided to set a new rule for us whereby after a certain number of new posts, earlier posts cannot,be replied to? If so, perhaps you’d better tell D9. As to your definitions of private vs public posting, well firstly everything on here is public so you have created your “definition” merely to suit your agenda. Being head of a SE boating group hardly equates to being the prime minister and in any case, Spitting Image was humorous and satirical, it wasn’t plain nasty for the sake of it. But clearly your judgement on such matters isn’t to be relied on since unlike thousands of other people, your behaviour had you singled out for a lifetime ban from CWDF for your traits.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Mar 3, 2018 8:06:44 GMT
But clearly your judgement on such matters isn’t to be relied on since unlike thousands of other people, your behaviour had you singled out for a lifetime ban from CWDF for your traits. The overwhelming majority of people who were banned from CWDF were banned purely and simply because they did not agree with the site owner's views on eu membership.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Mar 3, 2018 8:26:29 GMT
But clearly your judgement on such matters isn’t to be relied on since unlike thousands of other people, your behaviour had you singled out for a lifetime ban from CWDF for your traits. The overwhelming majority of people who were banned from CWDF were banned purely and simply because they did not agree with the site owner's views on eu membership. No, they were banned because they were general pains in the arse and relished in offensive (to some) politically incorrect stuff. You have no evidence to support your “Brexit” theory and as we know, it was a couple of rogue mods doing the banning, Dan himself was not really much interested in the forum at the time. In your case it was to do with your comments on the Calais migrants. Probably about 1/2 the forum had views on Brexit opposite to Dan’s, but they weren’t banned.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Mar 3, 2018 8:31:22 GMT
JohnV, not quoting your post as you’ve messed it up with too much white space. But yes, there may have been several pages after the abusive posts before I read and reacted, but so what? Have you decided to set a new rule for us whereby after a certain number of new posts, earlier posts cannot,be replied to? If so, perhaps you’d better tell D9. As to your definitions of private vs public posting, well firstly everything on here is public so you have created your “definition” merely to suit your agenda. Being head of a SE boating group hardly equates to being the prime minister and in any case, Spirting Image was humorous and satirical, it wasn’t plain nasty for the sake of it. But clearly your judgement on such matters isn’t to be relied on since unlike thousands of other people, your behaviour had you singled out for a lifetime ban from CWDF for your traits. You have just perfectly illustrated why your posts on behaviour are held in such contempt by so many. You thoroughly deserve the names that you have been called on this site .... you are nothing but a troll
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Mar 3, 2018 9:03:23 GMT
The overwhelming majority of people who were banned from CWDF were banned purely and simply because they did not agree with the site owner's views on eu membership. No, they were banned because they were general pains in the arse and relished in offensive (to some) politically incorrect stuff. You have no evidence to support your “Brexit” theory Yes I do. Jenlyn likes my post.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Mar 3, 2018 9:18:22 GMT
This is what I mean about hounding me around the forum. You haven’t experienced the same problem because kris isn’t in a girly sulk with you ever since about 5 years ago..... ....continues on Page 94. I'm late to the party, having been boating (as real boaters do in February) so haven't yet read all the thread - but I have to laugh at this. Hounded by kris - Watch Out! He's coming for ya with his Gurly Sulk! More dangerous than Delta's Black Beast of the Moors (aka 'Tiddles'). it gets even funnier ross he's blocked me now. He's like a petulant child with his fingers stuck in his ears.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2018 9:19:43 GMT
And here was me thinking Foxy was dangerous, better start watching out for the Black Beast of the Moor.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Mar 3, 2018 9:34:41 GMT
....continues on Page 94. I'm late to the party, having been boating (as real boaters do in February) so haven't yet read all the thread - but I have to laugh at this. Hounded by kris - Watch Out! He's coming for ya with his Gurly Sulk! More dangerous than Delta's Black Beast of the Moors (aka 'Tiddles'). it gets even funnier ross he's blocked me now. He's like a petulant child with his fingers stuck in his ears. The trouble is, whenever anyone he hasn't blocked quotes one of your posts, he gets to see it anyway.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Mar 3, 2018 9:38:46 GMT
it gets even funnier ross he's blocked me now. He's like a petulant child with his fingers stuck in his ears. The trouble is, whenever anyone he hasn't blocked quotes one of your posts, he gets to see it anyway. be careful he'll block you next.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2018 9:43:20 GMT
it gets even funnier ross he's blocked me now. He's like a petulant child with his fingers stuck in his ears. The trouble is, whenever anyone he hasn't blocked quotes one of your posts, he gets to see it anyway. I'm going to try blocking everyone and see what happens
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Mar 3, 2018 9:53:17 GMT
The trouble is, whenever anyone he hasn't blocked quotes one of your posts, he gets to see it anyway. be careful he'll block you next. wouldn't that be awful
|
|