|
Post by emma on Jun 18, 2016 10:40:41 GMT
not strictly true, a whole thread disappeared this morning, though whether because I called someone a fuckwit or what said fuckwit posted remains a mystery. Why do you suppose that your brain-dead ramblings would ever amount to anything sufficient to need moderation? I could train a parrot to say "fuckwit". That doesn't make the parrot intelligent. Regardless of what you thought about what I said, it was a well reasoned and well articulated post. I never saw your response, but if it was your usual blather of name calling rather than reasoned response, I didn't miss anything. I didn't call you a fuckwit because of your puerile and inane dribblings about political assassination which could easily have served as a seven year old's school essay but for the way you rubbished a woman killed two days ago, a very fine person respected both sides of the debate whose two small children are probably nowhere near understanding what's happened. A live aboard boater who had the welfare of vulnerable people including boaters at the forefront of her life, who was killed whilst serving the people of her community. That you used her death to make your vacuous and I'll-conceived point was below the low even for someone like you or your kind.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Jun 18, 2016 11:50:21 GMT
Why do you suppose that your brain-dead ramblings would ever amount to anything sufficient to need moderation? I could train a parrot to say "fuckwit". That doesn't make the parrot intelligent. Regardless of what you thought about what I said, it was a well reasoned and well articulated post. I never saw your response, but if it was your usual blather of name calling rather than reasoned response, I didn't miss anything. I didn't call you a fuckwit because of your puerile and inane dribblings about political assassination which could easily have served as a seven year old's school essay but for the way you rubbished a woman killed two days ago, a very fine person respected both sides of the debate whose two small children are probably nowhere near understanding what's happened. A live aboard boater who had the welfare of vulnerable people including boaters at the forefront of her life, who was killed whilst serving the people of her community. That you used her death to make your vacuous and I'll-conceived point was below the low even for someone like you or your kind. I wondered what the thread was about I have an idea now I am appalled by her death she was a lovely caring lady who like most of us loved a boating life. I remember reading an article she had wrote, and thought she should be the waterways minister, somebody connected with that way of life. The world is poorer by her passing God bless her
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jun 18, 2016 11:55:57 GMT
Depends what was actually said. Whether or not it is in good taste, it isn't illegal to show insufficient veneration to a murder victim, or to be critical of the views they held.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jun 18, 2016 12:06:37 GMT
and he was speaking from a country which suffers from an inordinate amount of gun crime
|
|
|
Post by emma on Jun 18, 2016 12:31:05 GMT
Depends what was actually said. Whether or not it is in good taste, it isn't illegal to show insufficient veneration to a murder victim, or to be critical of the views they held. yes, you're right, being a fuckwit isn't illegal. just as well eh?
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jun 18, 2016 12:36:14 GMT
Depends what was actually said. Whether or not it is in good taste, it isn't illegal to show insufficient veneration to a murder victim, or to be critical of the views they held. yes, you're right, being a fuckwit isn't illegal. just as well eh? for you ?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jun 18, 2016 12:41:24 GMT
Depends what was actually said. Whether or not it is in good taste, it isn't illegal to show insufficient veneration to a murder victim, or to be critical of the views they held. yes, you're right, being a fuckwit isn't illegal. just as well eh? As I didn't see the post, I can't comment specifically on it. However, I would have to say that, like many others here I suspect, I would consider Paul to be one of the more erudite and intelligent members of this forum, whereas I consider you to be one of the least intelligent.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jun 18, 2016 13:22:14 GMT
returning this thread .... somewhat to it's original track There have been some interesting posts, particularly the last one by Carlt. A further development on the unbalanced moderation has been the perfect example of favoured posters getting a gentle warning about posts that are flagrantly breaking forum rules and would have had any of the rest of us expunged without mercy. (this is in the Jo Cox thread into which no one should be introducing a political slant)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2016 13:35:13 GMT
returning this thread .... somewhat to it's original track There have been some interesting posts, particularly the last one by Carlt. A further development on the unbalanced moderation has been the perfect example of favoured posters getting a gentle warning about posts that are flagrantly breaking forum rules and would have had any of the rest of us expunged without mercy. (this is in the Jo Cox thread into which no one should be introducing a political slant) I saw the political statement by starkiwi, (well, more like a fanatical rant by a lunatic). Some folk will use anything to promote their agenda. I'm totally shocked by what happened to Joe cox, the world is definitely becoming a crazy place, but at the end of the day, I sincerely believe her killer is just a total nutcase. Anything could have set him off. I don't like to contemplate on where this will all end, I've never witnessed anything like this before in my lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by PaulG2 on Jun 18, 2016 13:45:24 GMT
Why do you suppose that your brain-dead ramblings would ever amount to anything sufficient to need moderation? I could train a parrot to say "fuckwit". That doesn't make the parrot intelligent. Regardless of what you thought about what I said, it was a well reasoned and well articulated post. I never saw your response, but if it was your usual blather of name calling rather than reasoned response, I didn't miss anything. I didn't call you a fuckwit because of your puerile and inane dribblings about political assassination which could easily have served as a seven year old's school essay but for the way you rubbished a woman killed two days ago, a very fine person respected both sides of the debate whose two small children are probably nowhere near understanding what's happened. A live aboard boater who had the welfare of vulnerable people including boaters at the forefront of her life, who was killed whilst serving the people of her community. That you used her death to make your vacuous and I'll-conceived point was below the low even for someone like you or your kind. Except that I didn't "rubbish" Ms. Cox. As I recall, I said that I didn't know her and offered my condolences to her family. I did use her assassination as an example of something, which you obviously took exception to. Obviously reading comprehension is not your strong suite.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jun 18, 2016 13:50:00 GMT
Re Sabcats post
yes it was very extreme before she self moderated it a bit after LC's "gentle warning" it's bad enough after she altered it, but the follow ups by magictime and Bee leave a lot to be desired and do not help at all
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jun 18, 2016 13:58:34 GMT
Paul, you don't have to defend yourself. We are all well aware of your reputation and the kind of posts you write just as we are aware of Emma's and the twisted bile she spews.
|
|
|
Post by PaulG2 on Jun 18, 2016 14:11:25 GMT
I should add that it demonstrates how ridiculous British law is when I can be held responsible for content posted by you lot. In an ideal world I would just add a disclaimer at the top of the page stating that everyone was responsible for their own posts, but that doesn't fly in the UK... I had previously understood that in English law defamatory comments were the sole responsibility of the author unless a site owner received a request to remove them but refused. There is a good link here that indeed explains that this is not the case and that a site owner can indeed be pursued especially if the author cannot be identified due to them posting anonymously or the site owner/admin. knew about and didn't remove it. (Which D9 has done in this case). Reading that link the forum hosting co. could be pursued too which would only really result in one thing and that is the shutting down of the Forum. www.adlexsolicitors.co.uk/internet-defamation.htm?gclid=Cj0KEQjwv467BRCbkMvs5O3kioUBEiQAGDZHL7Yy4NzD1V8GX-cZI5F1--GuckoL80EBrMB86CffEYwaAuLx8P8HAQI don't think my post was defamatory of anyone. It certainly wasn't meant to be. It merely mentioned Ms Cox as an example of something, and as an example of what might happen in the future. The entire time I was writing that post, in the back of my mind was the NSA and how they might react to what I said. Don't forget that we in America are under constant surveillance, and I didn't want to end up on some no-fly list, or worse. I was walking a fine line between analyzing and advocating. Delta thought I stepped over that line and I appreciate the action he took as he was able to apply standards more objectively than I could. Keep in mind that just four days before Ms. Cox was assassinated, I awoke to the news that 49 innocent people had been massacred by a madman simply because they were gay. Every day when I send my son off to school, Sandy Hook is in the back of my mind. (20 children, 6 adults slaughtered at their school.) Mass murder is becoming an almost daily occurrence here in the US. These mass murders are made possible by political whores who have sold their souls, and their constituents lives, to the firearms industry. Under these circumstances, one can become rather jaded.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2016 14:31:55 GMT
returning this thread .... somewhat to it's original track There have been some interesting posts, particularly the last one by Carlt. A further development on the unbalanced moderation has been the perfect example of favoured posters getting a gentle warning about posts that are flagrantly breaking forum rules and would have had any of the rest of us expunged without mercy. (this is in the Jo Cox thread into which no one should be introducing a political slant) I think most of us who have been members on there for a while know all about the site owners history of posting style and conflicts he has previously got himself into, it's been referred to on more than one occasion. It makes his current sanctimonious tone he applies to his PM's you get when he 'bollocks' you by PM wonderfully ironic. (It would be a bit like me and a few others buying the forum and then trying to expect everybody to be nice and wholesome to each other even when somebody is being an out and out tosser - it doesn't work like that).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2016 14:35:00 GMT
returning this thread .... somewhat to it's original track There have been some interesting posts, particularly the last one by Carlt. A further development on the unbalanced moderation has been the perfect example of favoured posters getting a gentle warning about posts that are flagrantly breaking forum rules and would have had any of the rest of us expunged without mercy. (this is in the Jo Cox thread into which no one should be introducing a political slant) I think most of us who have been members on there for a while know all about the site owners history of posting style and conflicts he has previously got himself into, it's been referred to on more than one occasion. It makes his current sanctimonious tone he applies to his PM's you get when he 'bollocks' you by PM wonderfully ironic. (It would be a bit like me and a few others buying the forum and then trying to expect everybody to be nice and wholesome to each other even when somebody is being an out and out tosser - it doesn't work like that). That was very subtle. I do prefer blunt myself though, he's a prick.
|
|