|
Post by JohnV on Nov 28, 2016 21:05:40 GMT
As I said earlier, I had forgotten that stunt of his. He strives for excellence ........ in stirring it ........ distasteful and petty.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 28, 2016 21:06:03 GMT
Upset me? Not in the slightest.
What it did do was to expose you as the slimy piece of shit that you are.
But no, it didn't upset me.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Nov 28, 2016 21:22:55 GMT
Generally I agree with you of course. However it is possible for someone to be very disruptive on a thread by posting verbose rubbish, obfuscating when challenged on it, changing the argument dynamically, repeating old and discredited arguments and generally giving the run around. Of course much of the time this doesn't matter but when the purpose of the thread is to give advice to someone on a technical matter who is in difficulty, it is very disruptive, selfish and generally annoying as the poor questioned is left completely baffled and gives up! At that point I find it hard to play the argument and not the man, for it is the man who is being obnoxious and selfish (liking the sound of his own voice etc) despite superficial politeness. Ultimately "playing the argument, not the man" only works if the other party is reasonably logical and rational.
Now that of course is your opinion. It does not appear to be the opinion of the Moderators or Admin. I would suggest that there is another motive. That you and two others want to be the gurus and anyone else who has ideas has to be smashed. I am aware that one of you went to Admin suggesting that the clique should be the final arbiters of what was right and wrong and be given the ability to recommend people for sanction even banning. It all smells of a 'we must be obeyed clique'; get off our threads type of thing. Bullies we would have called them at school. As for logic and rational I have been complimented on mine. I am told it is the reason I am good at what I do. I don't particularly want to be the guru, I am quite happy to be part of a team helping others, which generally I am. However when one individual repeatedly bombs the site with their pet theories that are clearly wrong from a scientific point of view, and that misinformation impacts on trying to help other people, then I do mind. So you too could be part of the team if you want to, but it's quite clear you don't. On the arbiters thing that was not my idea although I can see the issue. It all depends on whether your priority is to win the point regardless, or that the truth should prevail. Of course being a lawyer (allegedly) the former is bound to be your priority. Which is a pity.
|
|
|
Post by geo on Nov 28, 2016 21:36:37 GMT
Upset me? Not in the slightest. What it did do was to expose you as the slimy piece of shit that you are. But no, it didn't upset me. Please carry on, You and your friends have accused me of lots of things including not being me, you tried to take my name away, Geoff, for that I will not forgive any of you. You knew full well I was not your graham. Who from a quick look, it looks like you and your friends hounded him, maybe even committing a criminal offence. I can well understand why he is not here anymore from the little bits I have read. Did you get him banned, were you or your friends part of the list making group. You opened a box when you decided to try and bully me, a box that you cannot control, but I can and that bugs you something nasty, hence all the snide comments that you keep posting. If it does not upset then why point it out, I do not believe you, I have met too many like you through life.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 28, 2016 21:41:33 GMT
If it does not upset then why point it out To ensure that nobody else on here gets sucked in by your "Who, innocent little old me?" act. Don't try to threaten me you pathetic little man, I've spat bigger bullies than you out before breakfast. You can't hide behind the mods here.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Nov 28, 2016 21:43:20 GMT
I am watching Judge John Deed anyone want a plastic bag to get the truth out of Geo.............................
|
|
|
Post by geo on Nov 28, 2016 21:49:16 GMT
Now that of course is your opinion. It does not appear to be the opinion of the Moderators or Admin. I would suggest that there is another motive. That you and two others want to be the gurus and anyone else who has ideas has to be smashed. I am aware that one of you went to Admin suggesting that the clique should be the final arbiters of what was right and wrong and be given the ability to recommend people for sanction even banning. It all smells of a 'we must be obeyed clique'; get off our threads type of thing. Bullies we would have called them at school. As for logic and rational I have been complimented on mine. I am told it is the reason I am good at what I do. I don't particularly want to be the guru, I am quite happy to be part of a team helping others, which generally I am. However when one individual repeatedly bombs the site with their pet theories that are clearly wrong from a scientific point of view, and that misinformation impacts on trying to help other people, then I do mind. So you too could be part of the team if you want to, but it's quite clear you don't. On the arbiters thing that was not my idea although I can see the issue. It all depends on whether your priority is to win the point regardless, or that the truth should prevail. Of course being a lawyer (allegedly) the former is bound to be your priority. Which is a pity. I do not believe you. From what I have been able to find out about you; you spent many years as being the top of the shop as far as your colleague pilots were concerned. Now you are retired you cannot or do not like the idea of being like everyone else, no one to bully or push about, so you try to take it out on anyone you can disagree with who knows about the subject whatever it is. You cannot do it with the lay members it would soon show up.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Nov 28, 2016 21:50:07 GMT
Upset me? Not in the slightest. What it did do was to expose you as the slimy piece of shit that you are. You opened a box when you decided to try and bully me, a box that you cannot control, but I can and that bugs you something nasty, hence all the snide comments that you keep posting. If it does not upset then why point it out, I do not believe you, I have met too many like you through life. tonyb didn't try to "bully" you. I have never seen a post of his that wasn't a genuine attempt to assist. Your attack on him was nasty, spiteful and petty. I have met too many like you through life, unfortunately
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 28, 2016 21:53:38 GMT
I don't particularly want to be the guru, I am quite happy to be part of a team helping others, which generally I am. However when one individual repeatedly bombs the site with their pet theories that are clearly wrong from a scientific point of view, and that misinformation impacts on trying to help other people, then I do mind. So you too could be part of the team if you want to, but it's quite clear you don't. On the arbiters thing that was not my idea although I can see the issue. It all depends on whether your priority is to win the point regardless, or that the truth should prevail. Of course being a lawyer (allegedly) the former is bound to be your priority. Which is a pity. I do not believe you. From what I have been able to find out about you; you spent many years as being the top of the shop as far as your colleague pilots were concerned. Now you are retired you cannot or do not like the idea of being like everyone else, no one to bully or push about, so you try to take it out on anyone you can disagree with who knows about the subject whatever it is. You cannot do it with the lay members it would soon show up. So how is it that of all the thousands of members on CWDF (and the 253 on here) that the only person that is consistently disagreed with by a large number of posters (although Nick & I might be the most vocal) is you? Don't bother answering, the question is rhetorical.
|
|
|
Post by larkboy on Nov 28, 2016 21:54:38 GMT
You opened a box when you decided to try and bully me, a box that you cannot control, but I can and that bugs you something nasty, hence all the snide comments that you keep posting. If it does not upset then why point it out, I do not believe you, I have met too many like you through life. tonyb didn't try to "bully" you. I have never seen a post of his that wasn't a genuine attempt to assist. Your attack on him was nasty, spiteful and petty. I have met too many like you through life, unfortunately Here, here...
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Nov 28, 2016 22:00:28 GMT
I do not believe you. From what I have been able to find out about you; you spent many years as being the top of the shop as far as your colleague pilots were concerned. Now you are retired you cannot or do not like the idea of being like everyone else, no one to bully or push about, so you try to take it out on anyone you can disagree with who knows about the subject whatever it is. You cannot do it with the lay members it would soon show up. So how is it that of all the thousands of members on CWDF (and the 253 on here) that the only person that is consistently disagreed with by a large number of posters (although Nick & I might be the most vocal) is you? Don't bother answering, the question is rhetorical. Tony there arnt thousands of active members on CWDF! sometimes I check the birthdays and see when they last posted often never is the answer or once years ago, if they removed everyone that hasnt posted in a year or has been banned they might have less members than here
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 28, 2016 22:02:30 GMT
So how is it that of all the thousands of members on CWDF (and the 253 on here) that the only person that is consistently disagreed with by a large number of posters (although Nick & I might be the most vocal) is you? Don't bother answering, the question is rhetorical. Tony there arnt thousands of active members on CWDF! sometimes I check the birthdays and see when they last posted often never is the answer or once years ago, if they removed everyone that hasnt posted in a year or has been banned they might have less members than here Well yes, I know that, but if I'd said "the twenty active members on CWDF" it wouldn't have sounded half as good, would it?
|
|
|
Post by geo on Nov 28, 2016 22:04:07 GMT
You opened a box when you decided to try and bully me, a box that you cannot control, but I can and that bugs you something nasty, hence all the snide comments that you keep posting. If it does not upset then why point it out, I do not believe you, I have met too many like you through life. tonyb didn't try to "bully" you. I have never seen a post of his that wasn't a genuine attempt to assist. Your attack on him was nasty, spiteful and petty. I have met too many like you through life, unfortunately He joined the cohort and used it to attempt to bully me. He even suggested that only they should be allowed on technical threads. They should review anyone who was allowed to post on technical threads, they should be able to be the arbiters of what was right or wrong, judging everyone else with no exception and no appeal. They should control. Fortunately Admin is more astute than many here give them credit for and told them no. So there have, I am lead to believe from the little I have seen, been threats of not posting on the site etc unless they have their way. ED. Night night I am off to bed some of us have work to do tomorrow
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Nov 28, 2016 22:05:40 GMT
I don't particularly want to be the guru, I am quite happy to be part of a team helping others, which generally I am. However when one individual repeatedly bombs the site with their pet theories that are clearly wrong from a scientific point of view, and that misinformation impacts on trying to help other people, then I do mind. So you too could be part of the team if you want to, but it's quite clear you don't. On the arbiters thing that was not my idea although I can see the issue. It all depends on whether your priority is to win the point regardless, or that the truth should prevail. Of course being a lawyer (allegedly) the former is bound to be your priority. Which is a pity. I do not believe you. From what I have been able to find out about you; you spent many years as being the top of the shop as far as your colleague pilots were concerned. Now you are retired you cannot or do not like the idea of being like everyone else, no one to bully or push about, so you try to take it out on anyone you can disagree with who knows about the subject whatever it is. You cannot do it with the lay members it would soon show up. You can of course believe what you like (and for the record I'm not quite sure which bit you don't believe since as usual you are imprecise). You will be mistaken though, just as you are mistaken about so many other things.
Why not try being well informed about the subjects you post on, rational and helpful as opposed to argumentative for the sake of it and relishing the volume of your output. Then I'm sure we would all get along fine.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Nov 28, 2016 22:07:52 GMT
tonyb didn't try to "bully" you. I have never seen a post of his that wasn't a genuine attempt to assist. Your attack on him was nasty, spiteful and petty. I have met too many like you through life, unfortunately He joined the cohort and used it to attempt to bully me. He even suggested that only they should be allowed on technical threads. They should review anyone who was allowed to post on technical threads, they should be able to be the arbiters of what was right or wrong, judging everyone else with no exception and no appeal. They should control. Fortunately Admin is more astute than many here give them credit for and told them no. So there have, I am lead to believe from the little I have seen, been threats of not posting on the site etc unless they have their way. ED. Night night I am off to bed some of us have work to do tomorrow You really do come out with some distorted crap
|
|