freediver wrote on Oct 15^th, 2008 at 9:17am:


If there are special rules for anybody I would like to have my own special rules too.

Me too, it seems boofy thinks its ok to call somebody a pissant but when he is called dogturd in return he has a tanty and threatens to report it, I think he's unstable.

It took a lot longer with IQ because people were 'returning fire'. I had to give a few people temporary bans around that time.

I have been very specific with Grendel about what is inappropriate and he has indicated he understands what I consider inappropriate. He just doesn't think he should have to abide by the rules.

IMHO, if personal abuse is allowed it will bring "an eye for an eye" response a forum inevitably goes to dogs sometime with prolonged suffering stage. There are plenty of examples of that on the web.

Well I haven't said much at all sprint, so you'd be right and fd would be wrong and a liar to boot.

As for skippy...  I've heard many a Lwinger call others a pissant dear boy.  As for "dogturd"...  I didn't complain and any such insult from you is water off a ducks back to me.  But then fd is a hypocrite if he doesn't ban you for it IMO.  I'm also use to your deliusions and lies.

As for Lestat...  he seems to whing and whine and complain lots...  perhaps fd should tell him to grow a thicker skin.  I note Lestat like rubbing many people's noses in it...  perhaps he doesn't like it being returned.

I have't sworn at anyone and I haven't used terminology not in the dictionary or inappropriate.

Maybe fd has a problem personally...  I can understand that...  we've never gotten on.

Lestat abuses someone in pretty much every post, he can't help it and we, as non-muslims need to tolerate it otherwise we get labeled as bigots.

Grendel wrote on Oct 15^th, 2008 at 1:25pm:

And end rant, see I told you he was unstable, he makes imperial look perfectly sane.
Carry on boof, this is much funnier than all that muslim stuff.

Grendel wrote on Oct 15^th, 2008 at 2:12pm:


Yes, all that above most definitely is personal and perpetrators should be warned and conditionally banned.

Yes grendel makes some good points there.

Mantra.

IQ was not banned because of the OceanZ he was banned because he made nasty stalking threats toward FD - so please be correct about this.

Yes he should have been banned for all those nasty names he called you .

Ah but most of the stuff I posted and have seen have absolutely nothing to do with me fd.

lets not have any self fulfilling prophecies happening here eh.
Or scape-goating.

you should stay grendel..we all have a run in with FD  at some point..

its obvious you have friends here

Thanks kate 

No excuse.
No apology.
fd.
You tend to be very selective to whom you apply the rules to.

I've pointed that out.

I've shown others you seem to have no problem with or is it just that Muslims are exempt.  Do you think it not libelous to call someone a nazi or white-supremacist?

As for the other fairly teepid banter I agree with Mozz...  I don't get up in arms about his insults, nor skips, nor amadds etc, etc, etc... 

I understand your "fear" for your site... but as Mozz says it's probably more my frequency than anything else.  I participate fd...  that means more people also participate.  Usually I just return fire.  You seem to allow certain others to get away with stuff just because they are not as concise in their criticism.  I don't see the point in wasting my time libelling people in sentences.  I just call 'em stupid.  Or something equally appropriate. 

You obviously don't want this here yet you allow others to be just as insulting and arrogant and worse.  Perhaps they are too subtle for you or perhaps your bias creates a blindspot.  You allow others to break the rules regularly.  I can see that strict adherance would be almost impossible to police and that it would also be detrimental to participation if you went all opinion Nazi on everyone.

Like Mozz says we are all anon and there's really no one here I personally dislike etc.

Not sure what the answer is...  but if you ban me that might make you happy and at least my jibes will have been stopped.  Of course the rest of the stuff will remain.

I know you don't want flame wars but as I see it the site is far from that situation at present.

Your site...  your call

Amadd wrote on Oct 15^th, 2008 at 5:22pm:


You're the one who refuses to discuss with anyone a topic unless they have read the exact same book as you. If I read book A on poultry and you read book B on poultry, would I refuse to discuss poultry with you because you haven't studied the exact same book as me?

Of course not, I would never be so arrogant or hypocritical.

Remember, you take Zeitgeist as an informative text type, not a film. I would never try and discuss a movie plot in depth of something like say, Finding Nemo, without having seen the film.

However if the movie was a retelling of a novel I which I have read, I would have no issue trying to compare similarities.

If I saw a doco on Crocodiles in Far North Queensland narrated by David Attenborough, and you saw one on the exact same topic put out by National Geographic, I would never say no I won't discuss (perceived) facts with you because you have not seen the exact same film as me.

The only reason I can see you behaving like this is if you wanted to discuss cinematography, but you clearly don't having posted in the Fringe forum.

Have a nice day Amadd. Hope you grow up soon.

Amadd wrote on Oct 15^th, 2008 at 6:01pm:


Amadd, you are wrong and dim witted. You cannot compare views of alternative history, which are available from many sources, to a political debate which is only a one of a kind occurrence. Your analogy is flawed.

I have heard the Jesus astrology myth years before Zeitgeist ever came out. There is no new, ground breaking information contained in it, just things that are new to you.

Do you understand yet? Or is this too much for you?

There is absolutely no comparison between a one of a kind event such as a political debate, a fight, a wedding and hearing it relayed to you later and not being there, than to learning about certain theories which are nearly identical from different sources.

Is it sinking in yet just how much of a wank you are?

Address the post Amadd, or can't you?

Are you just another drone who swallows everything fed to them and can't think for yourself?

Quote:


Quote:


C'mon sweetheart. It's not too hard is it? You can do it right? Or are you going to admit you were wrong and are being far too narrow minded?

You never manage to address anything I write, you go for the old twist and change. Why?

Feeling OK there weasel?

Yes, I would probaby have a mental block if I visited a spastic asylum too.

Quote:


WTF? Can you please show me where I have ever been for one or the other as a whole?
I think I've already stated that I like to take the points of interest to me from lots of different places.

But if you want to continue, then you should post on the topic that I've already started regarding my beefs with you.

This has gotten into an entirely different topic.

So do you want to keep asking me questions here in the vain hope that I may falter on one of them, or do you want to answer the question of why you have the need to be a self-serving control freak who has no respect for freedom of speech?

Geebeezus.

Among all that up there, it is still unclear to me why FD acted. Maybe, that is on some other Thread.

Whatever.

Grendel, why don't you just Post away as you have now been allowed, instead of mucking over an irrelevant past.

If you can't get over that recent past, you are doomed here.

Just be a Poster, not a commentator on the actions/inactions of the Owner.

Quote:


Earth to BozO!  Ummm yesss...and your point being?

Quote:


Somebody tried to tell me that a man once rose from the dead and walked on water, but I told him he was dreamin'.

I don't believe I have called anyone names or been personally insulting. I have been called a Nazi, that's the only one I recall but there may have been others. Oh there was the guilt by association attacks on those that hunt being murderers and child molesters. Far better to respond intelligently rather than emotionally.

There are certainly some here that begin every attack on a differing opinion with an insult, calling someone an idiot or a moron etc. Nothing I can do about it. Ultimately it only lowers their own standing on the forum and lessens whatever good points they may bring to their argument, to both the person it is directed to and to other members.

I have not seen anything as bad as the garbage that spilled from imperial's keyboard and I think it took too long for him to be banned. Like I have said before, in the topic dealing with imperial, I decided very early on to treat him as persona non grata.

Grendal should probably have known, and I suspect that he did know, that his topic about One Nation would have largely been recieved negatively. I for one am disappointed at the demise of O.N. from the democratic political landscape. Regardless of flawed economic views, show me a party who doesn't, they represented the views of many Australians that have the right to hold those views AND be represented. Too much name calling from a few there.

I did think that Exotic's " Phil's neck being a holster for a knife " represents a over the top aggression that needs to be reighned in and contributes nothing to the forum or to his/her own image. If that matters to him I do not know.

Easel and Amadd, quit the bickering please.

Grendel, obviously I am going to deal with the more persistent rule breakers and the more obvious insults first. I am going to deal with the problems I am aware of, not the ones I don't know about. Maybe I would have time to deal with the rest, if it wasn't such a pain in the arse trying to deal with people like you who find any excuse for their behaviour. I am not a babysitter. I am not going to hold your hand and walk you through this. Either follow the rules or don't bother posting here. If you can't be bothered reporting abuse you see from others, don't whinge about it later on when you get pulled up for it. Either report it or get over it, but don't try to use it to deflect attention from your own behaviour. Take responsibility for your own actions.

Not a dobber fd...  that's unAustralian 

I don't whinge about it....  only respond to your hypocrisy regarding it.

Amadd wrote on Oct 16^th, 2008 at 4:01pm:


Yes.....

Quote:


Yes, I did censor you for control freak purposes. To stop you being one. I don't want to play this game again. Please stop.

You need a moderator for the moderators FD.  Someone to settle these disputes instead of having both parties complaining and disrupting the threads.

It only happens on the members boards.

Where's the moderator of the "Feedback Board".  He/she should be dealing with these complaints FD?

Pair of kids..ridiculous.

mantra wrote on Oct 16^th, 2008 at 4:51pm:


When you volunteer, from what I have read from you, there is nothing to be concerned about, and I think you are being genuine in wanting to help, but generally if someone says something like 'the ones with limited power need oversight, I'll do it', it can throw you a bit.

I don't think FD will go for this though. Will it be like an arbitration court where both parties have to agree to the ruling for it to be binding?

Quote:


Hmmmmmm.....Ok Easel.  Just thought FD sounded a bit stressed that's all - but no problems.  It would only be informal - just to calm people down a bit.

Quote:


I agree - but I thought there was a mod...it sounded like you.  Personally I don't care either way.  Just thought it would help out a bit if FD got sick of complaints. 

The issue is quite simple.
Easel was trying to tell me who's boss by ridiculously censoring my reply, which I outlined in my first statement here:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1223959804
FD has now banned me from posting in that thread.

Easel then tried to take one of my threads from another forum so that he could have control.

FD doesn't want to see the truth because I've already pasted him in our "Did Jesus exist" debate, and he's got a chip on his shoulder too.

Then you should come clean easel.
Tell me the real reason that you censored my post.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1223347391/all

Amadd wrote on Oct 16^th, 2008 at 5:32pm:


I have done, in at least three threads now. I don't see why I need to do it again.

Amadd - I just find it easier to go the boards where the moderators are flexible - as FD said there are plenty of boards here.  Obviously the thread should have been left in the Spirituality Forum - you know that Sprintcyclist wouldn't have had it censored.  

Avoid the forums where you think the moderator is unreasonable - it just upsets everyone involved in the argument.

Amadd wrote on Oct 16^th, 2008 at 5:48pm:


Yes, a supposedly open chatroom where you flat out refused to have any discussion with anyone who had not done exactly as you requested and watched the movie, regardless of the fact the ideas presented in the movie are not exclusive to it. Does it make sense now? If not, read my signature.

Quote:


Your best bet is sticking to those forums run by people you know Amadd.  Unfortunately forums aren't as informal as they used to be and this one has grown so big that there are some controls in place. 

Lots of things are unfair - and not just here Amadd.  Here the moderators of the member run boards have full control of the content and you have to abide by their rules - regardless of how unreasonable they appear.

You could try the others boards - there's General, Chat and Global and there is little interference from anyone there.

Well you should change your quote from:

The best way to win an argument is to start by being in the right

to:

The best way to win an argument is to not piss off the boss

..because I know I am in the right.

Personally, I think that myself and the people of Australia are deserving of an apology, but I'm not after that.
I'm only wanting to be treated the same as everybody else.

Easel has given me an assurance that I won't be.

Quote:

Quote:


You like cars - traffic penalties etc.  Have you tried Phil's forum on transport?  That definitely needs some input from someone like you.

There are probably a lot of people who agree with you Amadd - just ignore those who frustrate you.

As far as my quote goes - hahahhaha - once bitten twice shy - that's me.

Amadd wrote on Oct 16^th, 2008 at 6:11pm:


If anyone else had of come in acting the way you did, they would have got the same treatment. You are treated the same as everyone else.

Amadd wrote on Oct 16^th, 2008 at 6:16pm:


I'm giving it to you from my perspective in context. You should see the way I sleep, it is odd, I don't lie straight I am kind of stretched out and contorted.

Amadd wrote on Oct 16^th, 2008 at 6:23pm:


C'est la vie.

Amadd wrote on Oct 16^th, 2008 at 6:53pm:


I'm not trying to hide my actions with jibber. I am trying to explain to you why I did what I did, I'm not pretending that I didn't commit the acts you said I did, I am trying to show you that you are not a mind reader and do not understand my intentions. If that is jibber then I am sorry you don't get it.

Are you autistic Amadd? Often autistic people find it impossible to grasp that other people have minds and are capable of independent thought.

Amadd wrote on Oct 16^th, 2008 at 7:31pm:


So you are a mind reader are you Amadd?

I know what you wrote and the direction you wanted that thread to take.

Yes I did try and exert control over that thread. There is no way this side of the equator I was ever going to let you dictate the direction a thread was going to take. I prevented you from exerting control and trying to dominate a thread. Is that what has your knickers in a knot? The fact I did not allow your over inflated sense of self worth and ego to dictate to me?

Do you get it yet? Are you incapable of finding fault in yourself, or at the very least seeing it from my perspective?

Quote:


So you are the mind reader?
Pray tell, what direction is that?

At least you admit it at last that you were attempting to take control over me.

The discussion that I was interested in was the same as when I posted a thread on Sprituality. Nothing too sinister me thinks.

Well you're making yourself very clear now to me.

1. Abuse of power

2. Assumptions of my intent which you haven't yet outlined.

I had no intent of where the thread was going to go except that I wanted to discuss it with somebody who had watched it. BTW, you could've watched it 10 times over by now without this difference of opinion  

I don't know if you think that I was going to dig up the Jesus debate again, but there really isn't too much about that in the movie.
That wasn't my intention when I posted a thread in the Spirituality forum either.

Well what is it that you didn't want me to discuss?

Quote:


I thought you said minutes 

Well put it in the category of Pulp Fiction (not as good of course) if it makes more sense to you that way. You and FD were like the blind leading the blind. You were explaining what you thought of the first one and what you think the second one is about.

There is absolutely no way that I could have a discussion about the movie with you in regards to my interest.


But I'm happy that you've now admitted that you were usurping control.
Thanks for that.
Better the devil you know.

Why would I bother with a board which doesn't respect freedom of speech in the first place?

It's a joke 

Amadd wrote on Oct 16^th, 2008 at 8:54pm:


That's the spirit Amadd. Can you feel the weight shifting off your shoulders already?