Does anyone else miss TLS's + Bigbadwolf's posts?

[daizie]

I do

[Mick Mac]

YES. Bring em back.

[Ladymuck]

Yes, I do too - especially those from our Wild Endangered Specie.

[mockney piers]

Not really

if I'm going to be frank. Wolfie could be both amusing and erudite but frankly that side of him was outweighed by his crass, rude, obnoxious posts, I don't think anyone has had more posts reported than him.

Between them they managed to subvert every bloody thread and it got to the point where alot of regular posters and lurkers just stopped taking an interest.

Nobody wants censorship, but the other side of the rights coin is responsibilty. I think the place is much better without them.

[iaineasy]

well I agree with mockney, BBW was funny soemetimes, but very irritating at times too,and I was loatheed to start any new threads because they would be ridiculed or subverted regularly, have they been banned or something?

[SeanMacGabhann]

I think BBW was liked well enough by Admin and team to be given dozens of chances. Frittering away that muh goodwill takes some doing

I think Ianeasey speaks for a majority of people with his post

Interesting debate about the nature of forums, offensive users and free speech

here, btw

[ratty]

Nope!

[Mick Mac]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> I think Ianeasey speaks for a majority of people

> with his post

I'm not sure I agree with that Sean. Its all too serious without him.

[Brendan]

Give me a while and I will think up something suitably pornographic and offensive that in any other form of polite company it would either get me ostracised or smacked in the face or both. Then I?ll act as if I?m being persecuted when people take me up on it.

After that I?ll come up with some Daily Mail inspired balls about the state of society with barely hidden racist undertones.

[LegalEagle-ish]

I liked his humour (BBW not TLS) cos I like to shock people out of their comas, so I'll miss his stuff. He did sail close to the wind though and even I thought he'd gone a bit too far occasionally, but he's only young, so he's just learning his shock jock parameters.

[Brendan]

Not that I dislike either of them but there is very good reason why they get banned and/or argued with.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Largely because he bored the genuinely witty posters away I would argue

[Atila Reincarnate]

There is a fine line between free speech and offending others with your opinions ( I have on occasion been known to be guilty of this), no matter how much you may believe in your views, somebody out there is bound to hold an opposing view. It may be true that these guys just put forward provocative views purposely knowing that they would stir up a hornets nest just to see how people would react. Who knows, anyway I have no firm views on these guys being barred/banned either way.

[Mark]

I don't miss their posts and I also agree that ianeasy's post does speak for quite a few people, when I speak to people in real life about the forum they've expressed the same opinion. I understand Admin's especially pleased because the number of reported messages has reduced significantly.

[Mick Mac]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> >

> Largely because he bored the genuinely witty

> posters away I would argue

I think BBW is genuinely witty - but I agree there are others who have a much more sophisticated delivery. If he upset too many people then so be it.

Having lent him ?10 at the last drinks - I'm now concerned as to how I might get this back. I'll just have to treat him as another losing bet.

[PetuniaButtons]

Ooh, has he gone, then? that little woolfy chap? I thought I hadn't seen him about and I thought he must have got himself a nice lady friend! What did he do?

He was always a treasure to me. Such a nice polite boy.

If you see him around do tell him if he gets a bit lonely me and my friends will always have a cup of tea and a macaroon for him over on moneysavingexpert.com

It's not all money saving, you know! and we're always looking for new blood, as it were. I think he'll liven things up a bit, bless him!

(I can't say much about the other fella. As the Buttons always say- if youu can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all!)

Anyway must be off to listen to my friends on Calling All Pensioners on resonance.

ttfn!

[PeckhamRose]

(Is that my plumber Eric getting in touch with his feminine side speaking above?)

I miss them both. There, I've said it.

[giggirl]

There was a time when every single thread on the forum was subverted on a daily basis and Woolfie was one of the prime offenders (although he wasn't alone). Frankly that did a lot of damage. Someone would start a thread and then the next couple of pages would be the same people taking the piss and ruining the thread - it may have been funny for the people involved but it was boring for everyone else. Also, starting threads on every half baked thought that comes into your head - tedious.

That said, I did't mind most of his posts when he wasn't just out to cause trouble.

[Family Room Moderator]

I'm a bit torn on this one. I hate the idea of regular users getting banned, particularly when they contribute something.

TLS was an unusual voice on the forum, and I think the forum's better for people who do disagree with the 'liberal lite', as Quids would say - just because it's healthy to disagree sometimes. But his posts became frequently nasty and malicious so I ended up just skipping over them. So if he became a lovely shining light latterly I'm afraid I just wouldn't know about it!

BBW was often funny and livened up the forum. But he must have been temporarily banned a dozen times and the last time was for saying that someone's dad should be gang-raped. Each time he's been let back on he pushes and pushes until he's banned again. I know a lot of people don't mind that sort of talk but a lot of others would read it and think that this is the kind of thing that people in ED think is OK or even funny. The forum should be for everyone, not just for people with thick skins.

[Moos]

.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit was today, 10:26am by Moos.

[SeanMacGabhann]

To take ianeasy as an example (again) , I find him to be more than capable of taking a stand against the "liberal (e)lite" - and he's not doing anything that's going to get himself banned. He joins a long list of like-minded souls on here and long may that continue

TLS's difference from "liberal (e)lite" is an irrelevance to any banning or not surely?

To quite someone from that link above:

" Let me make a prediction: if you ban them, everyone will be relieved (except them, but they're not exactly delighted with life anyway). If you don't, you lose your forum as people slink away, tired of the poison. Who is your loyalty to, the people or the "principle"?"

I have noticed a lot of slinking away from this forum so would echo giggirl's comments about damage being done in the past. It's not a free-speech issue either (to my mind). There are dozens of local forums where people can be heard if they get chucked off one. Their voice need not go unheard

[Mick Mac]

Are they both banned permanently, do we know, or is it undecided?

[Moos]

SeanMac, I was talking about what I found positive as well as what I found negative about each of TLS and BBW, not implying that either was banned for not agreeing with the general political tone of the forum. Sorry if that was fuzzy from my post.

And I did mean lite not elite, again just to be clear.

[SeanMacGabhann]

And I hope I wasn't coming across as contrary to your point - most of which I agreed with anyway

and the (e) thing was entirely my own - it occured to me when I was typing and I liked it. At the time. ;-)

[skidmarks]

Threads are much easier to catch up on now if you missed the start?.but it does feel rather quiet on here now.