Gordon Brown's letter

[SeanMacGabhann]

Come on Hal, this isn't about moderating and you know it. This is personal with you...

You are old enough and sage enough to engage with people, regardless of "seperation of duties" issues but for you to claim that moderators and/or friends are ganging up on you is a low blow, which will ellicit support from some people but is meaningless

Stand your ground and, to use your own argument, express in terms which people who might not be au-fait with forum etiquette just what exactly Huguenot has done wrong. This, btw, is the same Huguenot who issued a full and frank apology on another thread - above criticism he ain't

[Mick Mac]

Easy Hal. Some people will understand what you are getting at but an online ruck is not the answer.

[mockney piers]

Gracefully?

A slew of personal insults and insinuations juxtaposed with faecal euphemisms and that's graceful?

Give me a break.

But I understand, the nasty moderators are ganging up, because we like to abuse out power and lord it over everyone, again spot on, I can't believe I'd never realised what an arse (doubtless explains my hitherto unrealised coprophilia too) I am.

Mea culpa mea maxima culpa.

[HAL9000]

Noooo. I'm not claiming anything of the sort - I'm sitting in front of a trading terminal that would shame mission control right now and New York's pre-market session has just kicked off. I can't deal with all of that and you two at the same time. That's all.

I'll be more than happy to continue this later. As for my argument - I've explained it fully in previous posts and you can see for yourself what he did just by scrolling up a bit. I'm sure both of you know exactly what I'm talking about.

Catch you later boys.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Hal

never "boys" me again. Even in jest. Which you weren't

I know when someone is talking down to me and smirking at the same time and I don't like it one bit

Tog_in_sox has been posting on here for over 2 years - it's a bit condescending to speak up "for" them only to say they "may not have sufficient online experience to recognise that they are being set up: they rise to the bait and end up looking foolish "

I don't think tog_in_sox has appeared foolish at all - I agreed with a lot of what they were saying, but agreed with Huguenot on the point re handicap/character flaw. Had you not waded in that debate might have happened

But you are letting your personal vendettas get in the way

[jimmy two times]

Maybe we should take a leaf out of Harry Hill's book and have a fight to sort it out.

[bignumber5]

Issues upon issues - Hal, did it ever occur to you that people are disagreeing with you because, well, they don't agree with you, rather than this clandestine conspiracy nonsense you're spouting? And bringing up and exposing the identities of the moderators as if that somehow makes any difference to anything is the online equivalent of the race-card: they're not dissin' you cos dey is moderators, dey is dissin' you cos dey fink you is wrong. The moderators are allowed their personal opinions as well, or do you think we should be running a catholic set up and metaphorically having our sex advice from obligate celibates?

Bad form, Hal.

(I'm not a moderator, by the by, just a bullshit filter: I'm sure you'd have outed me if I hadn't owned up)

To the topic of the thread, this whole thing seems like GB can do no right - one of his personal things seems to be responding to recent service bereavements. He said in the phone call that he'd spelt it right but that his handwriting is pants, which, if you've ever seen his scrawl, is very plausible indeed. This is not a story of a no.10 cock-up, it's the story of a grieving woman in the angry stage being exploited by a tabloid for their own "GB is usless" campaign. He might not have had the best run, but I didn't see Blair handwriting a letter of condolence to every grieving forces family and I don't see Cameron getting round to it either. Cut the poor bugger some slack, say I.

And wherever possible try not to identify him solely by his disability, I think we're better than that.

[Mark]

HAL if you have issues with the moderators and you can't sort it out properly then please send a PM to Admin or me. I'd rather you did that than stir up problems by bringing their moderation into question to win argument points.

Between you and me I'm actually getting a bit tired of unfounded accusations about the forum (and the team that run it) at the moment. Please give it a break.

[jimmy two times]

I doubt some of the things that have been written would have been said face to face. Maybe this should be the yardstick people use when writing their posts?

[computedshorty]

?

[bignumber5]

It doesn't offend, comp.shorty, but it adds nothing. Were you there, did you know him, or have you just finished watching "courage under fire"?

[Mick Mac]

i thought it was good. It read as a tribute.

I also think people should be less critical of other peoples posts.

There are too many people trying to show themselves as superior in dismissing other peoples opinions often in a rather nasty way.

[Easties EL]

The Sun, taking advantage of Vunerable people again. Haven't got much sympathy with Mr. Brown, he hasn't got long left in the job. Still, thumbs up to him, for having a good go. I'm sure none of us here, would have the balls to go and be Prime Minister.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Isn't that exactly what you are doing Mick? And it's not rare either.

If you think Hals attack could go unanswered you are dreaming

[Mick Mac]

Actually Sean I was not referring to Hals points at all. You will notice I had earlier asked Hal not to continue.

I was referring to BN5's response to the "prose" by computedshortly which CS had obviously gone to some length to create.

This is typical of what I am talking about - I'm getting bored with the whole thing to be honest.

I'm happy to accept your apology, if you agree you jumped in hastily.

[mockney piers]

In all fairness there's nothing nasty about MM's comment, he's just imploring for a little more decorum, something I entirely applaud!

I'm sorry if I got a little prams there but I felt I'd been personally insulted, undermined and had my integrity questioned (not that it's above reproach obviously). It got my goat to

say the least.

[Mick Mac]

MP - thanks - but i was not referring to Hals points - I actually forgot it was on the same thread. I had not got involved in todays earlier antics as there was obviously not going to be any winner.

[bignumber5]

Mick Mac Wrote:

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

> i thought it was good. It read as a tribute.

> I also think people should be less critical of

> other peoples posts.

> There are too many people trying to show

> themselves as superior in dismissing other peoples

> opinions often in a rather nasty way.

I wasn't attempting to be dismissing, but a descriptive narrative that actually rather romanticises the situation like it's scene from a film, is jam-packed with cliches and apparently with no personal attachment does not, to my mind, add anything. That's not attempting to be nasty, I just don't see the point. Comp.shorty even put in the disclaimer that it might offend someone - the piece doesn't offend me, but I think to pen prose over the death of someone that you never met in a place that you were not, and to even give a message from him to his mother from beyond the grave, is rather tasteless. And adds nothing. Never was much of a poet, though, so perhaps I'm missing the point.

[????]

Well you could just let it go bn5?

[bignumber5]

if everyone who has an opinion that i don't like that much keeps it to themselves too ;-)

But I have a hankering that thinking it and not saying it would make for a less effective forum...

[????]

Ok - In my opinion your post (unusually for you) looked meanspirited and condscending and given the general malaise of this thread (not your fault) it was a pity...but this is a circular argument isn't it?

Peace to all

[SeanMacGabhann]

I apologise Mick. Unreservedly. Just feeling a bit besieged

[Mick Mac]

Great. Thanks.

[Santerme]

bignumber5 Wrote:

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

> Mick Mac Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > i thought it was good. It read as a tribute.

> > I also think people should be less critical of

> > other peoples posts.

> > There are too many people trying to show

> > themselves as superior in dismissing other

> peoples

> > opinions often in a rather nasty way.

>

>

> I wasn't attempting to be dismissing, but a

> descriptive narrative that actually rather

> romanticises the situation like it's scene from a

> film, is jam-packed with cliches and apparently

> with no personal attachment does not, to my mind,

> add anything. That's not attempting to be nasty, I

> just don't see the point. Comp.shorty even put in

> the disclaimer that it might offend someone - the

> piece doesn't offend me, but I think to pen prose

> over the death of someone that you never met in a

> place that you were not, and to even give a

> message from him to his mother from beyond the

> grave, is rather tasteless. And adds nothing.

> Never was much of a poet, though, so perhaps I'm

> missing the point.

Well, perhaps, you could consider it posted by me...as I have been there (twice), have known hundreds of young men like him and most all soldiers leave letters to their loved ones just in case....including me.

[bignumber5]

to me it still wouldn't really add anything, though i admit that neither does me saying that which i think is MM and quids' point, which i take and apologise for my tone