A polite request, yet again

First topic message reminder :

I am sick to death of seeing the personal squabbling. This site isn't fun for me and the reason it's not is because of the people who won't stop fighting with one another.

The only thing I can think to do is take the whole site down if this doesn't stop.

I woke up in a great mood after getting one of my rare good nights' sleep, and now I really, truly feel like shit after just spending a few hours here. You people are ruining this place with your fighting.

If you're such a FUCKING CHILD that you can't simply be a member of a news forum without constantly fighting over historical "injustices," at least do everyone else the courtesy of being honest about it -- and DELETE YOUR FUCKING ACCOUNT.

OK, let's clear something up right now. The bans today (the other was Allakaka) had nothing to do with people being right-wing. They vandalized this site with abuse for the purpose of getting under one member's skin -- something I've meted out punishment for before, and issued warnings, INCLUDING TO CATMAN.

Drinky held up his hands like "what did I do?" here and then bragged about it on In A Flap.

I don't have any obligation to hang onto a member who has made it abundantly clear that he or she is just here to tear the site down or turn it into a cesspool. Which another IAF member, Sister Mary, essentially confirmed over there earlier today. That is just bullshit and I'm frankly getting pretty tired of some people's best efforts to confuse me on this issue.

I would, however, consider a second chance for Drinky, seeing as it comes from PhilDidge, whose opinion I respect. Just as I have shown respect for the opinions of Nems and many other right-wing members.

Abuse is not debate or conversation. NewsFix is about debate and conversation. If you can't express yourself without being abusive, you're pathetic.

Handy Andy wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

I know the hypocrisy is bloody amazing

I was simply quoting Drinky to demonstrate to Ben that his decision was fully correct and justified.
I wonder whether a few days as "The Cooler King" would bring him back a little more meek and polite?

If Bens ban was justified everyone would heave a sigh of relief at his absence and get on with things instead of jumping up and down about what he is saying elsewhere. If you want to talk about him then he should have the right to reply.

sphinx wrote:

Handy Andy wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

I know the hypocrisy is bloody amazing

I was simply quoting Drinky to demonstrate to Ben that his decision was fully correct and justified.
I wonder whether a few days as "The Cooler King" would bring him back a little more meek and polite?

If Bens ban was justified everyone would heave a sigh of relief at his absence and get on with things instead of jumping up and down about what he is saying elsewhere.  If you want to talk about him then he should have the right to reply.

I see what you're saying, but I think people have the right to talk about whether this was justified or not.

Hows about ....you all try something novel....and drop it???

grumpy old git wrote:Hows about ....you all try something novel....and drop it???

Not while they are having that much fun they wont

grumpy old git wrote:Hows about ....you all try something novel....and drop it???

HEAR, HEAR!!!! :D

grumpy old git wrote:Hows about ....you all try something novel....and drop it???

Seconded...

grumpy old git wrote:Hows about ....you all try something novel....and drop it???

Yes dropping it would seem a good idea , what is not a good idea is bending down to pick it up , apparently.  

sphinx wrote:

Handy Andy wrote:
I was simply quoting Drinky to demonstrate to Ben that his decision was fully correct and justified.
I wonder whether a few days as "The Cooler King" would bring him back a little more meek and polite?

If Bens ban was justified everyone would heave a sigh of relief at his absence and get on with things instead of jumping up and down about what he is saying elsewhere.  If you want to talk about him then he should have the right to reply.

He's had plenty of time to reply, and a quick check of his posts though going to his profile on here, and clicking on the stats section, to see his posts, that would show that all that he has done recently, was to engage in abuse, to upset the apple cart here as far as i can see.   

Ben_Reilly wrote:OK, let's clear something up right now. The bans today (the other was Allakaka) had nothing to do with people being right-wing. They vandalized this site with abuse for the purpose of getting under one member's skin -- something I've meted out punishment for before, and issued warnings, INCLUDING TO CATMAN.

Drinky held up his hands like "what did I do?" here and then bragged about it on In A Flap.

I don't have any obligation to hang onto a member who has made it abundantly clear that he or she is just here to tear the site down or turn it into a cesspool. Which another IAF member, Sister Mary, essentially confirmed over there earlier today. That is just bullshit and I'm frankly getting pretty tired of some people's best efforts to confuse me on this issue.

I would, however, consider a second chance for Drinky, seeing as it comes from PhilDidge, whose opinion I respect. Just as I have shown respect for the opinions of Nems and many other right-wing members.

Abuse is not debate or conversation. NewsFix is about debate and conversation. If you can't express yourself without being abusive, you're pathetic.

Ben it is not your actions I disagree with - it is the sickening crowing by certain people on here who are taking the opportunity to throw abuse at someone who cannot answer back.

If his so called victims were expressing relief and trying to move on I could accept that - what I find difficult to swallow is the childish delight in another punishment - it reminds me of the children at school that would provoke others until they did something then stand behind the teacher and thumb their noses at the one being told off even when they were not the one doing the tattle tailing. It is not adult and in my books is just as bad as the abuse that goes on.

Well, I for one am going to bed - gotta get up early in the morning to move the mother-in-law (Hatchet faced old harriden) from her flat to a care home.
What fun that will be! ::lightsab::

Puriel wrote:

grumpy old git wrote:Hows about ....you all try something novel....and drop it???

Yes dropping it would seem a good idea , what is not a good idea is bending down to pick it up , apparently.  

you need to shut it and stop stirring. you are a pathetic little man with no saving graces and absolutely nothing to recommend your meaningless existence...

Handy Andy wrote:Well, I for one am going to bed - gotta get up early in the morning to move the mother-in-law (Hatchet faced old harriden) from her flat to a care home.
What fun that will be! ::lightsab::

good luck with that....  

grumpy old git wrote:

Handy Andy wrote:Well, I for one am going to bed - gotta get up early in the morning to move the mother-in-law (Hatchet faced old harriden) from her flat to a care home.
What fun that will be! ::lightsab::

good luck with that....  

Gee, thanks!

Nighty night.

sphinx wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:OK, let's clear something up right now. The bans today (the other was Allakaka) had nothing to do with people being right-wing. They vandalized this site with abuse for the purpose of getting under one member's skin -- something I've meted out punishment for before, and issued warnings, INCLUDING TO CATMAN.

Drinky held up his hands like "what did I do?" here and then bragged about it on In A Flap.

I don't have any obligation to hang onto a member who has made it abundantly clear that he or she is just here to tear the site down or turn it into a cesspool. Which another IAF member, Sister Mary, essentially confirmed over there earlier today. That is just bullshit and I'm frankly getting pretty tired of some people's best efforts to confuse me on this issue.

I would, however, consider a second chance for Drinky, seeing as it comes from PhilDidge, whose opinion I respect. Just as I have shown respect for the opinions of Nems and many other right-wing members.

Abuse is not debate or conversation. NewsFix is about debate and conversation. If you can't express yourself without being abusive, you're pathetic.

Ben it is not your actions I disagree with - it is the sickening crowing by certain people on here who are taking the opportunity to throw abuse at someone who cannot answer back.

If his so called victims were expressing relief and trying to move on I could accept that - what I find difficult to swallow is the childish delight in another punishment - it reminds me of the children at school that would provoke others until they did something then stand behind the teacher and thumb their noses at the one being told off even when they were not the one doing the tattle tailing.  It is not adult and in my books is just as bad as the abuse that goes on.

Sphinx...You need to study his recent posts, that have actually gone on for quite a while (go to the stats section on his profile, then look at his posts)

  

There has been no injustice done,if folk only come here to abuse others then they do so at their own peril , Ben has given more than enough chances to them, they are responsible for their own actions, and this is Ben's' forum, so if none of us like the rules we are free to leave , it's that simple.

The guy already has a sore head, and if it were up to me this thread would be locked, as it's only being used to carry things on now, lets just put this behind us and push on with some chat and debate and fun!

The End.

Agree locking thread, nothing productive here

sphinx wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:OK, let's clear something up right now. The bans today (the other was Allakaka) had nothing to do with people being right-wing. They vandalized this site with abuse for the purpose of getting under one member's skin -- something I've meted out punishment for before, and issued warnings, INCLUDING TO CATMAN.

Drinky held up his hands like "what did I do?" here and then bragged about it on In A Flap.

I don't have any obligation to hang onto a member who has made it abundantly clear that he or she is just here to tear the site down or turn it into a cesspool. Which another IAF member, Sister Mary, essentially confirmed over there earlier today. That is just bullshit and I'm frankly getting pretty tired of some people's best efforts to confuse me on this issue.

I would, however, consider a second chance for Drinky, seeing as it comes from PhilDidge, whose opinion I respect. Just as I have shown respect for the opinions of Nems and many other right-wing members.

Abuse is not debate or conversation. NewsFix is about debate and conversation. If you can't express yourself without being abusive, you're pathetic.

Ben it is not your actions I disagree with - it is the sickening crowing by certain people on here who are taking the opportunity to throw abuse at someone who cannot answer back.

If his so called victims were expressing relief and trying to move on I could accept that - what I find difficult to swallow is the childish delight in another punishment - it reminds me of the children at school that would provoke others until they did something then stand behind the teacher and thumb their noses at the one being told off even when they were not the one doing the tattle tailing.  It is not adult and in my books is just as bad as the abuse that goes on.

Well surely that works both ways with people over there crowing, showing great delight and ridiculing people over here.

A bit of balance please.