I've deleted Catman's account at his request

First topic message reminder :

I will be saving screen shots from our PMs in case proof of this is needed later.

I guess that one's perception of GIG and Catman depends largely on whether or not they were abusive to you.

I don't take Catman's "difficulties" into account I'm afraid. He has no more difficulties than anyone else, and the ones he has are self-inflicted IMO.

Raggamuffin wrote:I guess that one's perception of GIG and Catman depends largely on whether or not they were abusive to you.

I don't take Catman's "difficulties" into account I'm afraid. He has no more difficulties than anyone else, and the ones he has are self-inflicted IMO.

His boyfriend being HIV+ is one of, if not the biggest day to day concern for phil; that cannot be easy and it is not self inflicted.

Eilzel wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I guess that one's perception of GIG and Catman depends largely on whether or not they were abusive to you.

I don't take Catman's "difficulties" into account I'm afraid. He has no more difficulties than anyone else, and the ones he has are self-inflicted IMO.

His boyfriend being HIV+ is one of, if not the biggest day to day concern for phil; that cannot be easy and it is not self inflicted.

I don't think that's the cause of his foulness.

eddie wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Personally, I think people who actually know his situation, and still come out with all the 'scrounger' posts should search their consciences.   This is only a forum, but who knows what consequences those posts have on his state of mind IRL?   They hold up their hands in horror at a care worker slapping a disabled patient, but metaphorically, they are doing exactly the same to a person with mental health issues, and they know it.

Do you mean me?
I haven't called him a scrounger, never have.
He was nasty and having digs about Madeleine McCann - and on the anniversary of her disappearance too -'so I made a post about drowning cats.

He'll be back anyway. He does this all the time.

No, I didn't mean you Eddie.

I think its a shame.Certain posters are allowed to call other people terrible names and slander each other.

From a newcomer's perspective there were people equally as rude as Phil if not more so.

I'm sure they will enjoy their petty victory.Its a shame because Phil often posted thought provoking threads.  

I liked him.

Eilzel wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I guess that one's perception of GIG and Catman depends largely on whether or not they were abusive to you.

I don't take Catman's "difficulties" into account I'm afraid. He has no more difficulties than anyone else, and the ones he has are self-inflicted IMO.

His boyfriend being HIV+ is one of, if not the biggest day to day concern for phil; that cannot be easy and it is not self inflicted.

Quite.I cannot comprehend that people on here continued to bully and mock him when they had possession of that knowledge.

All this 'scrounger alcohol' crap when the gentleman was caring for a severely ill loved one.It is all a bit sickening.

FluffyBunny wrote:I think its a shame.Certain posters are allowed to call other people terrible names and slander each other.

From a newcomer's perspective there were people equally as rude as Phil if not more so.

I'm sure they will enjoy their petty victory.Its a shame because Phil often posted thought provoking threads.  

I liked him.

Awwwwww, well you can talk to him over on Bitchfest. So far he's blamed Ben and Nems for his departure, but I'm sure you can stir him up and persuade him to blame others too.

FluffyBunny wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

His boyfriend being HIV+ is one of, if not the biggest day to day concern for phil; that cannot be easy and it is not self inflicted.

Quite.I cannot comprehend that people on here continued to bully and mock him when they had possession of that knowledge.

All this 'scrounger alcohol' crap when the gentleman was caring for a severely ill loved one.It is all a bit sickening.

Not as sickening as your vile posts elsewhere.

Raggamuffin wrote:

FluffyBunny wrote:

Quite.I cannot comprehend that people on here continued to bully and mock him when they had possession of that knowledge.

All this 'scrounger alcohol' crap when the gentleman was caring for a severely ill loved one.It is all a bit sickening.

Not as sickening as your vile posts elsewhere.

How's the search for Sarah Connor going?

Ragga,I have stuck you on ignore.

I can't be doing with your constant trolling and I'm sure its boring for everyone else to read too.

You're a WUM and a troll.I'm not interested.

FluffyBunny wrote:Ragga,I have stuck you on ignore.

I can't be doing with your constant trolling and I'm sure its boring for everyone else to read too.

You're a WUM and a troll.I'm not interested.

OK. Try not to sneak a look at my posts.   

FluffyBunny wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Not as sickening as your vile posts elsewhere.

How's the search for Sarah Connor going?

Who? We're not all stalkers like you.   

eddie wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Personally, I think people who actually know his situation, and still come out with all the 'scrounger' posts should search their consciences.   This is only a forum, but who knows what consequences those posts have on his state of mind IRL?   They hold up their hands in horror at a care worker slapping a disabled patient, but metaphorically, they are doing exactly the same to a person with mental health issues, and they know it.

Do you mean me?
I haven't called him a scrounger, never have.
He was nasty and having digs about Madeleine McCann - and on the anniversary of her disappearance too -'so I made a post about drowning cats.

He'll be back anyway. He does this all the time.

No Edds, she means me she just hasnt got the guts to say so. She is doing the snide 'some' people instead so if she gets pulled she can deny.

Raggamuffin wrote:

FluffyBunny wrote:I think its a shame.Certain posters are allowed to call other people terrible names and slander each other.

From a newcomer's perspective there were people equally as rude as Phil if not more so.

I'm sure they will enjoy their petty victory.Its a shame because Phil often posted thought provoking threads.  

I liked him.

Awwwwww, well you can talk to him over on Bitchfest. So far he's blamed Ben and Nems for his departure, but I'm sure you can stir him up and persuade him to blame others too.

I thought he would, I could give a shit but its not nice for Ben who went to bat for him more than once.
Phil is responsible for himself he chooses how to behave and Im sorry I dont buy into this he has problems crap.
We all have problems and worries. What I find most distasteful of all is the using of Doug as an excuse. If Phil was so bloody concerned for Doug he would have been looking after him, not proudly boasting he has been awake and drinking for over 24 hours. Lets not forget that Phil has been singing this tune for 7 years that we know of.

Sassy wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

No he hasn't. I made peace with phil by PM a few weeks (months?) ago; life's too short to uphold nonesense grudges  

Personally, I think people who actually know his situation, and still come out with all the 'scrounger' posts should search their consciences.   This is only a forum, but who knows what consequences those posts have on his state of mind IRL?   They hold up their hands in horror at a care worker slapping a disabled patient, but metaphorically, they are doing exactly the same to a person with mental health issues, and they know it.

An excellent post!

scrat wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Personally, I think people who actually know his situation, and still come out with all the 'scrounger' posts should search their consciences.   This is only a forum, but who knows what consequences those posts have on his state of mind IRL?   They hold up their hands in horror at a care worker slapping a disabled patient, but metaphorically, they are doing exactly the same to a person with mental health issues, and they know it.

An excellent post!

It is an excellent post but it won't make any difference to the people in question because if they were decent people they wouldn't have hounded a man with mental health issues and a severely ill OH in the first place.

I think they are bullies and a disgrace but possibly if Ben issued a warning to ALL involved about their feuding Phil may return.I think he just wants a level playing field and fair treatment for all.

This is all well and good but are we expected to take abuse from someone because he's mentally ill?
How does he know whether the people he is abusing aren't going through bad, sad, unhappy experiences?

FluffyBunny wrote:

scrat wrote:
An excellent post!

It is an excellent post but it won't make any difference to the people in question because if they were decent people they wouldn't have hounded a man with mental health issues and a severely ill OH in the first place.

I think they are bullies and a disgrace but possibly if Ben issued a warning to ALL involved about their feuding Phil may return.I think he just wants a level playing field and fair treatment for all.

What a load of bollocks! How long have you known Phil/Catman? Us hounded him off??? Often the other way round. He's started abusive threads about other posters for no reason, hurled abuse just for the kick it gave him. As for being mentally ill, so was Keith yet he managed to be nice to people.

Where is Keith by the way? Anyone know?

What is this mental illness that he allegedly has anyway?

eddie wrote:This is all well and good but are we expected to take abuse from someone because he's mentally ill?
How does he know whether the people he is abusing aren't going through bad, sad, unhappy experiences?

Just to clarify Eds. No, I didn't mean you, because you didn't call him 'scrounger', tell him to 'get a job' etc. The people who did that know who they are. No, you are not meant to take abuse from him and should tell him off when he dishes it out. However, deliberately winding him up about the one thing that hurts him more than anything else, that he worries about more than anything else, that he has just had a judge say that he is so ill he doesn't have to be re-assessed for two years instead of the normal eighteen months, is just plain nasty.

Sassy wrote:

eddie wrote:This is all well and good but are we expected to take abuse from someone because he's mentally ill?
How does he know whether the people he is abusing aren't going through bad, sad, unhappy experiences?

Just to clarify Eds.   No, I didn't mean you, because you didn't call him 'scrounger', tell him to 'get a job' etc.   The people who did that know who they are.   No, you are not meant to take abuse from him and should tell him off when he dishes it out.   However, deliberately winding him up about the one thing that hurts him more than anything else, that he worries about more than anything else, that he has just had a judge say that he is so ill he doesn't have to be re-assessed for two years instead of the normal eighteen months, is just plain nasty.    

I wasn't on here last night - what happened Sassy? anything specific, or just general?

Sassy wrote:

eddie wrote:This is all well and good but are we expected to take abuse from someone because he's mentally ill?
How does he know whether the people he is abusing aren't going through bad, sad, unhappy experiences?

Just to clarify Eds.   No, I didn't mean you, because you didn't call him 'scrounger', tell him to 'get a job' etc.   The people who did that know who they are.   No, you are not meant to take abuse from him and should tell him off when he dishes it out.   However, deliberately winding him up about the one thing that hurts him more than anything else, that he worries about more than anything else, that he has just had a judge say that he is so ill he doesn't have to be re-assessed for two years instead of the normal eighteen months, is just plain nasty.    

Perhaps you should have advised him to stop hurling abuse around. You were his enabler IMO.

Tesstacious wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Just to clarify Eds.   No, I didn't mean you, because you didn't call him 'scrounger', tell him to 'get a job' etc.   The people who did that know who they are.   No, you are not meant to take abuse from him and should tell him off when he dishes it out.   However, deliberately winding him up about the one thing that hurts him more than anything else, that he worries about more than anything else, that he has just had a judge say that he is so ill he doesn't have to be re-assessed for two years instead of the normal eighteen months, is just plain nasty.    

I wasn't on here last night - what happened Sassy? anything specific, or just general?

Just general, but Ben can't read everything, picked up on what Phil was saying but obviously hadn't read the threads where he was being got at. Phil obviously thought that wasn't on. Must say I agree, if he was being told to stop, the others should have been told to stop as well. But what's done is done, hope he comes back. I know he has lots of bad points, I happen to think he has a lot of good ones as well.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Just to clarify Eds.   No, I didn't mean you, because you didn't call him 'scrounger', tell him to 'get a job' etc.   The people who did that know who they are.   No, you are not meant to take abuse from him and should tell him off when he dishes it out.   However, deliberately winding him up about the one thing that hurts him more than anything else, that he worries about more than anything else, that he has just had a judge say that he is so ill he doesn't have to be re-assessed for two years instead of the normal eighteen months, is just plain nasty.    

Perhaps you should have advised him to stop hurling abuse around. You were his enabler IMO.

Really? Who is your enabler then, because I've hardly ever seen you do a decent post, most of the time you are trying to wind someone up. I think Fluffs has the right idea putting you on ignore.

Sassy wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Perhaps you should have advised him to stop hurling abuse around. You were his enabler IMO.

Really?   Who is your enabler then, because I've hardly ever seen you do a decent post, most of the time you are trying to wind someone up.   I think Fluffs has the right idea putting you on ignore.

I post alone - you were always there encouraging Phil and condoning his foul posts by excusing him. You also spam threads you don't like.

I just hope that Fluffy doesn't talk about me - she has a habit of saying she's ignoring something and then talking about them.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Really?   Who is your enabler then, because I've hardly ever seen you do a decent post, most of the time you are trying to wind someone up.   I think Fluffs has the right idea putting you on ignore.

I post alone - you were always there encouraging Phil and condoning his foul posts by excusing him. You also spam threads you don't like.

I just hope that Fluffy doesn't talk about me - she has a habit of saying she's ignoring something and then talking about them.

You obviously can't read.   I pulled Phil up a few times, and another time he thought I was ignoring him.   I never encouraged him to be nasty because it was counter-productive and told him so.   Now, perhaps you would like to go through my posts, you can get them listed quite easily, and show when where I encouraged Phil.   Either do that or apologise.

Sassy wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I post alone - you were always there encouraging Phil and condoning his foul posts by excusing him. You also spam threads you don't like.

I just hope that Fluffy doesn't talk about me - she has a habit of saying she's ignoring something and then talking about them.

You obviously can't read.   I pulled Phil up a few times, and another time he thought I was ignoring him.   I never encouraged him to be nasty because it was counter-productive and told him so.   Now, perhaps you would like to go through my posts, you can get them listed quite easily, and show when where I encouraged Phil.   Either do that or apologise.

Come off it - you were always there excusing him, and you're still doing it. Instead of blaming others, try blaming him for his own posts. Don't forget that he asked to be deleted, and that he apparently didn't ask in a very nice way either.

If you want to go and pat his head, you'll find him on Bitchfest posting as "Kingfisher".

Raggamuffin wrote:

Sassy wrote:

You obviously can't read.   I pulled Phil up a few times, and another time he thought I was ignoring him.   I never encouraged him to be nasty because it was counter-productive and told him so.   Now, perhaps you would like to go through my posts, you can get them listed quite easily, and show when where I encouraged Phil.   Either do that or apologise.

Come off it - you were always there excusing him, and you're still doing it. Instead of blaming others, try blaming him for his own posts. Don't forget that he asked to be deleted, and that he apparently didn't ask in a very nice way either.

If you want to go and pat his head, you'll find him on Bitchfest posting as "Kingfisher".

Then instead of gobbing off, find the proof and post it. Have fun.

Sassy wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Come off it - you were always there excusing him, and you're still doing it. Instead of blaming others, try blaming him for his own posts. Don't forget that he asked to be deleted, and that he apparently didn't ask in a very nice way either.

If you want to go and pat his head, you'll find him on Bitchfest posting as "Kingfisher".

Then instead of gobbing off, find the proof and post it.   Have fun.

I don't need to. If he comes back and starts meddling in my private life and spreading lies about it, he'll get it back - as will you.

jaded fox wrote:Forgive the dumb American but, what does "scrounger" mean? Is it something like spaz which doesn't mean much here but is derogatory over there?

I've always taken it to mean someone who was cheating the system out of their welfare benefits, or in general living at the expense of others. Any of our Brits care to chime in on this question?

Your right ben,some people claim for rent,children, and quite a few other benefits when they are working,and spend the money on fags, beer and bingo. some are quite blatent about it!!

nicko wrote:Your right ben,some people claim for rent,children, and quite a few other benefits when they are working,and spend the money on fags, beer and bingo.  some are quite blatent about it!!

Just trying to help Jaded out on a question she asked ... seven hours ago? You know, as a Brit, I felt like I should help her on that   

Raggamuffin wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Just to clarify Eds.   No, I didn't mean you, because you didn't call him 'scrounger', tell him to 'get a job' etc.   The people who did that know who they are.   No, you are not meant to take abuse from him and should tell him off when he dishes it out.   However, deliberately winding him up about the one thing that hurts him more than anything else, that he worries about more than anything else, that he has just had a judge say that he is so ill he doesn't have to be re-assessed for two years instead of the normal eighteen months, is just plain nasty.    

Perhaps you should have advised him to stop hurling abuse around. You were his enabler IMO.

I've seen sassy pick Phil up before now, but if she's anything like I was when I was Phil's friend, she probably speaks to him via pm
I find that's the best way tbh.

Sassy wrote:

eddie wrote:This is all well and good but are we expected to take abuse from someone because he's mentally ill?
How does he know whether the people he is abusing aren't going through bad, sad, unhappy experiences?

Just to clarify Eds.   No, I didn't mean you, because you didn't call him 'scrounger', tell him to 'get a job' etc.   The people who did that know who they are.   No, you are not meant to take abuse from him and should tell him off when he dishes it out.   However, deliberately winding him up about the one thing that hurts him more than anything else, that he worries about more than anything else, that he has just had a judge say that he is so ill he doesn't have to be re-assessed for two years instead of the normal eighteen months, is just plain nasty.    

Okay thanks for clarifying. I didn't see what happened last night.

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Perhaps you should have advised him to stop hurling abuse around. You were his enabler IMO.

I've seen sassy pick Phil up before now, but if she's anything like I was when I was Phil's friend, she probably speaks to him via pm
I find that's the best way tbh.

I don't - I find the best way is to tell him to sod off in public.   

Eilzel wrote:Me and phil have had enormous fallings out in the past. I think I'd be forgiven for having a very bitter attitude toward the guy; but I don't. If he is going through a bad time then I hope he can get through it, and that he will return when he feels able to,

Same here Mr E I don't feel any bitterness towards Phil though he was pretty awful sometimes. Hopefully he will feel better x

Raggamuffin wrote:

FluffyBunny wrote:I think its a shame.Certain posters are allowed to call other people terrible names and slander each other.

From a newcomer's perspective there were people equally as rude as Phil if not more so.

I'm sure they will enjoy their petty victory.Its a shame because Phil often posted thought provoking threads.

I liked him.

Awwwwww, well you can talk to him over on Bitchfest. So far he's blamed Ben and Nems for his departure, but I'm sure you can stir him up and persuade him to blame others too.

As much as I like Phil, I think even he would admit that he started much more than he got.  So, that was his style...he likes to carry on like that. That's just Phil...he picks fights.

He blames Ben, because Ben is responsible for the board.  It's minute to minute with Phil.  And if the boss man is giving him shit--as he frequently deserved--it was probably in one of those minutes he invents a grudge against Ben.

As far as Nems is concerned...no one can bullshite me.  I watched that happen.  Phil took out after Nems with venom.  Unfortunately, Nems is pretty damn good in her own right, and Phil got it back in buckets.

Being a lawyer, I admire a good jouster.  Phil was a good one; Nems is a better one.  Unfortunately, a good jouster cannot have moments of vulnerability and give up on a board, all teary eyed and such.  Hey guys...you live by the sword, you die by the sword.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Awwwwww, well you can talk to him over on Bitchfest. So far he's blamed Ben and Nems for his departure, but I'm sure you can stir him up and persuade him to blame others too.

As much as I like Phil, I think even he would admit that he started much more than he got.  So, that was his style...he like to carry on like that.

He blames Ben, because Ben is responsible for the board.  It's minute to minute with Phil.  And if the boss man is giving him shit--as he frequently deserved--it was probably in one of those minutes he invents a grudge against Ben.

As far as Nems is concerned...no one can bullshite me.  I watched that happen.  Phil took out after Nems with venom.  Unfortunately, Nems is pretty damn good in her own right, and Phil got it back in buckets.

Being a lawyer, I admire a good jouster.  Phil was a good one; Nems is a better one.  Unfortunately, a good jouster cannot have moments of vulnerability and give up on a board, all teary eyed and such.  Hey guys...you live by the sword, you die by the sword.

Thank you Quill.
I cant say how much I appreciate your support. It means a lot to the one sick of being cast as the baddie and the font of all evil.
xxxxx

Good evening Folks.

So Phils left but he'll be back.

Does anyone actually have concrete knowledge that Catty is suffering from a mental disorder?

Do any of you have concrete knowledge that Dougie even exists?

All his talk of Dougie having HIV and Catty having property in Spain...anyone have concrete knowledge that those things are true?

For what it's worth,I usually enjoyed reading his posts........they were disgusting.....but so are many of mine.And even though his posts were so bad,they were really interesting.Mad....but interesting.

Nems wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

As much as I like Phil, I think even he would admit that he started much more than he got.  So, that was his style...he like to carry on like that.

He blames Ben, because Ben is responsible for the board.  It's minute to minute with Phil.  And if the boss man is giving him shit--as he frequently deserved--it was probably in one of those minutes he invents a grudge against Ben.

As far as Nems is concerned...no one can bullshite me.  I watched that happen.  Phil took out after Nems with venom.  Unfortunately, Nems is pretty damn good in her own right, and Phil got it back in buckets.

Being a lawyer, I admire a good jouster.  Phil was a good one; Nems is a better one.  Unfortunately, a good jouster cannot have moments of vulnerability and give up on a board, all teary eyed and such.  Hey guys...you live by the sword, you die by the sword.

Thank you Quill.
I cant say how much I appreciate your support. It means a lot to the one sick of being cast as the baddie and the font of all evil.
xxxxx

I have to back quill on this.....you have been attacked incessantly by Phil and have stood your ground x

Well said quill.


And shady!!!!!

Nems wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

As much as I like Phil, I think even he would admit that he started much more than he got.  So, that was his style...he like to carry on like that.

He blames Ben, because Ben is responsible for the board.  It's minute to minute with Phil.  And if the boss man is giving him shit--as he frequently deserved--it was probably in one of those minutes he invents a grudge against Ben.

As far as Nems is concerned...no one can bullshite me.  I watched that happen.  Phil took out after Nems with venom.  Unfortunately, Nems is pretty damn good in her own right, and Phil got it back in buckets.

Being a lawyer, I admire a good jouster.  Phil was a good one; Nems is a better one.  Unfortunately, a good jouster cannot have moments of vulnerability and give up on a board, all teary eyed and such.  Hey guys...you live by the sword, you die by the sword.

Thank you Quill.
I cant say how much I appreciate your support. It means a lot to the one sick of being cast as the baddie and the font of all evil.
xxxxx

Well done Nems I know it has not been easy my little Petit-Pois xxx

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Awwwwww, well you can talk to him over on Bitchfest. So far he's blamed Ben and Nems for his departure, but I'm sure you can stir him up and persuade him to blame others too.

As much as I like Phil, I think even he would admit that he started much more than he got.  So, that was his style...he likes to carry on like that.  That's just Phil...he picks fights.

He blames Ben, because Ben is responsible for the board.  It's minute to minute with Phil.  And if the boss man is giving him shit--as he frequently deserved--it was probably in one of those minutes he invents a grudge against Ben.

As far as Nems is concerned...no one can bullshite me.  I watched that happen.  Phil took out after Nems with venom.  Unfortunately, Nems is pretty damn good in her own right, and Phil got it back in buckets.

Being a lawyer, I admire a good jouster.  Phil was a good one; Nems is a better one.  Unfortunately, a good jouster cannot have moments of vulnerability and give up on a board, all teary eyed and such.  Hey guys...you live by the sword, you die by the sword.

That's a nice shiny analogy but Phil wasn't a jouster,he is a human being,and frailties should be allowed on an internet forum where everyone seems to have known each other for a long time.Vulnerability is also natural and should be allowed.I'm not sure how I would react if someone referred to my OH as Aids riddled and almost dead  

There has been some shockingly hideous comments aimed towards him.

I'm not solely blaming Nems at all,I know Catman could be rude also,I just think he is going through alot at home and that may have caused him to rant sometimes.

Smelly's comment regarding Phil's OH absolutely disgusting.Maybe he just wants a break from the negative comments that he receives (and dishes out I concede).

FluffyBunny wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

As much as I like Phil, I think even he would admit that he started much more than he got.  So, that was his style...he likes to carry on like that.  That's just Phil...he picks fights.

He blames Ben, because Ben is responsible for the board.  It's minute to minute with Phil.  And if the boss man is giving him shit--as he frequently deserved--it was probably in one of those minutes he invents a grudge against Ben.

As far as Nems is concerned...no one can bullshite me.  I watched that happen.  Phil took out after Nems with venom.  Unfortunately, Nems is pretty damn good in her own right, and Phil got it back in buckets.

Being a lawyer, I admire a good jouster.  Phil was a good one; Nems is a better one.  Unfortunately, a good jouster cannot have moments of vulnerability and give up on a board, all teary eyed and such.  Hey guys...you live by the sword, you die by the sword.

That's a nice shiny analogy but Phil wasn't  a jouster,he is a human being,and frailties should be allowed on an internet forum where everyone seems to have known each other for a long time.Vulnerability is also natural and should be allowed.I'm not sure how I would react if someone referred to my OH as Aids riddled and almost dead  

There has been some shockingly hideous comments aimed towards him.

I'm not solely blaming Nems at all,I know Catman could be rude also,I just think he is going through alot at home and that may have caused him to rant sometimes.

Smelly's comment regarding Phil's OH absolutely disgusting.Maybe he just wants a break from the negative comments that he receives (and dishes out I concede).

So you think that Phil is allowed to be vulnerable but nobody else is allowed to be? He abuses people and then laughs about it, and then he does it again and again and again. Nobody is going to put up with that for very long.

Raggamuffin wrote:

FluffyBunny wrote:

That's a nice shiny analogy but Phil wasn't  a jouster,he is a human being,and frailties should be allowed on an internet forum where everyone seems to have known each other for a long time.Vulnerability is also natural and should be allowed.I'm not sure how I would react if someone referred to my OH as Aids riddled and almost dead  

There has been some shockingly hideous comments aimed towards him.

I'm not solely blaming Nems at all,I know Catman could be rude also,I just think he is going through alot at home and that may have caused him to rant sometimes.

Smelly's comment regarding Phil's OH absolutely disgusting.Maybe he just wants a break from the negative comments that he receives (and dishes out I concede).

So you think that Phil is allowed to be vulnerable but nobody else is allowed to be? He abuses people and then laughs about it, and then he does it again and again and again. Nobody is going to put up with that for very long.

Rags, have you ever worked with people with mental health problems?   I did for a year.   The one thing it taught me was, yes, you do have to treat people with mental health problems differently, because they can't handle things that other people can.   Now, I don't expect you to treat him any differently, because your empathy button seems to be missing and anyway, you don't really know about his personal situation.   However, anyone who does, knows he is going to overreact to attacks, and knows that there are certain subjects which are likely to cause him to overreact.   The fact that they then chose those subjects, on purpose, to attack him and whine about him reacting, shows malice and viciousness and a liking for inflicting pain on someone more vulnerable than they are.

Raggamuffin wrote:

FluffyBunny wrote:

That's a nice shiny analogy but Phil wasn't  a jouster,he is a human being,and frailties should be allowed on an internet forum where everyone seems to have known each other for a long time.Vulnerability is also natural and should be allowed.I'm not sure how I would react if someone referred to my OH as Aids riddled and almost dead  

There has been some shockingly hideous comments aimed towards him.

I'm not solely blaming Nems at all,I know Catman could be rude also,I just think he is going through alot at home and that may have caused him to rant sometimes.

Smelly's comment regarding Phil's OH absolutely disgusting.Maybe he just wants a break from the negative comments that he receives (and dishes out I concede).

So you think that Phil is allowed to be vulnerable but nobody else is allowed to be? He abuses people and then laughs about it, and then he does it again and again and again. Nobody is going to put up with that for very long.

No of course I think everyone is allowed to be vulnerable.

But if Phil started having a pop at me I would put him on ignore not make fun of his ill OH.

Sassy wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

So you think that Phil is allowed to be vulnerable but nobody else is allowed to be? He abuses people and then laughs about it, and then he does it again and again and again. Nobody is going to put up with that for very long.

Rags, have you ever worked with people with mental health problems?   I did for a year.   The one thing it taught me was, yes, you do have to treat people with mental health problems differently, because they can't handle things that other people can.   Now, I don't expect you to treat him any differently, because your empathy button seems to be missing and anyway, you don't really know about his personal situation.   However, anyone who does, knows he is going to overreact to attacks, and knows that there are certain subjects he is particularly likely to which he is definitely likely to cause him to overreact.   The fact that they then chose those subjects, on purpose, to attack him with and whine about him reacting, shows malice and viciousness and a liking for inflicting pain on someone more vulnerable than they are.

You think I should have empathy for a person who says that I should shove a crucifix in a private place? You think I should have empathy for a person who sticks their nose into my private life, lies about it, and abuses me over and over again about it? You think I should have empathy for a person who constantly abuses me about my faith and then laughs about it?

I don't think so.

FluffyBunny wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

So you think that Phil is allowed to be vulnerable but nobody else is allowed to be? He abuses people and then laughs about it, and then he does it again and again and again. Nobody is going to put up with that for very long.

No of course I think everyone is allowed to be vulnerable.

But if Phil started having a pop at me I would put him on ignore not make fun of his ill OH.

And what if he carried on - and on and on and on in virtually every thread and all over other forums?

Raggamuffin wrote:

FluffyBunny wrote:

No of course I think everyone is allowed to be vulnerable.

But if Phil started having a pop at me I would put him on ignore not make fun of his ill OH.

And what if he carried on - and on and on and on in virtually every thread and all over other forums?

You behave exactly the same, thread after thread you have gone after Fluff. What's your excuse?

There is an old saying that springs to mind....
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones!