Election Year or Fear!

[Andy_Faber]

Not true, you have deleted at least two posts where there was no name calling and Tricky is a tool!

I’m not getting into a spat about it, I COULD undelete the posts but that would be as childish as the name calling that caused the deletions in the first place, and which I note you are continuing

[swaledale]

I’m not getting into a spat about it, I COULD undelete the posts but that would be as childish as the name calling that caused the deletions in the first place, and which I note you are continuing

Go on then, I'm waiting. I know for a FACT you've deleted posts that involved no name calling, oh but hang on, its your perception that's in play here, which as you ahve demonstrated many times on here, isn't exactly aligned with reality!


Glad you recognise your being childish, add that to being a patronising ****!

[Geoff Parkstone]

Go on then, I'm waiting. I know for a FACT you've deleted posts that involved no name calling, oh but hang on, its your perception that's in play here, which as you ahve demonstrated many times on here, isn't exactly aligned with reality!


Glad you recognise your being childish, add that to being a patronising ****!

And there goes another one (soon) !

[Andy_Faber]

Not sure why it’s being discussed on this thread but this new ‘active moderation’ has worked a treat hasn’t it?
Never known so much bitching and backbiting as there is at the moment…and why? Because apparently two of the forum’s more sensible posters mentioned to AF that things were becoming unpleasant so he decided to act.
Unfortunately AF your version of ‘active moderation’ appears to have made things infinitely worse…largely because, unlike a good moderator/arbitrator/referee you are unable to disguise your prejudices and have confused fairness and firmness with high handedness so that everyone on here knows who you are sympathetic towards and, in turn, antagonistic towards.

The one good thing to have come out of all this, imo, is that MA has been ‘granted’ some sort of role as regards ‘moderation’ That makes sense, not least because he is far less likely than you to indulge in the sort of behaviour you claim to want to put an end and because he is a poster I suspect to be respected by just about everyone on here.

So…a simple request, just like MA and mac made. Can we stop the juvenile and petty dictator stuff where you determine what and when certain subjects can and cannot be talked about - the simple truth is that threads ‘succeed or sink’ according to the level of interest they generate - and get back to you (hopefully now with the guidance of MA) moderating more in the style of Ramondo rather than Rats…i.e. you ensure that there is no one being victimised on here and nothing written that is either illegal, libellous or beyond the bounds of decency…because that’s all a good moderator is actually responsible for?

As I said yesterday I’m not getting into a spat about this, although it might be a good idea if you moved this to the ‘deleted posts’ thread, or I will if you’re timed out to do so and want me to

[ramAnag]

As I said yesterday I’m not getting into a spat about this, although it might be a good idea if you moved this to the ‘deleted posts’ thread, or I will if you’re timed out to do so and want me to

I’m fine with you moving it to the ‘deleted posts’ thread. As I said I don’t know why the discussion is on the ‘Election thread’ but that’s where it appeared to have gravitated to.
As for ‘not getting into a spat about this’. I fear that’s just one of your strategies when you know you’re in the wrong. There are two or three you use when you are ‘losing’ a point…on this occasion, imo, a question has been asked responsibly and respectfully and it now requires an answer.

[Andy_Faber]

I’m fine with you moving it to the ‘deleted posts’ thread. As I said I don’t know why the discussion is on the ‘Election thread’ but that’s where it appeared to have gravitated to.
As for ‘not getting into a spat about this’. I fear that’s just one of your strategies when you know you’re in the wrong. There are two or three you use when you are ‘losing’ a point…on this occasion, imo, a question has been asked responsibly and respectfully and it now requires an answer.

I've moved it.

Not sure what the question was that you're referring to, happy to respond if its to a matter of fact and its dealt with on the deleted posts thread

[Andy_Faber]

I suspect you’re well aware…the question is the final paragraph of the post that you moved to the deleted posts thread

I'll responded on the deleted posts thread. I'm not talking about it on this thread again

[MadAmster]

Back on topic...

https://www.keighleynews.co.uk/news/...t-negotiation/

Maybe if people researched stuff before going off on one, it would help greatly.

My research has shown that Starmer's uncle really was aboard the Antelope when it was sunk by the Argentinians. His faux pas, and it's no more than that was, was to say it was torpedoed. It was bombed. Idiots are all over "social media", hammering him for what he said. The gist of the comments being that he lied about his uncle being in the Falklands aboard a ship that sank. That is also how I read your post TTR. I am unable to take action on posts like this one of yours that are completely wrong and could, IMO, cause you, AF and Footymad some legal problems if KS and/or his staff were to read it (I realise they are not likely to but I wouldn't take that chance). I would strongly advise AF to delete your post which is exceedingly defamatory. If he decides to do so, he may also delete this one of mine as it contains your defamatory post in the quote.

[ramAnag]

Maybe if people researched stuff before going off on one, it would help greatly.

My research has shown that Starmer's uncle really was aboard the Antelope when it was sunk by the Argentinians. His faux pas, and it's no more than that was, was to say it was torpedoed. It was bombed. Idiots are all over "social media", hammering him for what he said. The gist of the comments being that he lied about his uncle being in the Falklands aboard a ship that sank. That is also how I read your post TTR. I am unable to take action on posts like this one of yours that are completely wrong and could, IMO, cause you, AF and Footymad some legal problems if KS and/or his staff were to read it (I realise they are not likely to but I wouldn't take that chance). I would strongly advise AF to delete your post which is exceedingly defamatory. If he decides to do so, he may also delete this one of mine as it contains your defamatory post in the quote.

Well said, couldn’t agree more. Was wondering myself if it could possibly make any difference, to those who lost loved ones, whether HMS Antelope was sunk by bombs or torpedoes but then I remembered who said it and the futility or arguing with someone who will currently stop at nothing where KS is concerned.

[Andy_Faber]

Maybe if people researched stuff before going off on one, it would help greatly.

My research has shown that Starmer's uncle really was aboard the Antelope when it was sunk by the Argentinians. His faux pas, and it's no more than that was, was to say it was torpedoed. It was bombed. Idiots are all over "social media", hammering him for what he said. The gist of the comments being that he lied about his uncle being in the Falklands aboard a ship that sank. That is also how I read your post TTR. I am unable to take action on posts like this one of yours that are completely wrong and could, IMO, cause you, AF and Footymad some legal problems if KS and/or his staff were to read it (I realise they are not likely to but I wouldn't take that chance). I would strongly advise AF to delete your post which is exceedingly defamatory. If he decides to do so, he may also delete this one of mine as it contains your defamatory post in the quote.

I've deleted the post and amended the relevant section out of yours. I've also given Tricky the opportunity to come back to me if he can confirm that the lie he mentioned was actually a lie rather than just poor description, and if he can I'll reinstate