after yet another inane pm from ... you know who...

 

"i think he may have heeded my threats both here and via pm.... GOOD."

 

 

ROFLMFAO!! Don't kid yourself. I have PM'd the people who were asking why I hadn't responded, and some others, to tell them that I no longer intend posting in Perspectives as you've been conducting a vendetta against me due to being banned on DS. It's time people knew. From the replies I've received it seems I'm not alone in thinking that you go over the top with your moderating and picking on me. Notice how quiet it is in there? Only a handful of posts since Friday. Good. Drive posters away and look what happens. I know of a lot who won't post in there because of you and Scott being totally OTT and intolerant of any opinions but yours.

 

its time to draw this to a conclusion.

 

theres no vendetta against chris for 'getting me banned from ds' (in truth i only found out about the 24 hour suspention 30 mins before it ended :rofl:) ....

 

let me spell this out loud and clear to avoid any deliberate misconception

 

POSTING ONE LINERS WHICH ARE UNSUBSTANTIATED WILL NOT BE ALLOWED. POSTING TO GET A RESPONSE, A WIND UP, WILL BE GREETED WITH A WARNING . ID SOONER SEE NO POSTS IN PERSPECTIVES THEN A CRAZY CHRIS OR ANYONE ELSE LITTLE PLAYGROUND.

 

PERSPECTIVES IS FOR REASONED DEBATE, ONE LINERS ARE FOR THE LOUNGE (sorry adam...lol) , ANYONE IS FREE AT ANYTIME TO EXPRESS ANY OPINION, HOWEVER THIS ISNT A WALL FOR GRAFITTI, SO WHEN YOU POST SOMETHING BE PREPARED TO BE CHALLENGED ON IT, THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS FORUM. SUPPORT YOUR OPINION WITH REASONED FACTS OR SHUT TF UP.

 

plus the concept of me n scott not allowing differing opinions is totally wrong.

 

scotts possibly the one ive argued with the most, we all argue between eachother, me, scott, craig, tip, russt, and many more.... we might not agree on many things...i possibly disagree with craig more then anyone, but i fully respect his argument because he can support his views.

 

so in short.. SUPPORT YOUR VIEWS OR FCUK OFF.

FULL TRUTH

 

Quality over quantity any day

What? Huh?

I agree with that totally... It's not about personal views, it's how you actually present them.... I'm sorry, but I am NOT gonna tolerate some idiot thinking he's "big and clever" making spam and inane posts... And I'm certainly not going to tolerate someone who makes pathetic, inane "jokes" about stripping off in front of teenage girls, or posts which certainly appear to be an apologist or defensive tract for PROVEN paedophile "pop stars" (ie, Gary Glitter), which blithely ignore all the actual evidence and the fact that they were convicted, or posts which disrespect this nation's war veterans with such a total off-handed way in which Chris did, he wasn't making an actual argument at all, he was simply talking sh"te and being incredibly ignorant about the sacrifices these people made so that ingrate could lounge around on the dole all day....

 

Chris is hiding behind the 'rules', blatantly... He's a bloody rules lawyer, and it's obvious to me that he's deliberately playing me and Rob... Frankly, I want this idiot banned from the site forever, because of the way he's very obviously manipulating things... I can certainly see it, so can Rob, Craig, Tyron, Mr Self-Destruct, Brian, etc.... Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be an actual rule which covers such manipulation.... Which is why the Mods need more discretion.... Perspectives isn't like the other Forums, it needs to be treated as a special case....

As a Liberal, I don't particularly like the idea of banning anybody unless their posts stray into illegal territory. However, given some of his inane comments, I'm not going to waste my breath in arguing in Chris's favour.

*cough, cough*

 

Is this about Crazy Chris? The guy who stripped for his daughter?

As a Liberal, I don't particularly like the idea of banning anybody unless their posts stray into illegal territory. However, given some of his inane comments, I'm not going to waste my breath in arguing in Chris's favour.

 

sorry dude, but we HAVE to have that restriction here otherwise 3000 members could legaly post utter rubbish, and its not the person that we have or even can ban... its just bollox posts one individual in particular was posting.

 

*cough, cough*

 

Is this about Crazy Chris? The guy who stripped for his daughter?

 

inspired by his posts...yes, but it does apply to everybody.

http://www.buzzjack.com/forums/index.php?s...p;#entry2755597

 

On a separate note I got banned last week from UKMix for 48 Hours for saying that Michael Jackson loss of popularity was due to his insistence of having boys sleeping in his bedroom. Oh the irony.

http://www.buzzjack.com/forums/index.php?s...p;#entry2755597

 

On a separate note I got banned last week from UKMix for 48 Hours for saying that Michael Jackson loss of popularity was due to his insistence of having boys sleeping in his bedroom. Oh the irony.

 

:rofl: .... whats wrong with telling the truth?

UKMix sounds utterly ridiculous. Boys sleeping in his bed is a well established fact. Are they going to ban people who argue the moon orbits the Earth?

No, but they have a number of Michael Jackson loons who have some power and influence on the site.

 

If anyone wants to sign up and join this debate on this thread then be my guess:

 

http://www.ukmix.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=65238

 

As you well know I have liked Michael Jackson as a recording artist; but some MJ loons in this thread are proving to be as clinically impaired as the man himself was with regards to reality.

 

(I'm the more well known XTC hit single moniker, giving it as good as I can get without trying to get banned (again), from this site).

i havnt the time or inclination to join yet another site to argue the toss....

I think there are times when some of the main posters in this forum come across as intolerant of others' opinions and sometimes overly-aggressive. I personally like that, because I did Politics A-level and there's a lot of (American) politics in the degree I'm about to start, so I'm used to debates, but I can see how it could be offputting to many people.

 

As for Crazy Chris in particular: I think some of the stuff people regularly said to him was pretty unnecessary (there were a lot of digs at the fact he's on benefits, even when it wasn't relevant AT ALL to the discussion)... but he certainly didn't do himself any favours by often posting things that were clearly intended to push buttons, most of all his apologism (is that a word?) for the BNP.

I think there are times when some of the main posters in this forum come across as intolerant of others' opinions and sometimes overly-aggressive. I personally like that, because I did Politics A-level and there's a lot of (American) politics in the degree I'm about to start, so I'm used to debates, but I can see how it could be offputting to many people.

 

As for Crazy Chris in particular: I think some of the stuff people regularly said to him was pretty unnecessary (there were a lot of digs at the fact he's on benefits, even when it wasn't relevant AT ALL to the discussion)... but he certainly didn't do himself any favours by often posting things that were clearly intended to push buttons, most of all his apologism (is that a word?) for the BNP.

 

Can't see where you are coming from tbh Danny particularly the first bit, I am like the polar opposite politically from the likes of Scott, Rob (on most issues), Suedehead, Russ and so on but even though I am at opposite end of the political scale my views are tolerated and respected because I can back them up there is only intolerance of Crazy Chris as he can't back up a single thing and even I get on his case so if hardcore right wingers and lefties/liberals are united in dislike of the guy that really says something

 

I don't think it is unnecessary at all, he boasts about his lifestyle, he makes sneering remarks about taxpayers and particularly in a credit crunch when money is harder his sneering contempt for working people while at the same time bragging about his bone idle lifestyle rightfully riles hard working taxpayers

 

Then there are his vile views on the likes of Gary Glitter, the deceased war heroes, the holocaust and so on

 

He deserves all he gets and more, if I was admin on BJ his arse would have been long since out the door

 

As for other parts all that is asked here is that people back up their views with some reasoning, there is no excuse whether someone is 16 or 60 why they can't back up their own opinions and give their reasoning behind it

Can't see where you are coming from tbh Danny particularly the first bit, I am like the polar opposite politically from the likes of Scott, Rob (on most issues), Suedehead, Russ and so on but even though I am at opposite end of the political scale my views are tolerated and respected because I can back them up there is only intolerance of Crazy Chris as he can't back up a single thing and even I get on his case so if hardcore right wingers and lefties/liberals are united in dislike of the guy that really says something

 

I don't think it is unnecessary at all, he boasts about his lifestyle, he makes sneering remarks about taxpayers and particularly in a credit crunch when money is harder his sneering contempt for working people while at the same time bragging about his bone idle lifestyle rightfully riles hard working taxpayers

 

Then there are his vile views on the likes of Gary Glitter, the deceased war heroes, the holocaust and so on

 

He deserves all he gets and more, if I was admin on BJ his arse would have been long since out the door

 

As for other parts all that is asked here is that people back up their views with some reasoning, there is no excuse whether someone is 16 or 60 why they can't back up their own opinions and give their reasoning behind it

I actually agree with most of that :lol: However, I do think some people (not you) are often excessively aggressive and give the impression (rightly or not) that they are intolerant of other people's opinions. If someone has taken the time and trouble to set out an argument (not something Chris has ever done), it shows a lack of respect to respond with an expletive-laden rant.

Perhaps the dole lout will spend less time on the web and more time jobsearching, now, eh?

Perhaps the dole lout will spend less time on the web and more time jobsearching, now, eh?

 

I wouldn't hold your breath

I actually agree with most of that :lol: However, I do think some people (not you) are often excessively aggressive and give the impression (rightly or not) that they are intolerant of other people's opinions. If someone has taken the time and trouble to set out an argument (not something Chris has ever done), it shows a lack of respect to respond with an expletive-laden rant.

 

Exactly. There's been plenty of times here where people have been making a genuine effort to express their opinion intelligently (the vast majority of Chris's posts not falling under this category), only for one of the main posters here to try to shut them down completely, which is obviously going to be intimidating and make posters not come back. I mean, it really isn't that hard to express your opinion strongly while still keeping a respectful tone. I think/hope I've managed to do that with most of my posts here.

I'm no Chris apologist - he is obviously an utter loon, but I think some of the treatment bordered on the harsh.

 

Like the Gary Glitter thing - I don't recall any point where he actually tried to defend paedophilia, all he was saying was that he liked the music.

By the same token, is anyone who owns a Lennon or Beatles record an advocate of woman beating?

 

On the other side, he does himself no favours, and there was a serious lack of substance to pretty much all of his opinions.

I'm no Chris apologist - he is obviously an utter loon, but I think some of the treatment bordered on the harsh.

 

Like the Gary Glitter thing - I don't recall any point where he actually tried to defend paedophilia, all he was saying was that he liked the music.

By the same token, is anyone who owns a Lennon or Beatles record an advocate of woman beating?

 

On the other side, he does himself no favours, and there was a serious lack of substance to pretty much all of his opinions.

 

no comparison m8..... glitter was a serial, unrepentant, prolific paedophile... lennon did what?... sorry but these claims he was a woman beater may be true, but tbh its news to me! and i grew up with them.

 

the point about liking glitters music is the fact that by buying it he was facilitating a paedophiles lifestyle... c'mon m8, he is PAYING for his next trip to paedoland.