For some amazing reason I- Heiner- am going to write on behalf of Gautama aka Valerie. ( for some amazing reason, Heiner's account should be closed too, he posted very embarrassing stuff, when he's had too much booze. Just saying. I'm not drunk now!)

 

Entonces, el manifesto:

 

In quoting Horrific, Valerie asked to get her account disabled, which Ian did, after being so kind as to ask her, if she really meant it, well she did. For some funky reason, she didn't get the "account disabled!" thing, and can still be contacted via pm, but as a matter of fact, she can't log in any longer. So now it looks as if she's still there, when she isn't.

 

Now she wanted it, but for some reason. To make annoying and rather complex things short, she prefers to not be member of a community, where some people get away with a lot of strange behaviour, whereas others, well, they were forced into retirement. Intelligent, funny and very YOUNG people they were. Well, Sara and Julie were!

 

Sara and Julie, as far as I got it, didn't want it, but got banned anyway, and they got all the way. Sara had discussed in a pretty civilized manner yesterday night. I think even good old Julie did so. Now with Sara, you chased off one of the most amazing personalities who I do admire for her integrity at such an early age. She contibutes with a lot of more or less silly polls :P and cleverly entertaining statements. There's something very uncomprehensible going on, non ( :P )?

 

Now to Nathan. This chap and the reactions towards him always reminded me of the following, which you Ian might want to think about.

I'm a passionate demonstrator, and one problem with big, emotionally loaded demonstrations is:

 

Those young hotspurs, fighting for a sensible cause, but messing things up by not being able to control their emotions yet. One example of one of the demos I've attended. There was a big Better.than.you.and.the.average.jew- deployment in Berlin, and police did seperate those sh**- heads from many many counter- demonstrators, who came in all ages and races and states of maturity. Up front of us counter- demonstrators were the hotspurs, and here we go, their frustration with this quirky, most difficult of democratic rules, that all shit- heads can make themselves heard, even when they demonstrate in thousands and chant creepy things, as long as they follow the rules.

 

So now the hotspurs start throwing stones, even Molotov- Cocktails at the police- men and insult them and all of a sudden, things go crazy.

 

So subsequently and sadly rightfully so, the police starts using those water- cannons, chasing the hotspurs AND subsequently all the timid- minded counter- demonstrators ( i was awfully pregnant for god's sake, there were old people in wheel- chairs, we ran and hid in doorways and stuff, it was crazy.)

 

Nathan is one of those hotspurs, imo. I can personally understand them, but they suck endlessly, they should use their rightful frustration in a more intelligent way, because all what happens in the end is, that they get all the blame for their overreaction, while the initial ursupators of all the outrage get away, laughing (smugly).

 

That's sad. And not entirely fair. Just to make things clear, I too think, that Nathan was being a major asshole at attacking Eric- Poo and Marmellata in the way he did. That was plain, mad shit.

 

But in comparison to other members of this board he answered utterly civilized, when I asked him about his cursing- compulsion via vm.

Whereas those other members of this board were being nothing but smug, condescending sickos, when asked about their issues via vm.

 

AND: Nathan is in his early 20's. Other members of this board are so much older.

 

 

Hm, think about that, will you Ian. You might have felt like those policemen. But there were no Molotov- Cocktails, over the top insults: yes, but no actual weapons.

And by putting focus on the hotspur, you helped out this board's apparently untouchable ubermensch, who thus got away with not answering one and the same question again: why isn't he willing to change his doings and miserable smugness?

 

Could you please have the courtesy to disable my Heiner- account too, and make the disablement visible for visitors for both my Heiner- and Gautama accounts. It's a wish, because the politics of your board are nauseating me. And I think I have the right, that people see that. And it's not a ridiculous cause, imo. People shouldn't get away with strange behaviour, if there are so many ( Lore, Ren, Tonsu, Glossal Fragster, Jules, Nathan, Sara, Julie, Paul, Alexa, Eglantine, Imke, William, Reilly and all those others, who i didn't mention, or who simply don't voice up.) who are heavily annoyed by that.

 

 

 

And please, those other members aren't nazis, but the unintelligent smugness reminds me quite a bit. And you Ian make him look like an untouchable Übermensch, that's why i actually laughed out in amusement, when Nathan called his last thread: is Blaaah fellating you? You know, from the outside, it had something to it. :)

I'm not smug, I'm not a Nazi, I just don't appreciate suggestions that I might be a paedophile to the extent where my wife gets brought into the conversation. Nor do I appreciate requests for people not to post something get ignored, nor do I appreciate people creating threads simply to call me a ****.

 

If you want to pay for this site for the priviledge of being slagged off then you can call the shots. But the actions that I took last night were far more "civilised" than those who no longer appear on the forums. And may the board at last be better off for it.

 

Ian

Gosh, my English is very misunderstanding. You are not Marc, are you? You were supposed to feel like the police in the above. Anyway, since I'm not able to make my points clear, I again ask you to ban my Heiner- account, too. Please. Last comeback, I do remember, that I still have the possibilty to simply not log in any longer. Which will be my strategy, if you think my plea is silly.

 

I never said, YOU were smug Ian. And I said, that neither he or YOU are Nazis. For god's sake. . I understand, that you are pissed off of Nathan a lot. But again, I think that's focussing on the immature hotspur.

 

Well, enough of it already.

The board be better off for it? Or you?

 

Like I said yesterday, this situation is so fucked up in so many ways, that for once I'm lost to even know where to begin. So I'll just say nothing else.

ad shit.

 

But in comparison to other members of this board he answered utterly civilized, when I asked him about his cursing- compulsion via vm.

Whereas those other members of this board were being nothing but smug, condescending sickos, when asked about their issues via vm.

 

 

 

 

THIS

 

I think Nathan's complaints are not considered because of his previous behaviour or simply because the admins don't like him. Because sometimes he makes very good points. And I also think Mark's complains are considered because even with his creepy old man behaviour, someway the admin like him.

I tried not to be angry about that one post yesterday being like, banned but I still am for some reason. :shame:

I tried not to be angry about that one post yesterday being like, banned but I still am for some reason. :shame:

 

which post?

The one Nathan made that was quite civilised and actually had good points but kept getting deleted. :tongue:

 

I feel like I've gotten involved in all this madness too much. :uhoh2:

Nathan's post, it was lengthy, civilised and well written, but for some reason it wasn't allowed to be posted. I understand completely that they had to ban the username he used to write it, but they didn't have to delete the post. A lot of people re-posted it and it kept getting deleted.

 

As usual with Ian lately, no answers for it. The only answers he likes to give are for the vague easy questions that nobody really cares about and nobody really asks.

as I said, I think Nathan's post are removed just because Nathan posted it, not because of the content of the post.

I think that's terrible still, if he deletes just because it's by him, he should go deleting every single post he's ever made.

So you can only consider points from people you want around, is that what we're supposed to learn from this?

of course it's terrible, while other people can go around posting the most stupid things here others can't post their opinions about something.

Yeah I realise that, but that's totally unreasonable. We aren't allowed to re-post a well written post by a former member? It's not as if we were spamming, it was just a good post with a concise insight over the whole thing, and without being given a reason (Because there is no decent one) we aren't allowed to post it.

 

Guatama has been banned, Heiner's posting her thoughts and that seems to be fine.

LET'S BOYCOTT COLDPLAYING. :cheesy:

 

I would probably die. :disappointed:

Guatama has not been banned. I don't know who gave you that bit of information but it is wrong.

So you can only consider points from people you want around, is that what we're supposed to learn from this?

 

Well surely by re-posting Nathan's thoughts and agreeing with his opinion, that post becomes OUR opinion. We should have the right to express it. And what this has come down to is banning people for having an opinion (Sara).

sorry Ian but that's not the main point in this thread, it would be nice if you read the first post and reply to the important things

Sara was not banned for having an opinion, Sara was banned for reposting the thread when I clearly asked for it not to be. You're wrong Reilly for the second time in 60 seconds.

sorry Ian but that's not the main point in this thread, it would be nice if you read the first post and reply to the important things

I believe it was written for Mark. I have made my point of view very clear already :)

no, it was written for you. From what I know, Mark can't ban people and delete threads here

Gosh, my English is very misunderstanding. You are not Marc, are you?

Thanks Lore.

I'm not heiner I think I haven't even talked to her/him.

Ian, you're ignoring the important questions. That's what a lot of the problem is; people who just answer what they want to answer and not the things that matter. Is that how people should go through life?

Sara was not banned for having an opinion, Sara was banned for reposting the thread when I clearly asked for it not to be.

 

Like I said (As well as censoring us you must be censoring your own ability to read our posts) Sara's opinion WAS that post, she had the right to post it. If you had a reason, which you don't, for seeing the content of the post as abusive or un-necessary, then that's fair enough, but all you've done is stop Sara from expressing her opinion which was summed up in Nathan's post, and then ban her. You did ask us not to re-post it, but you didn't say why, other then 'It's Nathan's posts'. I don't know where it says in the Forum rules that you can't re-post a civilised opinion. If this was a court of law you'd be totally screwed.

 

Ian this is all stemming from you, not communicating with us, or having reasons for going about things the way you have been. Nathan wasn't given a reason as to why he was put on force ignore for Mark, I've said that Nathan really eased up on Mark and hasn't said much at all in the lead-up to it. So show us what he did specifically to deserve it! It's that simple.

Seriously Ian, I think you took this whole thing a bit too personal. I mean you basically censored perfectly calmed and valid made points. They had a bit of a right to be mad at you.

 

Lets say that they said **** to me or someone else, they certainly wouldn't be banned for that would they? By mixing in personal feelings in to this you at least in my opinion made the wrong decisions about the whole situation. I think Nathan should have been banned don't get me wrong on that, but how you tried to control the situation just looked wrong in my eyes.