Wikileaks diversion 1

[Guest]

Good to see that at least some of our more naive brethren have made it across here. Especially Mr Thumwood, whoever that may be, whose contribution, it must be said, despite winning the prize for surreal fantasy, at least has the merit of an honest ending!

And no, as I said when this board opened, I have no intention of getting deeply involved! I just enjoy a good laugh at the uncanny ability of a few people to get hold of completely the wrong end of the stick.

bws to all

S-S!

[french frank]

Simon, I hoped your new name would represent a change in attitude. Don't be rude about other members. Nothing that you have posted contributes in any way to the discussion, nor does it suggest that you have anything useful to contribute: it simply fosters a bad atmosphere which we have so far avoided.

[johnb]

FF, although I offered to assist with the forum you had better not make me a moderator as I would most definitely remove the post that Simon made in this thread. Not because of any views he expressed but because he took the opportunity to insult and provoke other members.

IMO this behaviour is totally unacceptable on this forum, whoever the poster is.

(To be honest, I am also saddened by Simon's post as I had hoped we had left this sort of thing behind us.)

[french frank]

Diversion ended? Back to Wikileaks ...

[johnb]

PS It might we worth considering whether certain topics, such as politics and religion, should be outlawed from the forum. This isn't something that I would wish to happen as the discussions can be stimulating, however, if topics cannot be debated in a courteous manner there might be no alternative.

[Uncle Monty]

Nearly all the posters on this Forum (and its predecessor(s)) show a commendably civilised and sensible ability to take a deep breath before either giving or taking offence. This is not the least of the place's attractions, and is fairly unusual in cyberspace. Take it from me, I have seen the Portsmouth football messageboard

I suppose there will always be one or two who are ruder than they would think of being in person, or who (to quote Flann O'Brien) mount their lofty equine at the first hint of teasing, let alone abuse. But as long as the rest of us know who they are, the social fabric will be maintained. Probably

[Uncle Monty]

Sorry, hit the wrong button. . .

[french frank]

PS It might we worth considering whether certain topics, such as politics and religion, should be outlawed from the forum. This isn't something that I would wish to happen as the discussions can be stimulating, however, if topics cannot be debated in a courteous manner there might be no alternative.

It's a possibility, though I would strongly defend the discussion of all topics and the expression of all points of view.

Uncle Monty - I agree in theory. But there is no way to 'control' a community in that way. 90% may choose to ignore disruptions/attacks but it's not good enough to prevent the hijacks. I prefer removing them to another thread and let those who prefer the diversions to the original topic, follow them - and let that thread go where it will! As you see, even when I said 'Diversion ended?' it still goes on :o). This is one of the more cunning lessons of those who want to disrupt.

Edit: I have now opened a new MB called Diversions. It's hidden, but if you save the url you can always see what's new - and add to any threads.