pippa
WH Member
Posts: 230
|
Post by pippa on Jun 19, 2013 11:31:13 GMT
I imagine you believe this since you have chosen to make it your signature, pippa. Would you care to explain precisely WHO is keeping you and me obedient and passive and precisely HOW? Or is the internet just one big plot, the same internet, actually, that permits your fav whistleblowers to spread the truth? C'mon! You don't want us to think you are paranoid, do you? i may be paranoid but it doesn't mean they're not out to get me... but you want me to explain it to you marchesa? i would have thought it would speak to you as it does to me and i choose it as my signature because it fits with so many different aspects of life in so many ways be it restrictions placed on us by governments and authority figures or those who just which to dominate - out there as well as in the home. and my immediate thought is closer to home on these boards which a a good example imv. what is allowed what's tollerated and considered acceptable opinion. why, just yesterday i noticed a certain someone (wont mention any names) likening another posters views to those of Nick Griffin. an attempt to silence and set the paramaters of what's 'commonly accepted opinion' if ever there was one. and were you not the robust individual you are you would have been shut up and sent packing many moons ago way back to the beeb days. your views don't fit marchesa with the status quo on message boards. although to save themselves from the endless resulting boredom where everyone agrees with each other, a little bit of dissension and debate within the restricted spectrum must be tolerated within the ranks (debate within the restricted spectrum). how many times you've been banned, yet because of your tenacity you found a way back in and still, here you are to this day banging your individual drum despite the mountain of shit that has been heaped upon you along the way. all the attempts to discredit you yet you're still here. just as well you revel in it - a rare thing marchesa. most are sent packing. of course we have rare individuals, the whistle blowers and non conformists who are prepared to stick their neck out no matter what. without the whistleblowers and truth seekers who risk their lives, livlihoods and freedom, we'll just carry on accepting the restrictions placed upon us and swallow what's dished out to us from those who wish to control. thankfully there's a whiff of awakening out there in the world but i wont hold my breath. edit: i should clarify that it would fair a enough accusation had the aforementioned posters views actually echoed those of Nick Griffin but of course they do not.
|
|
pippa
WH Member
Posts: 230
|
Post by pippa on Jun 19, 2013 11:41:05 GMT
|
|
pippop
pc
I love everyone here.
Posts: 1,110
|
Post by pippop on Jun 20, 2013 15:43:15 GMT
I imagine you believe this since you have chosen to make it your signature, pippa. Would you care to explain precisely WHO is keeping you and me obedient and passive and precisely HOW? Or is the internet just one big plot, the same internet, actually, that permits your fav whistleblowers to spread the truth? C'mon! You don't want us to think you are paranoid, do you? i may be paranoid but it doesn't mean they're not out to get me... but you want me to explain it to you marchesa? i would have thought it would speak to you as it does to me and i choose it as my signature because it fits with so many different aspects of life in so many ways be it restrictions placed on us by governments and authority figures or those who just which to dominate - out there as well as in the home. and my immediate thought is closer to home on these boards which a a good example imv. what is allowed what's tollerated and considered acceptable opinion. why, just yesterday i noticed a certain someone (wont mention any names) likening another posters views to those of Nick Griffin. an attempt to silence and set the paramaters of what's 'commonly accepted opinion' if ever there was one. and were you not the robust individual you are you would have been shut up and sent packing many moons ago way back to the beeb days. your views don't fit marchesa with the status quo on message boards. although to save themselves from the endless resulting boredom where everyone agrees with each other, a little bit of dissension and debate within the restricted spectrum must be tolerated within the ranks (debate within the restricted spectrum). how many times you've been banned, yet because of your tenacity you found a way back in and still, here you are to this day banging your individual drum despite the mountain of shit that has been heaped upon you along the way. all the attempts to discredit you yet you're still here. just as well you revel in it - a rare thing marchesa. most are sent packing. of course we have rare individuals, the whistle blowers and non conformists who are prepared to stick their neck out no matter what. without the whistleblowers and truth seekers who risk their lives, livlihoods and freedom, we'll just carry on accepting the restrictions placed upon us and swallow what's dished out to us from those who wish to control. thankfully there's a whiff of awakening out there in the world but i wont hold my breath. edit: i should clarify that it would fair a enough accusation had the aforementioned posters views actually echoed those of Nick Griffin but of course they do not. Pippa. Who are you quoting in your sig? I reckon that I could tell if somebody's views echoed those of NG but I'd need to know what was said. I'm dying to know.
|
|
pippa
WH Member
Posts: 230
|
Post by pippa on Jun 21, 2013 22:49:42 GMT
Who are you quoting in your sig? pippop - i'm fairly certain it was my pal, gnome. i would've attributed it at the time but there wasn't enough space to do so.
|
|
pippop
pc
I love everyone here.
Posts: 1,110
|
Post by pippop on Jun 22, 2013 9:13:49 GMT
Rubbish when Jean's away!
This proves that people only come here to read her posts.
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jun 29, 2013 20:50:11 GMT
That's almost certainly the truth of it, pippop.
Not posting myself is the best way I have discovered of preventing other posters from posting, which is (as pippa has revealed with her usual perspicacity) my main reason for existing.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jul 7, 2013 9:28:51 GMT
Perhaps keeping this thread artificially stuck at the top of the Discussions list while other more recent comments languish lower down the list has something to do with people thinking nothing new has been posted on this board?
Alternatively I could argue that it is MY absence from the board that has put it into terminal decline, jean.
Perhaps our moderators can explain WHY they have kept this unremarkable thread top of the list for so long?
Or why the "Killing Babies" post of 20th June is now top of the list whereas this thread has the latest comment.
I cannot imagine a better strategy for making visitors think no-one is at home!
Is it a weird policy of management or just incompetence?
|
|
pippop
pc
I love everyone here.
Posts: 1,110
|
Post by pippop on Jul 7, 2013 9:41:35 GMT
Perhaps keeping this thread artificially stuck at the top of the Discussions list while other more recent comments languish lower down the list has something to do with people thinking nothing new has been posted on this board? Alternatively I could argue that it is MY absence from the board that has put it into terminal decline, jean. Perhaps our moderators can explain WHY they have kept this unremarkable thread top of the list for so long? Or why the "Killing Babies" post of 20th June is now top of the list whereas this thread has the latest comment. I cannot imagine a better strategy for making visitors think no-one is at home! Is it a weird policy of management or just incompetence? My money's on a weird policy of management. But why? What can they be up to?
|
|
pippop
pc
I love everyone here.
Posts: 1,110
|
Post by pippop on Jul 7, 2013 11:29:58 GMT
I know!
The management obviously wants to keep people passive and obedient and to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.
Yeah.
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 7, 2013 12:15:19 GMT
Perhaps our moderators can explain WHY...the "Killing Babies" post of 20th June is now top of the list whereas this thread has the latest comment . That's because someone, possibly admin, had stickied that thread so that it always appeared first on the board. I have now reversed the process, so that it future it won't.
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 7, 2013 12:17:52 GMT
The management obviously wants to keep people passive and obedient and to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum. You've got it, pippop. As I explained above. I could argue that it is MY absence from the board that has put it into terminal decline, jean. You could, but would anyone believe you? Pippa thinks I aim to stop you from posting, but why are you letting me get away with it?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jul 8, 2013 10:24:39 GMT
Well, sinceI am the only one who ever posts anything interesting and well evidenced that departs from the typical ad hominems produced by the rest of you, I have very good reason for thinking it is my input that keeps the board lively. Nay, too, plays his part. The rest of you are all terribly defensive!
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 8, 2013 11:35:58 GMT
It does occur to me to wonder why, if what you say is true, your very own Science board is in apparently terminal decline.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jul 8, 2013 12:42:32 GMT
Yes, I haven't been posting on the Science Board as often as usual lately! Until a month or so ago I used to post about ten items per day. Proves my point. I'm the one who makes the running, jean, not you and certainly not your little ***, pippop.
Whatever happened to "visitor", by the way, your mole in the defense establishment?
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 8, 2013 12:51:20 GMT
Until a month or so ago I used to post about ten items per day. Nobody much replied to you even then though, did they? The bulk of the posts were just Nick throwing insults at alancalverd, who eventually realised that he (Nick, that is) didn't know nearly as much as he was claiming to, and got fed up replying.
|
|