|
|
Post by jean on Nov 4, 2014 19:06:19 GMT
Both of these people are aware of the threads, undoubtedly they have read them at some time, and there is nothing to stop them replying, indeed both people have replied on the MCL board When someone 'talks behind someone's back' it means that the person talked about cannot reply and defend himself... Feeling just a leetle bit defensive, no? The fact is, you chose to ridicule posters from other boards in places where you were pretty sure they wouldn't see what you'd written. The practice of stalking and lurking on boards where you don't post, taking contributions out of context and working them up into something, and accompanying them with sneering accounts of the poster who wrote them is pretty unpleasant really. |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 4, 2014 23:36:27 GMT
I am pondering as to where one has to draw the line to comply with the edict of Admin. I don't think you're really confused at all, jonjel. I think you know as well as anyone where the line should be drawn. It's not that hard. You are right that once a poster has written something online it is in the public domain. As it can be read by anyone, there's no bar to it being quoted. But By all means tell us that someone thinks that we might hand back the Falkland Islands to Argentina. It's an opinion worth discussing. Quite a lot of people think so actually. (The clue is in the back.) But it adds nothing to tell us that in your opinion the poster who said it is vociferous and infamous for quantity not quality. Ask yourself, why would you want to add that? |
|
|
|
Post by Jonjel on Nov 5, 2014 15:10:17 GMT
By all means tell us that someone thinks that we might hand back the Falkland Islands to Argentina. It's an opinion worth discussing. Quite a lot of people think so actually. (The clue is in the back.)
But it adds nothing to tell us that in your opinion the poster who said it is vociferous and infamous for quantity not quality. Ask yourself, why would you want to add that?
Jean. I am sure 'quite a lot of people' think the earth is flat, or that the Planet Zog is part of our universe. Yes handing the Falklands over to Argentina could be a subject worthy of discussion, but I was using that as an example of what another poster posts. Maybe a better illustration of the way his mind works would have been to tell you that his solution to the badger cull is to keep all cows in sheds.
As for my comment on him being better known for quantity not quality, that was an opinion, and of course one must not express opinions about anyone on another board on this one.......
|
|
pippop
pc 
I love everyone here.
Posts: 1,110
|
Post by pippop on Nov 5, 2014 15:15:37 GMT
his solution to the badger cull is to keep all cows in sheds.
What a monstrous thing to say! Even as a joke. Terrible. |
|
|
|
Post by Jonjel on Nov 5, 2014 15:37:14 GMT
his solution to the badger cull is to keep all cows in sheds.
What a monstrous thing to say! Even as a joke. Terrible. He was not joking, but I think you are Pippop!  |
|
pippop
pc
I love everyone here.
Posts: 1,110
|
Post by pippop on Nov 5, 2014 15:44:59 GMT
I let my cows out of their shed every week! They love it. And I love watching their little faces!
A veal-crate is too good for that MCL man.
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 5, 2014 16:25:49 GMT
...As for my comment on him being better known for quantity not quality, that was an opinion, and of course one must not express opinions about anyone on another board on this one....... That's a very good example of the passive voice used to give a spurious impression of objectivity. He is known... 'Known' by whom? Oh, just you, then. More accurate to say 'I think...'? |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 5, 2014 17:13:49 GMT
I see cleefy has gone back to his Science Board thread. Good.
|
|
|
|
Post by cutiePie on Nov 5, 2014 18:26:10 GMT
He is due a change of identity is he not?It's so exciting when that happens.
well, not really.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jonjel on Nov 6, 2014 15:29:58 GMT
...As for my comment on him being better known for quantity not quality, that was an opinion, and of course one must not express opinions about anyone on another board on this one....... That's a very good example of the passive voice used to give a spurious impression of objectivity. He is known... 'Known' by whom? Oh, just you, then. More accurate to say 'I think...'? Jean. I am not going to get into a debate about the strict use of language. I think the vast majority of posts on any board have the hidden prefix I think as they are expressing the posters personal view. I will agree with you in that I think that discussing the merits or shortcomings of a poster on a board where he does not post is a bit of a waste of time However you know very well that if I have an issue with someone I will say so, on the thread where he has made the comments. I think that particular poster is a noxious trouble maker who deliberately goads anyone who dares to disagree with his warped Marxist views, but I have told him that and a lot worse where I know he will read it. |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 6, 2014 17:21:07 GMT
I think that particular poster is a noxious trouble maker who deliberately goads anyone who dares to disagree with his warped Marxist views, but I have told him that and a lot worse where I know he will read it. I know you have, jonjel, and that's fine. But why repeat it all here? |
|
|
|
Post by Jonjel on Nov 6, 2014 18:08:33 GMT
Why repeat it here? Why tell me here you know I have faced him directly with it?
As part of a discussion I think!
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 6, 2014 20:42:26 GMT
I'm acknowledging that you do, as you say, tell this poster what you think to his face.
I question whether it serves any purpose telling any stray posters here what you think of him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jonjel on Nov 7, 2014 9:53:27 GMT
Well, we must agree to differ.
I liken people quoting what others say as commenting to others on a conversation in the pub.
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 7, 2014 10:27:22 GMT
It's not the quoting, jonjel, so much as the added commentary that's inappropriate for this board.
Nobody here needs to know what you think of someone who only ever posts somewhere else.
You've suggested I think that comments like yours and cleefy's are much the same as dissing the Royal Family, the difference is (as I've pointed out already) that there's plenty of widely-disseminated information of all kinds concerning the sort of people we call public figures, and a rounded picture can be built up by the reader.
(I think you know this really.)
|
|
