[rquote=2563561&tid=147394&author=angus58]So basically, you want to report anyone who doesn't share your rose-tinted view of Mike Tyson, and you are now threatening to "report" me, no doubt in the expectation of getting me banned for having the audacity to express my disgust. Thankfully, the moderators on this forum seem to have sufficient commonsense to allow FMs to have differences of opinion. In fact it was YOU that attacked me when I posted that in my view Tyson's crime was on par with those of King and Glitter. There are many that would agree with me, and would not want to see him in CBB.
I do not see how I have insulted you in any way, my "vitriol" as you put it, has been firmly directed towards a convicted rapist (FACT), and I am perfectly entitled to be disgusted and sickened by anyone who feels compelled to defend the indefensible. If you are offended by my disgust, that's too bad- your feelings are in no way more important than mine. So we will just have to agree to differ. [/rquote]
And so you continue with the vitriol. I tried to apologise if I offended you with the 'ashamed' bit in my post, yet you have shown little grace in your response.
You have accused me of something throughout this that I have NOT done (back to this in a moment). You continue to use words like 'disgust', 'sickened' and these are aimed at me. Indeed, I have not come across such vitriol directed at me since I have been on here - even from the trolls!
My only initial gripe was that you bracketed Tyson in with the likes of King and Glitter. For me this was too much. Indeed there are many people out there who would agree with me on this - I assure you of this (totally different contexts and totally different situations). Do a search on discussions around Tyson on google and you will see what I mean. See the reports around his arrival to the UK in 2000, for example. There is divided opinion on him, so do not make me out to be the minority. I choose to look at the WHOLE of Tyson as a person, and his life in context, rather than focus on his conviction (and if a true conviction, then it was indeed a crime and he paid the price). But on this, we can agree to disagree.
However, back to your accusations. The one thing that you continue to accuse me of is 'defending the indefensible'. I have never 'defended' ANY of Tyson's bad actions, including the ear biting which sickened me terribly. I was pointing out the context of Tyson's life, and the journey he has been on in terms of his search for redemption since those 'bad times'. I also made it clear he would never do CBB, nor would I want him in there. So what am I defending exactly? Only the fact that Tyson has tried to repay his dues and has come a long way. I DO NOT defend any conviction for criminal behaviour, if indeed that convivtion was safe (it may indeed have been, but we will never know for sure).
Whether you are able to come off your high horse and reply with a more conciliatary response, I am not sure. But I really want to leave this subject alone now. I said in my very first post - 'don't get me started on Tyson' - as I knew something like this would happen
