[Withano]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Can you back up the accusation of scum with a news report? Or is it just an idle insult because you don't like the person? News reports including those with historic photographs have been posted that call into question Corbyn's sympathies. It's a subject that bears discussion about someone who could be prime minister of this country. Not an insult to your favourite.

This isn't about Brillo, or any issue you might or might not have with her. I don't even remember if she was part of that thread until after all the deletions. I see mention of the far right and calling some us far right as much as Brillo says leftie. You can always find someone who might have said something on both sides of a disagreement but that doesn't mean you, as someone who is supposed to be a moderator and therefore, we hope, impartial should say it. I don't know what else to say to you Dezzy, if you can't see it for yourself.

Personally I've never called Corbyn scum and I wouldn't be that impressed with those doing so in the same way that I wasn't impressed by the Reese Mogg thread. I can only speak for myself but I can tell you that when you ask you are projecting and thinking for people by assuming that is what we would do. Take issue with it when we've said it, not before we've thought of it. I might have said remoaner once or twice back in the early days around the referendum after being called stupid so many times I lost count but once people made a fuss about how they found it offensive I didn't use it anymore.

A very quick search shows that you have called Aubrey and James Jordan scum?... its just an adjective that people use to describe someone they dislike. I dont see a problem with it... you clearly didnt either before recently.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

On the issue of the scum thing.

Does anybody that has taken issue with me calling a politician scum take issue with the fact that there's members accusing another politcian of being a terrorist sympathiser?

Would these people take issue if the thread was about Jeremy Corbyn and I called him scum? They wouldn't, they'd probably agree with me.

Lastly, it's been said that calling a politician scum is inflammatory but has anyone that's tried to come for me ever pulled up say, Brillo on her frequent uses of terms such as lefties, snowflakes and Remoaners? Why is what I said unacceptable yet you are all silent when one of your own uses apparently 'inflammatory language'?

I'll tell you why, because it's me, that's what the difference is here and it's completely hypocritical and until you can resolve those hypocrisies then I completely reject what you've said on the issue of me calling a politcian scum (and then explaining why afterwards, something that has been conveniently forgotten about in this thread).

As a mod, though, and if there are all these members complaining about other members derailing threads with Corbyn mentions, why would you use language that is pretty well going to inflame members to respond in a similar vein? You aren't stupid. The word 'scum' isn't really the issue for me, it's the way felt you could use it and then delete posts when you got comeback. You should be setting an example, not using your position in an blatantly unfair way.

It's saying 'Ha, I can say what I like, and so can anyone else who wants to name call Ree Moggs, but if you say anything about Corbyn, I'll zap your posts'!!!

Because of your position as a mod, you got away with doing that, and its disgusting.

You also said that mentioning Corbyn was off topic and not relevant, and it was not. A critical post about a possible future PM should be open to comparative critical posts about his opposite in the opposition party. To say otherwise is censorship.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Withano

Werent you asked about 20 times in one thread to provide evidence about a fortnight ago.. and it sort of boiled down to 'well its a fact for me, from my perspective'. Did you ever find evidence for it in the end or are we still stuck there? Genuinely curious.

I posted a long list of quotes and links about Corbyn's IRA involvement in this very thread, but you must have missed it. Not that there was any real need, because it is a fact that he was an IRA supporter. FACT. Many people now agree with that, but there is a few still behind with the times. If you do your research, and open your mind, you'll get there.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Withano

A very quick search shows that you have called Aubrey and James Jordan scum?... its just an adjective that people use to describe someone they dislike. I dont see a problem with it... you clearly didnt either before recently.

I may well have used it describe James Jordan, his treatment of Gary Busey in CBB was just horrible. He and Dee at the time reminded me of the employees in one of those abusive mental care homes that sometimes get secretly filmed. I still have trouble looking at his face and am likely to switch off if hes on. However that is CBB. I have no idea who Aubrey is.

And you are rather missing the point. Which was why stronger posts like scum were fine on the thread while other relatively tame posts referring to Corbyn were deleted. Its about double standards not the word.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Can you back up the accusation of scum with a news report? Or is it just an idle insult because you don't like the person? News reports including those with historic photographs have been posted that call into question Corbyn's sympathies. It's a subject that bears discussion about someone who could be prime minister of this country. Not an insult to your favourite.

This isn't about Brillo, or any issue you might or might not have with her. I don't even remember if she was part of that thread until after all the deletions. I see mention of the far right and calling some us far right as much as Brillo says leftie. You can always find someone who might have said something on both sides of a disagreement but that doesn't mean you, as someone who is supposed to be a moderator and therefore, we hope, impartial should say it. I don't know what else to say to you Dezzy, if you can't see it for yourself.

Personally I've never called Corbyn scum and I wouldn't be that impressed with those doing so in the same way that I wasn't impressed by the Reese Mogg thread. I can only speak for myself but I can tell you that when you ask you are projecting and thinking for people by assuming that is what we would do. Take issue with it when we've said it, not before we've thought of it. I might have said remoaner once or twice back in the early days around the referendum after being called stupid so many times I lost count but once people made a fuss about how they found it offensive I didn't use it anymore.

I explained my opinion that he is scum because of the way he voted against the interests of the vulnerable in favour of protecting his own interests and class in the thread itself, as a response to Brillo rather strangely accusing me of disliking him because he is white and educated? (I don't get it either) In a thread highlighting his dubious voting record no less. his voting history is common knowledge, you don't need an article, you just need google to find out the official voting histories of MPs.

You are entitled to call Corbyn a terrorist sympathiser, I'm entitled to call an MP scum, unless you're saying that I don't deserve an equal right to free speech as you do? Because you aren't arguing against what I said, you're arguing that I shouldn't have said it.

It's about you and the rest coming for me for 'inflammatory remarks; about a politician when you have a nine plus page thread calling Corbyn a terrorist sympathiser and Brillo regularly uses her terms to insult people that think differently to her. Of course it's relevant because it highlights your hypocrisy on the matter. It's okay for you and your friends to use the language you use but when it comes to me calling a politician scum which is ****ing tame compared to calling another a terrorist sympathiser, it's suddenly not okay. That is hypocritical no matter how you cut it.

What exactly do you know about the decisions I've made when it comes to moderating? You don't know anything you've just seen that I have an opposing opinion to you and you've taken that to mean that I can't be impartial although that logic makes no sense and it's based on nothing but a baseless assumption. I'd honestly say that I'm one of the most impartial moderatora on this website, when it comes to moderating people get the same treatment from me regardless of who they are, in fact I'm more prone to infracting friends then people I don't get on with so I completely resent what you said there and what you insinuated especially considering you haven't mentioned any other moderator who comments in debates and have strong opinions and I think that's proof that the issue is not with Moggs or Corbyn or the word 'Scum', it's because people have an issue with me. Always remember that no members aside from the mods are privy to the decisions we make, to make assumptions based on nothing and present them as arguments is pointless.

You might say you wouldn't be impressed with someone calling Corbyn scum but would you truly bring it up as you have here against me? Let's say, for example, Jet said that Corbyn is scum, would you try to pull her up on it like you did me? I don't think you would at all. You would remain silent at best. The problem about the remoaner stuff is that it's not just you, other people still say it and some of those people have gotten up in arms over me describing a politician they like as scum. It's hypocritical for them to take issue with me and it's hypocritical for you to call me out on saying 'scum' not about another member but about an MP in a thread about that said MP but not having a problem when your friends use, ahem, 'inflammatory language'

[jet]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I may well have used it describe James Jordan, his treatment of Gary Busey in CBB was just horrible. He and Dee at the time reminded me of the employees in one of those abusive mental care homes that sometimes get secretly filmed. I still have trouble looking at his face and am likely to switch off if hes on. However that is CBB. I have no idea who Aubrey is.

And you are rather missing the point. Which was why stronger posts like scum were fine on the thread while other relatively tame posts referring to Corbyn were deleted. Its about double standards not the word.

Exactly!

[jet]

a nine plus page thread calling Corbyn a terrorist sympathiser

That's not name calling though, that's a fact.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by jet

As a mod, though, and if there are all these members complaining about other members derailing threads with Corbyn mentions, why would you use language that is pretty well going to inflame members to respond in a similar vein? You aren't stupid. The word 'scum' isn't really the issue for me, it's the way felt you could use it and then delete posts when you got comeback. You should be setting an example, not using your position in an blatantly unfair way.

It's saying 'Ha, I can say what I like, and so can anyone else who wants to name call Ree Moggs, but if you say anything about Corbyn, I'll zap your posts'!!!

Because of your position as a mod, you got away with doing that, and its disgusting.

You also said that mentioning Corbyn was off topic and not relevant, and it was not. A critical post about a possible future PM should be open to comparative critical posts about his opposite in the opposition party. To say otherwise is censorship.

Ah, more jibes aimed at the fact that I'm a mod.

Nobody would be infracted or punished for saying that the subject of a thread (unless it was a forum member) was scum especially if they explained why, like I did. As Jack has mentioned, your friends have also used the word 'scum' to describe BB housemates. Not people making decisions that would lessen the quality of life for vulnerable people in the UK but z-list celebs on a reality TV show. Can you explain why that is okay but what I said isn't?

As for the deleted posts, did Vicky not post in this thread multiple times confirming that the posts deleted were as I said? Why are you trying to rewrite history to make out that I deleted posts because they were critical of me? Considering this thread has turned from the 'I hate Jeremy Corbyn' club to the 'I hate Dezzy' club in the last few pages, that's obviously not the case otherwise we'd have a lot of deleted posts in this topic alone.

A lot of your assumptions about my modding in this thread come from nothing more than your vehement dislike of me rather than anything factual.

You accused me of a lot in this thread and it's all directly from how you feel about me, not about my moderating, not about my opinions, it's about me. You suddenly aren't holding other moderators to the same standards you are trying to hold me to, you don't bring up the fact they are mods if they disagree with you in topics and I've seen other mods get into fiery issues without the accusations I have to deal with from the same people over and over.

It's okay to dislike me, I don't care if you do but don't try to drag me through the mud with baseless claims just because you don't like me. I ****ing reject that.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I may well have used it describe James Jordan, his treatment of Gary Busey in CBB was just horrible. He and Dee at the time reminded me of the employees in one of those abusive mental care homes that sometimes get secretly filmed. I still have trouble looking at his face and am likely to switch off if hes on. However that is CBB. I have no idea who Aubrey is.

And you are rather missing the point. Which was why stronger posts like scum were fine on the thread while other relatively tame posts referring to Corbyn were deleted. Its about double standards not the word.

My posts were relevant to the thread, it was my response to the subject of his voting history. Vicky has already confirmed that the posts deleted were, in her words, 'But I CAN see why they were deleted as they were basically just 'well you like Corbyn so ner ner ner ner ner' type posts from what I saw'.

That is why they were deleted. Two mods have said the same, two mods with quite wildly different political beliefs.

This double standard of which you speak is non-existent.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I explained my opinion that he is scum because of the way he voted against the interests of the vulnerable in favour of protecting his own interests and class in the thread itself, as a response to Brillo rather strangely accusing me of disliking him because he is white and educated? (I don't get it either) In a thread highlighting his dubious voting record no less. his voting history is common knowledge, you don't need an article, you just need google to find out the official voting histories of MPs.

1. You are entitled to call Corbyn a terrorist sympathiser, I'm entitled to call an MP scum, unless you're saying that I don't deserve an equal right to free speech as you do? Because you aren't arguing against what I said, you're arguing that I shouldn't have said it.

It's about you and the rest coming for me for 'inflammatory remarks; about a politician when you have a nine plus page thread calling Corbyn a terrorist sympathiser and 2. Brillo regularly uses her terms to insult people that think differently to her. Of course it's relevant because it highlights your 3. hypocrisy on the matter. It's okay for you and your friends to use the language you use but when it comes to me calling a politician scum which is ****ing tame compared to calling another a terrorist sympathiser, it's suddenly not okay. That is hypocritical no matter how you cut it.

What exactly do you know about the decisions I've made when it comes to moderating? You don't know anything you've just seen that I have an opposing opinion to you and you've taken that to mean that I can't be impartial although that logic makes no sense and it's based on nothing but a baseless assumption. I'd honestly say that I'm one of the most impartial moderatora on this website, when it comes to moderating people get the same treatment from me regardless of who they are, in fact I'm more prone to infracting friends then people I don't get on with so I completely resent what you said there and what you insinuated especially considering you haven't mentioned any other moderator who comments in debates and have strong opinions and I think that's proof that the issue is not with Moggs or Corbyn or the word 'Scum', it's because people have an issue with me. Always remember that no members aside from the mods are privy to the decisions we make, to make assumptions based on nothing and present them as arguments is pointless.

You might say you wouldn't be impressed with someone calling Corbyn scum but would you truly bring it up as you have here against me? Let's say, for example, Jet said that Corbyn is scum, would you try to pull her up on it like you did me? I don't think you would at all. You would remain silent at best. The problem about the remoaner stuff is that it's not just you, other people still say it and some of those people have gotten up in arms over me describing a politician they like as scum. It's hypocritical for them to take issue with me and it's hypocritical for you to call me out on saying 'scum' not about another member but about an MP in a thread about that said MP but not having a problem when your friends use, ahem, 'inflammatory language'

1. No Dezzy I'm arguing that I had he same right to my opinion that you had to yours but you deleted my opinion. Even though I could argue your use of words was more aggressive than mine in that thread.

2. I am not Brillo, nor Brillo's keeper. I am talking about my posts being deleted. Not Brillo.

3. And so your resort to accusations and name calling. How would you know who I am friendly with or not? You don't know anything of the kind so don't presume. And again with the Brillo.

As with the last bit about calling Corbyn scum. If you called Corbyn scum then deleted my posts in the same context. Of course I would have the same issue with it.

I don't mention any of the other Mods because they are fine. I don't think any of them have deleted my posts and any disagreements are dealt with civilly. None of the others feel the need to call me names like hypoceite, at least not to my face!

It was you who had a strong opinion then deleted my posts, not Vicky, or Naimh or James or anyone else.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Ah, more jibes aimed at the fact that I'm a mod.

Nobody would be infracted or punished for saying that the subject of a thread (unless it was a forum member) was scum especially if they explained why, like I did. As Jack has mentioned, your friends have also used the word 'scum' to describe BB housemates. Not people making decisions that would lessen the quality of life for vulnerable people in the UK but z-list celebs on a reality TV show. Can you explain why that is okay but what I said isn't?

As for the deleted posts, did Vicky not post in this thread multiple times confirming that the posts deleted were as I said? Why are you trying to rewrite history to make out that I deleted posts because they were critical of me? Considering this thread has turned from the 'I hate Jeremy Corbyn' club to the 'I hate Dezzy' club in the last few pages, that's obviously not the case otherwise we'd have a lot of deleted posts in this topic alone.

A lot of your assumptions about my modding in this thread come from nothing more than your vehement dislike of me rather than anything factual.

You accused me of a lot in this thread and it's all directly from how you feel about me, not about my moderating, not about my opinions, it's about me. You suddenly aren't holding other moderators to the same standards you are trying to hold me to, you don't bring up the fact they are mods if they disagree with you in topics and I've seen other mods get into fiery issues without the accusations I have to deal with from the same people over and over.

It's okay to dislike me, I don't care if you do but don't try to drag me through the mud with baseless claims just because you don't like me. I ****ing reject that.

Dezzy, I don't dislike you, I don't know you. We just rarely agree on anything and I find you combative at times and hard work.
It wasn't about you in that thread, it was about you deleting the Corbyn posts, if it had all happened the way it did with another mod I'd have felt the same.

It isn't nice to be rounded on by so many and I can tell you are upset so I will certainly try to see it from your point of view also, and we'll just leave it at that, okay?

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by jaxie

1. No Dezzy I'm arguing that I had he same right to my opinion that you had to yours but you deleted my opinion. Even though I could argue your use of words was more aggressive than mine in that thread.

2. I am not Brillo, nor Brillo's keeper. I am talking about my posts being deleted. Not Brillo.

3. And so your resort to accusations and name calling. How would you know who I am friendly with or not? You don't know anything of the kind so don't presume. And again with the Brillo.

I don't mention any of the other Mods because they are fine. I don't think any of them have deleted my posts and any disagreements are dealt with civilly. None of the others feel the need to call me names like hypoceite, at least not to my face!

It was you who had a strong opinion then deleted my posts, not Vicky, or Naimh or James or anyone else.

But if you're going to make a big fuss about me calling an MP scum then why aren't you bothered about other members using way worse inflammatory language that is used to insult other members? That's the point I'm trying to make, you try to drag me over hot coals yet there's nothing but silence if someone else happened to do the same (let's be real calling someone a terrorist sympathiser is way worse than anything I said).

I've explained why your posts were deleted, Vicky backed that sentiment up, what more do you want?

Namecalling? Pointing out hypocrisy and explaining why it is hypocritical is not name calling.

Do you honestly think that I'm the only person who deletes your posts? Again, you know nothing about who moderates what so blaming me for it just because you dislike me is not logical.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

On the issue of the scum thing.

Does anybody that has taken issue with me calling a politician scum take issue with the fact that there's members accusing another politcian of being a terrorist sympathiser?

Would these people take issue if the thread was about Jeremy Corbyn and I called him scum? They wouldn't, they'd probably agree with me.

Lastly, it's been said that calling a politician scum is inflammatory but has anyone that's tried to come for me ever pulled up say, Brillo on her frequent uses of terms such as lefties, snowflakes and Remoaners? Why is what I said unacceptable yet you are all silent when one of your own uses apparently 'inflammatory language'?

I'll tell you why, because it's me, that's what the difference is here and it's completely hypocritical and until you can resolve those hypocrisies then I completely reject what you've said on the issue of me calling a politcian scum (and then explaining why afterwards, something that has been conveniently forgotten about in this thread).

I agree wholeheartedly with all you say above.
I think your last paragraph is one of the fairest and strongest points made here.

[Tom4784]

Any way, I'm done. Nothing I say will change it because everything I say will probably be twisted out of shape any way.

You've got my explanations and my points, there's nothing else to say.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

But if you're going to make a big fuss about me calling an MP scum then why aren't you bothered about other members using way worse inflammatory language that is used to insult other members? That's the point I'm trying to make, you try to drag me over hot coals yet there's nothing but silence if someone else happened to do the same (let's be real calling someone a terrorist sympathiser is way worse than anything I said).

I've explained why your posts were deleted, Vicky backed that sentiment up, what more do you want?

Namecalling? Pointing out hypocrisy and explaining why it is hypocritical is not name calling.

Do you honestly think that I'm the only person who deletes your posts? Again, you know nothing about who moderates what so blaming me for it just because you dislike me is not logical.

Look this is getting embarrassing. Just stop. You are completely missing the point. However I will make it clear I don't dislike you or anyone else on the forum. At best I'm indifferent.

[bots]

i will state my thoughts for what its worth, and its not a direct attack on anyone.

This is a left leaning forum, the majority are young members with left leaning views, some extreme left wing. In the run up to the GE, while things were said about Corbyn, the majority was attack upon attack at the conservative party. This I really don't mind because it reflects the membership and its good to debate. However, when a unilateral decision is made to protect a political side by deleting the views of perfectly valid posters, its wrong, and if that is going to be the forum policy, then i won't contribute to the debate, because it's not even and fair. So for me until this is cleared up, I shall stay well clear of any political threads. If rules are going to be applied to political debate, they should be applied fairly and evenly

[jet]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i will state my thoughts for what its worth, and its not a direct attack on anyone.

This is a left leaning forum, the majority are young members with left leaning views, some extreme left wing. In the run up to the GE, while things were said about Corbyn, the majority was attack upon attack at the conservative party. This I really don't mind because it reflects the membership and its good to debate. However, when a unilateral decision is made to protect a political side by deleting the views of perfectly valid posters, its wrong, and if that is going to be the forum policy, then i won't contribute to the debate, because it's not even and fair. So for me until this is cleared up, I shall stay well clear of any political threads. If rules are going to be applied to political debate, they should be applied fairly and evenly

I totally agree with this, and I'll do the same meanwhile and steer clear.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

On the issue of the scum thing.

Does anybody that has taken issue with me calling a politician scum take issue with the fact that there's members accusing another politcian of being a terrorist sympathiser?

Would these people take issue if the thread was about Jeremy Corbyn and I called him scum? They wouldn't, they'd probably agree with me.

Lastly, it's been said that calling a politician scum is inflammatory but has anyone that's tried to come for me ever pulled up say, Brillo on her frequent uses of terms such as lefties, snowflakes and Remoaners? Why is what I said unacceptable yet you are all silent when one of your own uses apparently 'inflammatory language'?

I'll tell you why, because it's me, that's what the difference is here and it's completely hypocritical and until you can resolve those hypocrisies then I completely reject what you've said on the issue of me calling a politcian scum (and then explaining why afterwards, something that has been conveniently forgotten about in this thread).

FCOL - I don’t use the word leftie half as much as some on here use the term far-right and it is nearly always reactionary. Leftie is just short for left-wing where as far-right implies a lot more ie nazi. There is no comparison.

Neither can words such as snowflake and remoaner, words I use very occasionally, compare to words such as nazi, racist etc. You do understand that the word snowflake is a totally reactionary word to OTT PC don’t you - without one the other would not exist. You’re deliberately trying to twist the point being made here and divert attention away from your own actions.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by jet

I totally agree with this, and I'll do the same meanwhile and steer clear.

Me too.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i will state my thoughts for what its worth, and its not a direct attack on anyone.

This is a left leaning forum, the majority are young members with left leaning views, some extreme left wing. In the run up to the GE, while things were said about Corbyn, the majority was attack upon attack at the conservative party. This I really don't mind because it reflects the membership and its good to debate. However, when a unilateral decision is made to protect a political side by deleting the views of perfectly valid posters, its wrong, and if that is going to be the forum policy, then i won't contribute to the debate, because it's not even and fair. So for me until this is cleared up, I shall stay well clear of any political threads. If rules are going to be applied to political debate, they should be applied fairly and evenly

Although I agree with that in principle doesn’t that just give those that seek to shut down the opinions of others what they want. Isn’t that effectively giving them exactly what they want - free reign without challenge. Mixed feelings on this.

[Ammi]

..the thing is though, who are ‘they’ that would be given exactly what they wanted..?..it’s often said..’this is where the cause of members not wanting to post on SD is’...but that ‘cause’ isn’t a fixed thing, its what an individual thinks it is and where the issues lie...over time I’ve had private conversations about why a person feels put off from posting in SD and those conversations have all differed in their reasons, although some have been similar...and some members even saying, oh I’m off now because ‘that group’ or that member is ‘shutting down’ and it’s just not worth it etc..and some would rather discuss topics by PM, rather than in a thread atm for the reasons they have which also can be different...but ‘that group’ or ‘that member’ is so interchangeable as well, depending on perceptions...so far as modding is concerned, we must be a nightmare .....and I do totally agree with Dezzy in the ‘do we only take issue because of the person’, who we might personally just not feel any connection of thoughts with or conveyance of thoughts whatsoever...anyways, none of that’s helpful but what I wanted to say is...jet, you’re pretty amazing, you know that..?.....you felt a potential ‘pack’ in the thread vein toward Dezzy might develop...which you immediately ‘withdrew’ from having any part of...I think I like you a lot actually....(...btw jet, Dezzy is pretty amazing as well and a great and devoted moderator also ..)...

[Ammi]

...actually Vicky is an awful moderator...she looked up my file and saw I hadn’t pressed the report button since 2016, when I haven’t really been here for the whole of 2017..that’s how forum aware she is.....(...obviously she’s not awful at all and I’m sure she won’t mind be saying that...)...but I guess it’s showing how difficult the general moderator thing is in trying their best to be objective and observant etc...

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..the thing is though, who are ‘they’ that would be given exactly what they wanted..?..it’s often said..’this is where the cause of members not wanting to post on SD is’...but that ‘cause’ isn’t a fixed thing, its what an individual thinks it is and where the issues lie...over time I’ve had private conversations about why a person feels put off from posting in SD and those conversations have all differed in their reasons, although some have been similar...and some members even saying, oh I’m off now because ‘that group’ or that member is ‘shutting down’ and it’s just not worth it etc..and some would rather discuss topics by PM, rather than in a thread atm for the reasons they have which also can be different...but ‘that group’ or ‘that member’ is so interchangeable as well, depending on perceptions...so far as modding is concerned, we must be a nightmare .....and I do totally agree with Dezzy in the ‘do we only take issue because of the person’, who we might personally just not feel any connection of thoughts with or conveyance of thoughts whatsoever...anyways, none of that’s helpful but what I wanted to say is...jet, you’re pretty amazing, you know that..?.....you felt a potential ‘pack’ in the thread vein toward Dezzy might develop...which you immediately ‘withdrew’ from having any part of...I think I like you a lot actually....(...btw jet, Dezzy is pretty amazing as well and a great and devoted moderator also ..)...

Jet and Jaxie were the only ones posting and given they had their posts removed were quite entitled, I didn't see any pack mentality on the thread or any potential to see one develop

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Livia

Me too.

#metoo they touched me on the...

Oh wait this thread is about some other thing. Some kinda whingey nonsense. Never mind. Me too about that as well I guess. What is it we're talking about?

Actually I guess my two cents is what it always is; this is a private forum, the people running it pick the mods, if you don't like their policies then by all means complain about it but if the status quo has been decided then . If the forum staff don't want every SD thread to become a Jezza Corbz thread then that's their business. If the forum staff want to force every thread on every topic to be about a micropiglet wearing a monocle that's their business. No one is being oppressed here. This isn't a public space. You're in someone else's house and if you don't like the game they're playing, you are free to go home. This applies to all of us and is well worth remembering.

[Ammi]

..I have to say as well, I do find it personally quite heartbreaking with jet, when his personal experiences and pain are so obvious in ‘anti Corbyn’ posts...and he’s asked for ‘proof’ when that ‘proof’ is right there in everything he writes of his thoughts...and I do understand the need for ‘absolute proof’ also...but there are so many of us who have shared painful, emotional experiences in our lives over time and we can all relate and we can all feel and we do relate and we do feel... but ‘proof’ isn’t always asked for on other topics beyond Jeremy Corbyn...the ‘lack of objectivity’ as it were, isn’t always attached to and applied equally either...