Deletion

[Flosshilde]

OK, FF, as I said it was intended to be fun - or perhaps satire (not neccessarily very good satire ) - to prick Simon's pomposity. I was rather surprised that it had so many responses, & that so many people rushed to the defence of the indefensible.

[Bryn]

Thanks for the Census reminder, by the way. Just completed mine online.

[MrGongGong]

It hasn't been wiped from the face of the earth and if there was a strong feeling from the community that it should be restored, I would restore it. As you said the thread was 'a bit of fun'I didn't think you would consider it seriously revisionist. The feeling of the community as expressed and in PMs to me was strongly against the thread. I take note of the strong feelings of you, Am51 and MrGG against the tone of many Simon's posts and I totally share your view about them. On the other hand, I have felt that they should be left to speak for themselves as part of the discussion. On yet a third hand, I don't feel that responding to the provocation does anyone much credit.

On the issue of your thread, can I ask you to bear in mind that there are two opposing points of view and I can't satisfy them both. Don't take this as some sort of victory for Simon. It isn't. If anyone deserves to be issued with an infraction, he does, especially as he has had warnings already.

[johnb]

I thought that the Soviet Union was a dab hand at 'removing' difficult people from photographs etc.

To suggest that this forum is moderated in a Stalinist way is just about the most ridiculous thing I have read. I've only had experience of two other music related forums and in both of those some of the things that are said in this forum would most definitely be deleted and threads would be locked (and quite rightly so).

I was rather surprised that it had so many responses, & that so many people rushed to the defence of the indefensible.

I have little time for Simon's deliberate baiting of people who don't agree with him. In fact my personal view is that he causes far too much trouble in this forum and that he does it quite deliberately. But then, people do so readily take up his bait rather than ignoring it, so they are equally complicit.

On the other hand, I also intensely dislike the targetting of one individual by others.

[Curalach]

I was rather surprised that it had so many responses, & that so many people rushed to the defence of the indefensible.

I don't think that was the case at all, it certainly wasn't for me. I made it clear that I would have responded in the same way if Simon, or anyone else, had posted a similar thread about you, or anyone else.

One of the pleasures of this forum to date, thanks to ff, has been the lack of sniping and backbiting which so disfigured the BBC boards at times. I hope it continues to be so.

I have no brief for some of Simon's views but I think the thread was a misjudgement, whether in fun or not, and I am content that it is closed.
I'm sorry to see that a new one has been started.

[Simon]

I take it you'll be carrying out similar actions with Simon's bullying posts, Frenchie?

I can't find the origin of this post.

But please - don't worry frenchie about this. Just show me "bullying" posts that I have made - or even sharply-worded replies - that have not been in response to either a personal attack on me or a completely indefensible or abhorrent remark, and I'll remove them myself.

What I expect you mean, however, are those posts where I wiped the floor with some silly arguments from people whose views you are inclined to support. You don't like that, and you have no logical answer, so you whine that I'm bullting you. Sad.

[Simon]

whether in fun or not...

Oh I don't think that there was any doubt that the thread was certainly intended not to be in fun.

It took them by surprise, though, that so many found it abhorrent, irrespective of whether they agree in general with my political/religious views or not. That didn't surprise me though, having enjoyed so many good discussions with so many of you.

Though I couldn't see the unpleasant posts, I am grateful for the clear fair-mindedness of so many, which is indeed a credit to this forum.

Personally, I would have preferred the thread to stay, as a witness to the behaviour and spite of three posters, but there we go. I certainly wasn't going to respond to it.

I have the three people involved on "ignore" now - as I have had two of them for ages. It hasn't stopped one of them following me about, but maybe now they will desist and stop making attacks against me, rather than against the points I make.

I look forward to peaceful posting in the future.

bws to all

Simon

[Simon]

From John B

I have little time for Simon's deliberate baiting of people who don't agree with him.

And how much time do you have for the deliberate baiting of Simon by the people who don't agree with him? Or do you only see one side?

Point taken?

[barber olly]

It hasn't been wiped from the face of the earth and if there was a strong feeling from the community that it should be restored, I would restore it.

Should I be bothered! Having no clue about the original source I just saw the heading deletion and thought it must be something to do with a now no longer available recording. As a relative newcomer to the boards I think its time for an early bath!

[Mr Pee]

On the other hand, I also intensely dislike the targetting of one individual by others.