jwocky wrote:You also claimed I did something wrong when I excused myself from a decision, I was party in and hinted over and over again,
Page 5
bomber wrote:My suggestion that no one gives up power is valid.... Jwocky says he's not acted but took a step backwards and allowed his private little group to act on his behave.... does this not sound familiar ?
[But you could say it doesn't sound familiar because it's not the same as on Curtis forum]
This IS what you posted on
Page 2, 3 pages earlier
jwocky wrote:So, here are the options:
- we try to explain Lydiot once more the basic rules and every community has its rules, just to be clear about that. If that doesn't work, we have to discuss what we can do and, without having this discussed yet with the other mods or admins, if he has nothing to offers but more lies and twists, he forces us to use the last measure, means ban at some point because his actions are not aimed at a fiar discussion but only destruction.
- or the community as whole could of course stand to its responsibility for itself and maybe take a stand against someone who never contributes anything but all the time tries only for his own psychological needs throw stones into the gear and enjoys those grinding noises.
[you clearly separate out the 'we' and 'community' as be two different entities..... and the fact that there's been no discussion yet with the other mods or admins..... me thinks a Freudian slip
THIS IS ON PAGE 2 !
I don't know maybe your idea of giving up power and mine are different.... now how about those high standards of ethics ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jwocky wrote:it was a fake of some kind because "nobody steps away from a position of power"
Jwocky try and understand that at this moment in the conversation 'stepping away from power' had nothing to do with you or your actions, I was clearly talking to Vincent about the moderating process..
Page 1
bomber wrote:suggestion... lets see this complaint 'in full' uncensored.... and this community will be the judge.
[btw a suggestion is something you do whilst have a civil conversation, it's not a demand or anything disrespectful.]
Vincents reply to this was.
Page 1
KL-666 wrote:I have to disagree on this. I do not believe in "justice by the people". We have had too many witch hunts for that. No, i believe in protecting the privacy of the accused.
['privacy of the accused' from someone that started the topic by quoting the accused, let's talk about those high ethics again ?]
I replied to Vincent clearly about the moderation process, cause that's all we're talking about.
Page 2
bomber wrote:And a person who doesn't accept the verdict of the people , their peers. Is in fact a dictator and as such can be compared to all other previous dictators going back to juleus cecsar.
I'm sorry Vincent that we seem to have differing opinions on this... I'm not in agreement with all that Lydiot writes now, in the past and most probably in the future.
But he didn't like my response
KL-666 wrote:Who are you to tell me about which topic i may say something and which not?
And no, you did not convince me that we should start "justice by the people".
[just an ordinary user.... not as important as him it seems]
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchell