Validated posters etc.

[paul wright]

I must say that at one time - in the days of Patrick whatsisface - I found tele a bit of a drone. Perhaps it's since his labelling as critic, but I've found him - you in fact, tele- to be definitively a useful and informative source, and as claimed in the signature

[John White]

TonyGosling wrote:

Anyone else - please come up with a decent argument.

Decent arguments and coherent explanations are actually sorely lacking.

Having been labelled a totally inappropriate and misleading '911 Truth Critic' (when I am clearly not and have never professed to be) - how exactly can such a system work informing others as to someone's 'viewpoint/stance' when admin slap daft labels willy-nilly just because they don't like someone?

The person responsible has never had the gumption or courage to explain themselves.

Are you STILL playing this record Tele?

I know I told you precisely why you had the truth critic label attached to your username and told you exactly how to have it removed

For the benefit of others, you got the label becuase of your habit of posting irelevant, irrelevant or facile comments on threads, especially those bringing forward new 9/11 information, and that this was widely percieved as potentially motivated to derail threads: many other memebrs certainly expressed that view!

And I offered to take the label off if you would simply agree not to do that anymore in a pm to

However, I have to observe you do seem to have made your "badge of shame" into something of a "badge of pride": its fun being the Marlon Brando rebel

[telecasterisation]

Are you STILL playing this record Tele?

I know I told you precisely why you had the truth critic label attached to your username and told you exactly how to have it removed

For the benefit of others, you got the label becuase of your habit of posting irelevant, irrelevant or facile comments on threads, especially those bringing forward new 9/11 information, and that this was widely percieved as potentially motivated to derail threads: many other memebrs certainly expressed that view!

And I offered to take the label off if you would simply agree not to do that anymore in a pm to

However, I have to observe you do seem to have made your "badge of shame" into something of a "badge of pride": its fun being the Marlon Brando rebel

I know exactly the stated justification behind 'why', but that appeared in one thread, now swirled away in the mists of time. Anyone who never saw that will have no clue why - so to everyone outside that 'loop' I am a believer in the official version. This is hardly;

Whatever labels are used (if any), they should be useful and meaningful and not promote divisions and elitism

'911Truth Critic' only has one meaning without the background knowledge of;

your habit of posting irelevant, irrelevant or facile comments on threads

I am guessing my comments must be really really irrelevant then?

Marlon Brando? Given such a soap opera state of affairs, you surely mean Marlon Dingle.

[John White]

Marlon Brando? Given such a soap opera state of affairs, you surely mean Marlon Dingle.

LOL! you can play whatever role you like in your own drama Tele

[paul wright]

your habit of posting irelevant, irrelevant or facile comments on threads

I am guessing my comments must be really really irrelevant then?

Marlon Brando? Given such a soap opera state of affairs, you surely mean Marlon Dingle.

I missed that whole period I believe. Anyway in spite of the impression some may have gained that I'm some sort of pc stalinist gatekeepng thought police, I am a bit of a fan of facileness. It can be disruptive, on the other hand it can be...er....facilitating. Or at least leaven the mood

[Dogsmilk]

Most forums just issue a warning if it is deemed a user is being disruptive - they don't brand them for life with a highly misleading label and refuse to remove it irrespective of their subsequent posting record because they didn't do exactly what they were told at the time and so are still a naughty boy.
I'm sorry, John, but it all seems a bit primary school.

[sam]

Most forums just issue a warning if it is deemed a user is being disruptive - they don't brand them for life with a highly misleading label and refuse to remove it irrespective of their subsequent posting record because they didn't do exactly what they were told at the time and so are still a naughty boy.
I'm sorry, John, but it all seems a bit primary school.

Well I'm pretty miffed, myself.

I come back here as a sock of a banned person and don't even earn the "9/11 truth critic" label, just "moderate poster" or somesuch. Nothing like dramatic enough for a bloke whose Black Helicopter is ready to rise and fly off to ensure the destruction of Twoofy iconoclasts throughout SE Europe (fuel prices permitting, and as long as the weather doesn't get too hot ).

[chek]

Most forums just issue a warning if it is deemed a user is being disruptive - they don't brand them for life with a highly misleading label and refuse to remove it irrespective of their subsequent posting record because they didn't do exactly what they were told at the time and so are still a naughty boy.
I'm sorry, John, but it all seems a bit primary school.

Well I'm pretty miffed, myself.

I come back here as a sock of a banned person and don't even earn the "9/11 truth critic" label, just "moderate poster" or somesuch. Nothing like dramatic enough for a bloke whose Black Helicopter is ready to rise and fly off to ensure the destruction of Twoofy iconoclasts throughout SE Europe (fuel prices permitting, and as long as the weather doesn't get too hot ).

It's all part of the globalisation process, Ignatz.
Even shills are losing their home market value.
I expect that shortly we'll see Eastenders-coached Chinese call centres adopting your role.
"Cor blimey guv, you twoofers ain't half stoopid, do me a favour".

It's only a matter of time.

[John White]

Most forums just issue a warning if it is deemed a user is being disruptive - they don't brand them for life with a highly misleading label and refuse to remove it irrespective of their subsequent posting record because they didn't do exactly what they were told at the time and so are still a naughty boy.
I'm sorry, John, but it all seems a bit primary school.

I tend to agree with you: in that this particular situation with Tele IS a bit "primary school": with other posters the Truth Critic label most certainly does fit: Messirs Stott and O'hara, for example. All Tele has to do is talk reasonably with us and say "ok I see where the concern comes from" (and its not just admin picking on Tele, it genuinely was a wide spread concern the way that the most significant new threads seemed to have tele popping up saying "Bob Monkhouse bibble wibble" on an ongoing basis and there was a torrent of pm's from members "WTF?!ing" about it), but he's chosen not to do that and wage his own "campaign against injustice" in his forum sig, which personally speaking I'm not very bothered by and inclined to simply let him get on with

The idea behind the Validated Poster and Truth Critic labels was a very simple one: the first to say "this person is known as a real activist" and the second "this person is known to reject 9/11 Truth". There was a need for both, the idea being that the labels helped the vast majority of people who simply browse the forum and never post to see at a glance where people where coming from, and to dis-arm the posting methods of critics to a certain extent

Now I can see that this hasn't entirely worked and there are a understandable questions as to how this has been handled from time to time. We could, for example, scrap the "Truth critic" label and simply delete posts by critics when made outside critics corner and ban them if they keep doing it: that is what we did for some considerable time, between the introduction of critics corner and the creation of the critic label. I think its probably both preferable in terms of freedom of speech and practical in terms of moderator manpower to let them post outside critics corner but to use the truth critic label. But its not an ideal situation however its looked at, and sometimes a fudge is the best we can do. I'm not against scrapping the whole thing, but then we need something else to do its job, perhaps a whole bunch of new mods. And the label does work fine for most of the people its apllied to: Mr stott, for example, is not going to deny he's a critic

Bringing this back to Tele, I suspect that the member of the admin team who first attached the critic label to Tele was doing it from the POV of a shot across the bows to say "look, this is how your posting is coming across". Tele hasnt really taken that on board, but the critic label has actually meant we have kind of gone "well ok let him do what he wants then, the problem is defused by the label". If that wasnt the case, and Tele didnt adress the issue, it would probably leave banning as the only viable option after a short length of time. And I went to a fair bit of effort to get Tele unbanned at one time, as I recall

Nonetheless, if Tele wants to post on this thread that hes done with the Norman Wisdom stuff and wants to get on with being a 9/11 campainger, then I'll take the critic label off and see how we go with a line drawn under the past: cant say fairer than that

[John White]

Most forums just issue a warning if it is deemed a user is being disruptive - they don't brand them for life with a highly misleading label and refuse to remove it irrespective of their subsequent posting record because they didn't do exactly what they were told at the time and so are still a naughty boy.
I'm sorry, John, but it all seems a bit primary school.

Well I'm pretty miffed, myself.

I come back here as a sock of a banned person and don't even earn the "9/11 truth critic" label, just "moderate poster" or somesuch. Nothing like dramatic enough for a bloke whose Black Helicopter is ready to rise and fly off to ensure the destruction of Twoofy iconoclasts throughout SE Europe (fuel prices permitting, and as long as the weather doesn't get too hot ).

A deeply regretable oversight I agree

So I fixed it for you

[sam]

Well I'm pretty miffed, myself.

I come back here as a sock of a banned person and don't even earn the "9/11 truth critic" label, just "moderate poster" or somesuch. Nothing like dramatic enough for a bloke whose Black Helicopter is ready to rise and fly off to ensure the destruction of Twoofy iconoclasts throughout SE Europe (fuel prices permitting, and as long as the weather doesn't get too hot ).

A deeply regretable oversight I agree

So I fixed it for you

Ta.

I've had my fair share of run-ins with TC and will never defend his position on many issues. But if you stuck him with the label "Holocaust Denier" just because he rubbed some people up the wrong way in the general sense, that would be totally unjustifiable, yes?

So assigning to him (and others) the "9/11 Truth Critic" label as a vague, all-purpose reprimand is equally irrational.

[ian neal]

post in critics corner 'sam'

[sam]

post in critics corner 'sam'

Ian - if you were banned from driving for some traffic offence and somebody told you that you must also refrain from mowing your lawn or painting your windows, would you not object? You are proposing that I should accept such judgements, in effect. I trust that you would take a stand against such onerous conditions, in the defence of personal freedom.

It's about logic and consistency and being reasonable ..... that kind of stuff.

So, it's a "no" to your request. I have retired from 9/11 debate here, but absolutely reserve the right to discuss other matters, including forum policy.

[ian neal]

fine discuss other matters all you like in critics corner