ftil wrote:
Then leave and stay off them and the topic.
These newcomers who keep popping in and then dissing DIF AND then going in to DIF and then dissing here....well lets say it gets on my nerves a wee bitsie

I'm not necessarily saying yourself or naming names here btw, just watching shit happen.

phemohilia wrote:
The thread was in a private section for members only but a few moths ago I noticed that it was removed.

ftil wrote:
Sean can't be held responsible for all the silly posts made in that forum.
Its true theres a hell of a lot that could've been sorted quicker but it looks like they're getting on top of it now.

andyh wrote:

To be honest, I have a problem with newcomers who go back and forth to create problems.
But at the same time, it is too bad that sean created this problem in the first place. People are free to join any forum but I assume that his conscience screamed out laud what is really going on.
When I got an e-mail I was wondering what it was all was about. I thought that it was his desperate attempt to attract members. I may be wrong as assumptions may not be correct but I have been paying attention to the number of visitors and active members. But again, I have noticed that tendency on a few conspiracy forums where 5% max to 10% of visitors are active.

andyh wrote:
Wrong assumption. He was the last person to post on that thread and he made it clear that he closed it. I wouldn't have a problem if he didn't make condescending remarks about those who asked to close that thread. Pedophilia is still in DSM IV and it is still a crime.

ftil wrote:
Sean has added to the problem by having the thread on DIF for all to see which inevitably dragged curious people over here, yes you're spot on with that I wouldn't disagree at all. People should also be able to join any forum they want, how dare they leave right? lol

However, the early leavers were the 'loudest' voice of anti-nazis on the DIF so to speak so the forum ended up being heavily biased all of a sudden which led to some turmoil. Admittedly the mods should have spotted that people were at their wits end.
Free speech is fine with me, hate speech is not.
If the mods couldn't see that then they should have gone to specsavers

I'm actually glad I'm banned as I don't want to be a part of that, that said, it is their forum and I don't want to destroy it, merely not take part in it. Thats the main reason I came here, besides wanting to be with pals I've known for a long time etc.

What I'd like to see is for sean to forget about it and for everyone here to forget about it and we can get on with things
My animosity is mainly with internet trolls rather than with sean or the dif mods. I'm not anti-icke at all, in fact I agree with a hell of a lot of what he says, perhaps not the reptilian stuff but I can respect that. There's less harm in it than other silly beliefs such as islam or christianity but you know me

I believe that most of what is going on is humanitys own fault in general. Yes there are a few small tweaks going on here and there but the economic paradigm does the rest. It is this economic paradigm which I believe is the false reality that Icke speaks of, rather than something to do with parallel dimensions or pseudo-science.
It is the one thing that binds everyone on the planet, they all partake in it and they all believe very strongly in it, this belief is what makes it real. People starve to death because of it, yet there are resources galore while neocons harp about 'overpopulation'.
Science even shows it to be a myth but the MSM won't address it because it simply aint 'pc'.

ftil wrote:
If he bollocked the guy and told him he's a prat and closed the thread then that would do for me.

If he didn't then I would remind him about it, as atm he would probably appreciate being reminded about it.

andyh wrote:
No he didn’t block the guy and told him that he was a prat. On the contrary, he criticized the members who asked to close the thread. Too bad that you didn’t read the entire thread because you could understand why several members were furious. He was not alone as 2 mods earlier tried to convince us that we needed to understand and talk with a pedophile. There is no excuse as I said pedophilia is in DSM IV and it is still a crime.

But interestingly enough, the pedophile made one post and never came back before it was closed for the fist time as well as when it was reopened. It is strange, isn’t it.

ftil wrote:
Heh, its only because I don't want to dirty my screen by reading it
Put it this way, I am not a grass, so I'm never going to get sean in trouble over it but eventually its going to be inevitable and I'd simply rather not be around.
He needs to chill out and have some curry/weed whatever and sort it.

andyh wrote:

Hey, I didn’t know that you were banned. I remember when I got 30 days time out. Well, I didn’t take as time out but as a ban and I never came back. The second time I was banned for the same reasons as I tried to recover deleted posts and to post them on another forum and I still was upset. Than something changed…….I asked to close my account twice. What a freedom.

Regarding Icke, he was important to awaken my curiosity to do my research. I don’t agree with him on many issues since I got serious about doing research about mythology and religions. If somebody is careless and is not thorough in researching the subject or historical facts that can be verified by scholars and professional historians, I wouldn’t waste my time to read his or her work. I am done with conspiracy theorists. I prefer scholars and ancient historians work with artifacts.

ftil wrote:
Basically I got banned for saying what you just did here on this forum after I was absent from DIF for 3 months or so.
Prior to that I basically got sod all points, I was probably the 'model' DIF member.
Model as in I was dumb enough to try and back Icke's corner on his own forum under his own rules, I got nothing but a load of abuse for it, ignored by mods and imho used for 'traffic'.

And here I am backing up sean on a separate forum.

andyh wrote:

andyh wrote:
Well, I am a female and it was good that I read it and voiced my opinion. I didn’t care if they would ban me for it as I challenged mods. I have a clearly defined a bottom line and if somebody crosses it, I don’t stay quiet. I wouldn’t look at the mirror for being silent.
Regarding to sean, I believe that what goes around comes around. Some people can’t notice that it is they who put a rope around their own neck.

Why are you doing it? He is an adult and he can do it by himself. He has a plenty of opportunity on Rumors on DI Forum thread there. But he put all the dirt upon members here. You may go there and read it.
Don't tell that you are in love.....

ftil wrote:
Love? lol hardly,

He's human and I understand human fallibility shall we say .

Oh, I thought that we may get some love story here.

Andy, adults need to take responsibility for their actions and words. He is an adult and as everybody else he needs to face his music. If you protect him, people may make wrong assumptions about you, particularly, those who read that ……dreadful thread.

ftil wrote:
lol, thats gonna happen anyway

All due respect....

I see that hadabusa is now listed as "Voluntarily Inactive". Is this how it's going to be played? Giving someone the option to return to this community after they hold the threat of "legal action" over someone else's head in a personal vendetta with child pornography being the leverage?? Someone PLEASE tell me something that comes close to making sense because I'm not understanding the reasoning here.

phemohilia wrote:
The rank title 'Inactive' was changed to 'Voluntarily Inactive' across the board today...see the other thread by feather in this category.

It was just for clarity, to show that inactive members are indeed inactive because they asked to be...anyone whos tag was inactive, would have changed to 'voluntarily inactive' across the board automatically, its not a manual process...so i wasnt thinking or looking at any user in particular, be it hadabusa or anyone else.

Technically nothing has changed, hadabusas rank was inactive because he asked to be inactive, if you want to address the issue of whether he should be allowed back or not thats fine, but the changing of the rank title had nothing to do with hadabusa or any other user in particular, and its still the same status, just a better more accurate description, if you catch my drift.

so no ones status has changed, just more detail on the rank tag.

No, I understand the new status thing, what I don't understand is why it doesn't say "Banned". In regards to the wonderful little present that he left us in the form of a totally unacceptable post.

phemohilia wrote:
We said we would ban people based on community consensus right?

So if you want to bring this issue up start a thread about it here in community chest. This thread was about ftils questions, and yeah i can appreciate that there is overlap, but its probably clearer if a new thread was started as banning a member really is a seperate issue.

Man we cant read every post that is made, so you guys need to use the report button, even if it is an old post that has been overlooked previously. As of now i dont even know where the post(s) in question is/are located.

If you do then start a thread and quote or link the info.