This place is no fun anymore ...

[Dave]

I've stopped pretty much all the rule-breaking that I ever did, and people still frigging complain - I'm sick to death of it.

I'm not being funny - but people around here need to chill out and stop being so high and fecking mighty.

Get over yourselves.

And when I say 'people', I mean 'JameiLei'.

[ThorRune]

No, Jamei ain't particularily bad. You just feel it particularily bad because you've started being annoyed by him and now seem to take anything as him being high and mighty. The times i've seen you comment on hes high-and-mighty-ness, i've not really noted hes post as anything in particular myself.

You've sort of replaced _r_ here as the resident raving mad british guy. I think you should continue your raving, and forget about your little annoyance with Lei, because you whining about him ain't going to make anything better anywhere.

Where did _r_ go, btw..? I miss him around.

[Dave]

He left because the forum fun factor was heading steadily downhill. He made the right choice.

Sometimes I wish I'd jumped with him.

At least we wouldn't have constant whining about language and others.

I'd love to see how r would respond to this complaining.

[DeletedUser21]

What if Dave and _r_ were the same guy.


OMG Paradox!

[XeryusTC]

What if Dave and _r_ were the same guy.

Or the same gal!

[Dave]

Sadly not. James is better than I am at handling this bulls***.

[DeletedUser21]

Is that so?

Look up a few old posts from him or when he used the age old "Tombe" (later "Paranoid Android") account (who remembers that ).

He left a couple of times, came back, leave again, came back again but too bad he gave up at all at the end. You never went away as far as I remember so I guess you handle it better in the end.

But sadly it's not about handling the matter but more of staying here liking the place. I'm here for 4 years now (almost) and never went away. Call me stuck up but I know that most people come and go and probably this was Spiffs time. I still don't like to see people go away after spending lots of quality time here but it can't be helped sometimes.

[orudge]

Well, I don't see why the forum should be no "fun" as such. I think the only things people have really objected to is overzealous swearing, mainly (although not entirely) by you, Dave, which to be honest really isn't necessary, and for the most part, isn't something James tended to do when he was on the forums (not in every other post, as it were, at least).

As for complaints recently, have I perhaps missed them? I don't remember any complaints to me at least, and I haven't seen any of your posts reported in a while, so things seem to be better as far as I can see. But perhaps people can tell me otherwise.

Anyway, nobody has anything against people having fun. But there is a difference between having fun and random spam, "jokey" insults, and the like, which a few users are guilty of perpetrating quite a bit. And even these things will generally pass by if they don't happen too often or if they're not derailing a vaguely serious discussion.

Your thoughts and comments are appreciated.

EDIT: Oh, I see now the reason for this thread. Sigh.

[Dave]

The thing is though, Owen - I took criticism on board. I actually felt ganged up on by the moderator team - which is fair enough, my behaviour needed moderating. I appreciate swearing isn't the be all and end all, but it just occurs naturally - this is something we're going to disagree on for a long time. I've tried to sort that out, and for the most part, I've succeeded.

I do feel, however, that certain users (and it's not JUST JameiLei, but he was the one who was getting on my tits at the time) have nothing but contempt for the way I act and will do ANYthing to highlight it negatively.

I'm sure you're going to tell me to ignore it, but when it comes to attacking the very way with which I act, after I have already compromised, I refuse to give anymore ground. To use a fairly useful analogy, it's like the German exploitation of the Munich Agreement in 1938 - they were given what they said they wanted - the Sudetenland - and then they refused to give up at that and went ahead and took all of Czechoslovakia anyway.

That's what it seems to me at the minute - people are demanding for the moderators to order me to change my attitude - I do so, yet this is still not good enough. Gradually any form of character I have on this forum is being chipped away - you can't say this, you can't do that, etc, etc, and for what purpose? So someone can sit and browse the forum safe in the knowledge that I'm not going to hurt their precious eyes with some naughty words? This is where my real issue lies - you seem fairly happy to let me continue have some free rein, which I appreciate (how I've not yet earned an official warning is a miracle... but we'll come to that in a minute) so why do other users constantly feel the need to try and self-moderate my behaviour in your absence?

On the subject of not receiving a warning, I've been considering why this is the case and I reckon it's because of a lack of personal attacks on people. I very rarely voice my opinion in an irrational way towards someone and when I do I feel it's more than justified (e.g. regardless of the common mass' opinion, I still firmly believe my attitude towards Spiff was justified in the circumstances). This example isn't even relevant - it refers to someone with power abusing it to try and get at me. Some of the dolts that are currently churning out the negative comments aren't even regular forumites.

On this specific subject, how about I have my say about JameiLei's attitude? Yes it's genial, yes it's polite - but it SMACKS of hypocrisy and I feel patronised every time I read something that he puts across in a matter of fact way. His constant reference to "fact" cannot and will not act as a replacement for experience - and he must start to understand that he does not have an authority worth anything more than those who speak on the subject. The way he conducts his posts on the forum suggests he has a PhD in every subject he decides to contribute to. It might also be worth pointing out that fact does not act as opinion, even if you think the opinion is wrong - if someone holds a misguided opinion, it is not your place to tell them they are wrong.

So JameiLei - whilst you go on and on about my attitude and my behaviour, take a look at your own - yes I'm hot headed, yes I'm opinionated, but I was both of those things long before you became a regular poster on this forum and it is only now that I am being constantly questioned and villified about my attitude. So I implore you to find ways to modify your own attitudes towards me. I think that's civil enough.

I've got no plans to leave this forum - I've got some top friends on here - people I've met, people I've yet to meet and those that were stupid enough to ask me to be their best man - and I won't let my forum experience be affected by the sterile few who, in several moments of stupidity, attempt to censor someone's views whilst shamelessly putting across their own. Because they're acting for the supposed good, they think it is acceptable.

So what now? Do I stop posting aggressive, loud and provocative comments to make the golden few feel better? Do I jack. The name Dave Worley has become synonymous with rambling arguments, aggressive responses and shameless fanboyism towards those who deserve it. Whilst the approach has more supporters than critics (and believe me, I'm of the strong opinion that it does), I'm not compromising my character any more than I've already been forced to.

Peace out.

[jonty-comp]

The fact remains, Dave, that just about all the arguments in the last four months have somehow involved you. I used to enjoy reading your witty and well-thought-out posts always, but nowadays I think you're just confrontational, abusive and downright annoying. It's like trying to talk to a chav, to be honest. There really isn't any need for being so abusive. Maybe some of it is warranted. Maybe it's how you act in real life - but just about everyone else here doesn't act like that, and it can really get on peoples' nerves, which just makes for even more arguments.

[jvassie]

That may be true, Jonty, however often the arguements have started as a result of other people taking a disliking to either Dave or his posts. Myself, i don't have a problem at all with Dave, if that is who he is then nothing can change that, he has my sympathy often because he seems the only one who used to try and lighten the place up a bit, with something called humour, which I'm afraid to say, is a concept it seems a lot of people on this forum don't seem to, or don't want to, understand. Looks to me like a lot of you critisise him for the way he posts, you judge against your own morals, thoughts and/or beliefs, yet when push comes to shove, you have nothing solid to fall back on, so instead resort to trying to shine a negative light on Dave's posts, judging them now by the forum rules instead.

What Dave has said about himself, its true, he is synonymous with rambling arguments, aggressive responses and shameless fanboyism towards those who deserve it, but thats Dave, and you have to accept that. (Oh and yes im one of the supporters, sue me for it )

Really don't need to keep picking holes in Dave's 'existance' here.

[jonty-comp]

But ask yourself: If your posts annoy a large number of people, then are they the best thing to be posting? You have to learn to compromise in this world. I would admire someone who behaves however they want in some situations - more power to them, going against the trend and all that. But somebody like Gordon Brown doesn't annoy everybody in the country and then say "Oh, deal with it, you f*****s" - otherwise he wouldn't be prime minister. And yes, you can probably respond with some smart retort about him being unfit for the position, but why is he there then?

[Dave]

The fact remains, Dave, that just about all the arguments in the last four months have somehow involved you. I used to enjoy reading your witty and well-thought-out posts always, but nowadays I think you're just confrontational, abusive and downright annoying. It's like trying to talk to a chav, to be honest. There really isn't any need for being so abusive. Maybe some of it is warranted. Maybe it's how you act in real life - but just about everyone else here doesn't act like that, and it can really get on peoples' nerves, which just makes for even more arguments.

I rest my case.

It's like trying to talk to a chav, to be honest.

If you actually think that's the case, you really, honestly need to get out more.

I couldn't be less like a chav if I tried.

That may be true, Jonty, however often the arguements have started as a result of other people taking a disliking to either Dave or his posts. Myself, i don't have a problem at all with Dave, if that is who he is then nothing can change that, he has my sympathy often because he seems the only one who used to try and lighten the place up a bit, with something called humour, which I'm afraid to say, is a concept it seems a lot of people on this forum don't seem to, or don't want to, understand. Looks to me like a lot of you critisise him for the way he posts, you judge against your own morals, thoughts and/or beliefs, yet when push comes to shove, you have nothing solid to fall back on, so instead resort to trying to shine a negative light on Dave's posts, judging them now by the forum rules instead.

What Dave has said about himself, its true, he is synonymous with rambling arguments, aggressive responses and shameless fanboyism towards those who deserve it, but thats Dave, and you have to accept that. (Oh and yes im one of the supporters, sue me for it )

Really don't need to keep picking holes in Dave's 'existance' here.

Well said that man.

I would admire someone who behaves however they want in some situations - more power to them, going against the trend and all that.

You've just called me a Chav, now admit that I'm going against the trend for behaving how I want.

So how many more times do you want to contradict yourself?

Personally any reference to Gordon Brown is completely moot - he has a public duty to act responsibly and correctly - he is the prime minister of the country.

And what duty do I have to be responsible?

But ask yourself: If your posts annoy a large number of people, then are they the best thing to be posting?

And how many constitutes large? Because it involves JameiLei, you and selected others, that means it's large? I'm sure if you weren't annoyed by it you'd be telling people not to be silly and to get over it, but because it involves you, it's completely different. Don't tell me that's not the case with some "smart remark" - that's how the human mind works.

[jvassie]

Discussing Gordon Brown only takes us further off-topic. And the point there is, he has the lives of millions of people 'in his hands' so to speak. Dave here on the forum however, his posting will not have anywhere near the effect that Gordon Brown uttering the same words would cause.

To be perfectly blunt, i have problems with a fair amount of the users here, on different levels, but i don't repeatedly complain about them. I've been here since 2002, I've seen this forum grow and grow, for the worse and for the better, but still, i don't repeatedly complain about the bad people, the forum will continue to grow, and yes, i still won't be complaining regularly about the people that I dislike.

This is an online community, the people you meet are both varied and similar in many different aspects, we have to understand and respect that, just because something someone does doesn't fit into your own personal consensus, there is no call for it to be blatantly flogged, and then using the forum rules to cover it up.

[jonty-comp]

The fact remains, Dave, that just about all the arguments in the last four months have somehow involved you. I used to enjoy reading your witty and well-thought-out posts always, but nowadays I think you're just confrontational, abusive and downright annoying. It's like trying to talk to a chav, to be honest. There really isn't any need for being so abusive. Maybe some of it is warranted. Maybe it's how you act in real life - but just about everyone else here doesn't act like that, and it can really get on peoples' nerves, which just makes for even more arguments.

I rest my case.

How do you rest it? I hardly ever get what you're on about when you say that. I'm sure you have a word document with a load of prefabricated responses to criticism.

If you actually think that's the case, you really, honestly need to get out more.

I couldn't be less like a chav if I tried.

That may be true, I've been fortunate to grow up in a town that's relatively free of their malevolant influence. I've known some fair idiots in my time though, and I dislike most of them because of this confrontational attitude.

Well said that man.

Ah, keeping the friends friendly. I commend you.

I would admire someone who behaves however they want in some situations - more power to them, going against the trend and all that.

You've just called me a Chav, now admit that I'm going against the trend for behaving how I want.

So how many more times do you want to contradict yourself?

Am I contradicting myself? I thought chavs always went against the trend and behaved like they wanted. Of course, that's because I like to think the trend is a proper human being - not a numbskull whose only formal education was about where the family planning clinic is.

Personally any reference to Gordon Brown is completely moot - he has a public duty to act responsibly and correctly - he is the prime minister of the country.

And what duty do I have to be responsible?

Again, maybe this is just me being YE OLDE ENGLISCHMAN, but I like to think that everybody has a duty to be responsible and nice towards others. Otherwise, what would the world be like? We'd probably all be dead from nuclear war, to start with, and that would wreak havoc with Owen's plans to move the servers away from Eweka.

And how many constitutes large? Because it involves JameiLei, you and selected others, that means it's large? I'm sure if you weren't annoyed by it you'd be telling people not to be silly and to get over it, but because it involves you, it's completely different. Don't tell me that's not the case with some "smart remark" - that's how the human mind works.

I think a lot more people dislike your attitude than you like to think. Of course you'll think most people like you, everyone does it, it's called being a human. But I feel if we opened up the floor with no resistance then people will reveal their opinion. Maybe they're just too intimidated to respond against you, or maybe they've just given up on you and now ignore anything you do. While that may be a viable thing for me to do in IRC against people that annoy me, as a moderator of a section of these forums I feel obliged to not ignore anyone, and this is why I'm still responding to you.

[Dave]

The fact remains, Dave, that just about all the arguments in the last four months have somehow involved you. I used to enjoy reading your witty and well-thought-out posts always, but nowadays I think you're just confrontational, abusive and downright annoying. It's like trying to talk to a chav, to be honest. There really isn't any need for being so abusive. Maybe some of it is warranted. Maybe it's how you act in real life - but just about everyone else here doesn't act like that, and it can really get on peoples' nerves, which just makes for even more arguments.

I rest my case.

How do you rest it? I hardly ever get what you're on about when you say that. I'm sure you have a word document with a load of prefabricated responses to criticism.

Because it's a crap way of being negative. It's not even criticism, it's just potshot after potshot.

If you actually think that's the case, you really, honestly need to get out more.

I couldn't be less like a chav if I tried.

That may be true, I've been fortunate to grow up in a town that's relatively free of their malevolant influence. I've known some fair idiots in my time though, and I dislike most of them because of this confrontational attitude.

I'm not even sure how confrontational you think I am.

Well said that man.

Ah, keeping the friends friendly. I commend you.

Friends are worth keeping, to be honest.

I would admire someone who behaves however they want in some situations - more power to them, going against the trend and all that.

You've just called me a Chav, now admit that I'm going against the trend for behaving how I want.

So how many more times do you want to contradict yourself?

Am I contradicting myself? I thought chavs always went against the trend and behaved like they wanted. Of course, that's because I like to think the trend is a proper human being - not a numbskull whose only formal education was about where the family planning clinic is.

Well once again you're wrong. The phenomenon of the chav is based around the fact that they all aspire to the celebrity culture. That's not against the trend.

Personally any reference to Gordon Brown is completely moot - he has a public duty to act responsibly and correctly - he is the prime minister of the country.

And what duty do I have to be responsible?

Again, maybe this is just me being YE OLDE ENGLISCHMAN, but I like to think that everybody has a duty to be responsible and nice towards others. Otherwise, what would the world be like? We'd probably all be dead from nuclear war, to start with, and that would wreak havoc with Owen's plans to move the servers away from Eweka.

Either way, it's still a crap example.

And how many constitutes large? Because it involves JameiLei, you and selected others, that means it's large? I'm sure if you weren't annoyed by it you'd be telling people not to be silly and to get over it, but because it involves you, it's completely different. Don't tell me that's not the case with some "smart remark" - that's how the human mind works.

I think a lot more people dislike your attitude than you like to think. Of course you'll think most people like you, everyone does it, it's called being a human. But I feel if we opened up the floor with no resistance then people will reveal their opinion. Maybe they're just too intimidated to respond against you, or maybe they've just given up on you and now ignore anything you do.

*shrug* What am I supposed to say to that? Boo hoo I'm sorry I was wrong everyone forgive me?

Enough people like me to stick around. Quite clearly, you'd rather I didn't.

While that may be a viable thing for me to do in IRC against people that annoy me, as a moderator of a section of these forums I feel obliged to not ignore anyone, and this is why I'm still responding to you.

You're riding along on your high horse again. "Oh it's my job to not ignore you, even though I don't like you".

Is it f***. You want to ignore me? Go ahead, do me a favour.

[jonty-comp]

Because it's a crap way of being negative. It's not even criticism, it's just potshot after potshot.

I'm not sure what else to say if that isn't criticism.

I'm not even sure how confrontational you think I am.

Inexplicably.

Friends are worth keeping, to be honest.

I would have to agree.

Well once again you're wrong. The phenomenon of the chav is based around the fact that they all aspire to the celebrity culture. That's not against the trend.

Last time I looked there weren't [m]any celebrities who went around the streets wearing hoodies and trakkies getting ASBOs and stabbing people...

Either way, it's still a crap example.

Difference of opinion, evidently. I'd like to see a world full of people like you.

*shrug* What am I supposed to say to that? Boo hoo I'm sorry I was wrong everyone forgive me?

It would be nice!

While that may be a viable thing for me to do in IRC against people that annoy me, as a moderator of a section of these forums I feel obliged to not ignore anyone, and this is why I'm still responding to you.

You're riding along on your high horse again. "Oh it's my job to not ignore you, even though I don't like you".[/quote]

Well, I'd like to think I DO have a higher horse than you. After all, I'm a moderator and you're not. This isn't an everybody's-equal forum. I apologise if I'm being patronising.

[Dave]

After all, I'm a moderator and you're not. This isn't an everybody's-equal forum. I apologise if I'm being patronising.

ALERT ALERT

POWER RUSH

Watch your epeen doesn't grow jonty. I can imagine you're already rubbing one off over being moderator of the smallest section on the forum.

Well done with that sunshine.

Last time I looked there weren't [m]any celebrities who went around the streets wearing hoodies and trakkies getting ASBOs and stabbing people...

Right, so gangster rappers in the USA don't go round wearing hoodies assaulting people in the streets?

[jonty-comp]

Watch your epeen doesn't grow jonty. I can imagine you're already rubbing one off over being moderator of the smallest section on the forum.

Well done with that sunshine.

Is that the best response you can come up with? Another reference to penii.

Right, so gangster rappers in the USA don't go round wearing hoodies assaulting people in the streets?

They might wear hoodies, but I can't recall many who go around assaulting people in the streets. In fact, some rapper was on the ever-amiable Jonathan Woss (OK, I can't help it! Ross.) show the other week and he seemed like a generally nice guy. I can't remember exactly who it was but he was definitely very famous. Forgive me if I'm not up to speed with American rappers, it's not my favourite genre.
I thought the reason chavs were like they were was due to the perfectly human desire to stand out from the crowd - there's the type of person that just wants to fit in with everyone else, and there's the type that goes out of their way to be different. Like it or not, being banged up for stabbing makes you famous. Infamous, but still famous. I've done all this with GCSE English poems. Who'd've thought it'd actually come in useful one day.

[Dave]

Right, so gangster rappers in the USA don't go round wearing hoodies assaulting people in the streets?

They might wear hoodies, but I can't recall many who go around assaulting people in the streets. In fact, some rapper was on the ever-amiable Jonathan Woss (OK, I can't help it! Ross.) show the other week and he seemed like a generally nice guy. I can't remember exactly who it was but he was definitely very famous. Forgive me if I'm not up to speed with American rappers, it's not my favourite genre.
I thought the reason chavs were like they were was due to the perfectly human desire to stand out from the crowd - there's the type of person that just wants to fit in with everyone else, and there's the type that goes out of their way to be different. Like it or not, being banged up for stabbing makes you famous. Infamous, but still famous. I've done all this with GCSE English poems. Who'd've thought it'd actually come in useful one day.

Yeah... Well done on your GCSE... My degree on POPULAR CULTURE is obviously less use than your GCSE in ENGLISH.

Unbelievable.