Jump to content

Does anyone else miss TLS's + Bigbadwolf's posts?


Recommended Posts

Not really

if I'm going to be frank. Wolfie could be both amusing and erudite but frankly that side of him was outweighed by his crass, rude, obnoxious posts, I don't think anyone has had more posts reported than him.

Between them they managed to subvert every bloody thread and it got to the point where alot of regular posters and lurkers just stopped taking an interest.


Nobody wants censorship, but the other side of the rights coin is responsibilty. I think the place is much better without them.

I think BBW was liked well enough by Admin and team to be given dozens of chances. Frittering away that muh goodwill takes some doing


I think Ianeasey speaks for a majority of people with his post


Interesting debate about the nature of forums, offensive users and free speech


here, btw

Give me a while and I will think up something suitably pornographic and offensive that in any other form of polite company it would either get me ostracised or smacked in the face or both. Then I?ll act as if I?m being persecuted when people take me up on it.


After that I?ll come up with some Daily Mail inspired balls about the state of society with barely hidden racist undertones.

I liked his humour (BBW not TLS) cos I like to shock people out of their comas, so I'll miss his stuff. He did sail close to the wind though and even I thought he'd gone a bit too far occasionally, but he's only young, so he's just learning his shock jock parameters.
There is a fine line between free speech and offending others with your opinions ( I have on occasion been known to be guilty of this), no matter how much you may believe in your views, somebody out there is bound to hold an opposing view. It may be true that these guys just put forward provocative views purposely knowing that they would stir up a hornets nest just to see how people would react. Who knows, anyway I have no firm views on these guys being barred/banned either way.
I don't miss their posts and I also agree that ianeasy's post does speak for quite a few people, when I speak to people in real life about the forum they've expressed the same opinion. I understand Admin's especially pleased because the number of reported messages has reduced significantly.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> >

> Largely because he bored the genuinely witty

> posters away I would argue


I think BBW is genuinely witty - but I agree there are others who have a much more sophisticated delivery. If he upset too many people then so be it.


Having lent him ?10 at the last drinks - I'm now concerned as to how I might get this back. I'll just have to treat him as another losing bet.

Ooh, has he gone, then? that little woolfy chap? I thought I hadn't seen him about and I thought he must have got himself a nice lady friend! What did he do?


He was always a treasure to me. Such a nice polite boy.


If you see him around do tell him if he gets a bit lonely me and my friends will always have a cup of tea and a macaroon for him over on moneysavingexpert.com


It's not all money saving, you know! and we're always looking for new blood, as it were. I think he'll liven things up a bit, bless him!


(I can't say much about the other fella. As the Buttons always say- if youu can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all!)


Anyway must be off to listen to my friends on Calling All Pensioners on resonance.


ttfn!

There was a time when every single thread on the forum was subverted on a daily basis and Woolfie was one of the prime offenders (although he wasn't alone). Frankly that did a lot of damage. Someone would start a thread and then the next couple of pages would be the same people taking the piss and ruining the thread - it may have been funny for the people involved but it was boring for everyone else. Also, starting threads on every half baked thought that comes into your head - tedious.


That said, I did't mind most of his posts when he wasn't just out to cause trouble.

I'm a bit torn on this one. I hate the idea of regular users getting banned, particularly when they contribute something.


TLS was an unusual voice on the forum, and I think the forum's better for people who do disagree with the 'liberal lite', as Quids would say - just because it's healthy to disagree sometimes. But his posts became frequently nasty and malicious so I ended up just skipping over them. So if he became a lovely shining light latterly I'm afraid I just wouldn't know about it!


BBW was often funny and livened up the forum. But he must have been temporarily banned a dozen times and the last time was for saying that someone's dad should be gang-raped. Each time he's been let back on he pushes and pushes until he's banned again. I know a lot of people don't mind that sort of talk but a lot of others would read it and think that this is the kind of thing that people in ED think is OK or even funny. The forum should be for everyone, not just for people with thick skins.

To take ianeasy as an example (again) , I find him to be more than capable of taking a stand against the "liberal (e)lite" - and he's not doing anything that's going to get himself banned. He joins a long list of like-minded souls on here and long may that continue


TLS's difference from "liberal (e)lite" is an irrelevance to any banning or not surely?


To quite someone from that link above:


" Let me make a prediction: if you ban them, everyone will be relieved (except them, but they're not exactly delighted with life anyway). If you don't, you lose your forum as people slink away, tired of the poison. Who is your loyalty to, the people or the "principle"?"


I have noticed a lot of slinking away from this forum so would echo giggirl's comments about damage being done in the past. It's not a free-speech issue either (to my mind). There are dozens of local forums where people can be heard if they get chucked off one. Their voice need not go unheard

SeanMac, I was talking about what I found positive as well as what I found negative about each of TLS and BBW, not implying that either was banned for not agreeing with the general political tone of the forum. Sorry if that was fuzzy from my post.


And I did mean lite not elite, again just to be clear.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...