Originally posted by HandyAndyAndy,
Bobby was/is a narcissistic windbag who tried to take control of the forums in his own presumptuous, self-aggrandizing way.
I'm sorry he doesn't feel well these days, but that doesn't change the past. He deserved all the brickbats lobbed in his direction
Again you have very selective memory it was you and others who started picking on him for no appearent reason. That is why I defended him!!
You are right who started doesn't change and the bullys started on him first!!! He surprised you all when he started giving back just as good or better than he was getting. A group of you thought you OWNED the Forums!!!
Actually at that time you did!!!
-VR
21 Dec 16
Originally posted by SilverstrikerNo one is innocent.
GB wasn't completely innocent either, from the sheer volume of threads created it seemed everyone was as bad as each other.
To be honest, and this is my opinion, I think GB could have been a little more engaged with the conversation. Still, GB withstood an inordinate amount of verbal abuse just the same.
Originally posted by FMFSo it was you that made it public that you had shared a PM so that Suzianne wouldn't think you had kept a secret from her?
On the Spirituality Forum in a post. Didn't want to keep the fact I'd done it secret from her.
That's bizarre.
I think you did it to try and cause Suzianne public humiliation. I can't see any other reason why you would share a PM, and an innocuous one at that, and then announce it in a public forum.
In fact you made it public in three separate threads. What's more is that it appears there's collusion between you and divegeester since at virtually the same time as you were announcing your betrayal of a trust divegeester was starting this thread to pick on Suzianne for thumbing. A thing that is unprovable except possibly by inside knowledge.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29602
Originally posted by josephwMostly from your chum Seitse, hey?
No one is innocent.
To be honest, and this is my opinion, I think GB could have been a little more engaged with the conversation. Still, GB withstood an inordinate amount of verbal abuse just the same.
GB did copy and paste a tad too much, which did alienate some people, including myself. I rather liked him though and wish him well.
Originally posted by josephwYes, I told her that I had passed her silly message on to several people. And she hasn't sent me any more nonsense like that again since. No need for secrecy. It's all good.
So it was you that made it public that you had shared a PM so that Suzianne wouldn't think you had kept a secret from her?
21 Dec 16
Originally posted by josephwWhat "betrayal of a trust" are you referring to? What "collusion" are you referring to? What "inside knowledge" are you referring to?
What's more is that it appears there's collusion between you and divegeester since at virtually the same time as you were announcing your betrayal of a trust divegeester was starting this thread to pick on Suzianne for thumbing. A thing that is unprovable except possibly by inside knowledge.
Originally posted by Very RustySure, Rusty, that was it -- "no apparent reason." Some of us decided to find a harmless old guy posting friendly messages in the forum
Andy,
Again you have very selective memory it was you and others who started picking on him for no appearent reason. That is why I defended him!!
You are right who started doesn't change and the bullys started on him first!!! He surprised you all when he started giving back just as good or better than he was getting. A group of you thought you OWNED the Forums!!!
Actually at that time you did!!!
-VR
and make his life miserable, push him around and bully him mercilessly. And then you came along and "protected" him.
Are you on drugs or just demented?
21 Dec 16
Can a person get in trouble for sharing the contents of a received PM on a public forum without the senders consent?
If yes, what is the difference between sharing on a public forum, or sharing with friends? Both seem the same, and both involve the non-consent of the PM sender.
Something just seems wrong with sharing a PM with friends without the senders knowledge or consent. Because 'friends' are part of the public.
21 Dec 16
Originally posted by chaney3Just quote the part of the TOS or FAQ that you think applies..
Can a person get in trouble for sharing the contents of a received PM on a public forum without the senders consent?
If yes, what is the difference between sharing on a public forum, or sharing with friends? Both seem the same, and both involve the non-consent of the PM sender.
Something just seems wrong with sharing a PM with friends without the senders knowledge or consent. Because 'friends' are part of the public.