@fmf saidLook FMF, you compromised your own radio show by not treating with respect the work submitted in good faith by one of your contributors. At precisely the time we had fallen out at RHP and without my knowledge or consent you altered my name, broadcast on the radio. This coincided with the show, for the first time, not being made available for preview before it went out. (So I had to listen to it for the first time live). It was not common at the time to make spoonerisms out of the contributors names, and when this did become common you sought the permission of the contributors involved. You sought no such permission from myself. You did not make me aware of your intent.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
Your failed attempt to sabotage the radio progamme, by going behind my back when a single PM would have solved "the problem", happened two and a half years ago.
Far from setting out to sabotage your show I went to lengths to ensure it wasn't compromised. MixCloud offered to delete the recorded shows completely, but I asked them simply to splice out my stories and then emailed you in good time, before the next broadcast, giving you the opportunity to plug the gaps left. (Which you did). My direct contact with the Radio show was to ensure that none of my work appeared on future broadcast. I simply had lost trust that you would ensure this.
@fmf saidThe spite was all yours sir. When I listened to the show, where for the first time I couldn't preview it (something flagged up with my by Phil who was also unable to preview it) I knew you had done something, due to us having fallen out. I assumed you had simply cut me out of the show and wanted me to find out live, but no, you had messed my name.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
Your spiteful attempt to sabotage the show failed. It's still going strong.
It was the one petty bit of control you had.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidThere was no "spite" or "pettiness" on my part. None whatsoever. You've been wrong about that all along.
The spite was all yours sir. When I listened to the show, where for the first time I couldn't preview it (something flagged up with my by Phil who was also unable to preview it) I knew you had done something, due to us having fallen out. I assumed you had simply cut me out of the show and wanted me to find out live, but no, you had messed my name.
It was the one petty bit of control you had.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidYou only had to PM me. A different light-hearted pseudonym would have been inserted. And a modified audio file would have been sent to the station. You'd probably still be involved in the show to this day. But instead, you did the most vindictive thing you could think of. Oh well. The show survived.
I don't believe you. Your account requires an inordinate amount of coincidences and basic errors/poor decisions on your part.
@fmf saidWe have already established you had ignored my 2 previous emails. But as above:
You only had to PM me. A different light-hearted pseudonym would have been inserted. And a modified audio file would have been sent to the station. You'd probably still be involved in the show to this day. But instead, you did the most vindictive thing you could think of. Oh well. The show survived.
'Far from setting out to sabotage your show I went to lengths to ensure it wasn't compromised. MixCloud offered to delete the recorded shows completely, but I asked them simply to splice out my stories and then emailed you in good time, before the next broadcast, giving you the opportunity to plug the gaps left. (Which you did). My direct contact with the Radio show was to ensure that none of my work appeared on future broadcast. I simply had lost trust that you would ensure this.'
@ghost-of-a-duke said"Ramifications"? Are you going to bring a lawsuit and try to get the radio station closed down?
If a complaint was made to your radio show in writing which you then shared publically, you don't think that would have ramifications?
-Removed-The spoonerism thing is a bit of an own goal on your part, as for the first couple of years FMF insisted it was a pseudonym to give the impression more writers were involved. This of course was ludicrous as a pseudonym by design should not be relatable to a persons real name (as a spoonerism is).
And the issue was only brought up in the Chamber after I was made aware of the falsehoods FMF was sharing in the WhatsUp group. It was the only platform I had as a right to reply (as a number of the same members were in both groups).
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI received no email or PM from you about the pseudonym issue. You did not send one and instead you simply handled the situation in the most vindictive way available to you.
We have already established you had ignored my 2 previous emails. But as above:
'Far from setting out to sabotage your show I went to lengths to ensure it wasn't compromised. MixCloud offered to delete the recorded shows completely, but I asked them simply to splice out my stories and then emailed you in good time, before the next broadcast, giving you the opportun ...[text shortened]... t none of my work appeared on future broadcast. I simply had lost trust that you would ensure this.'