The Popular Group

@divegeester said
🤢

Ah, the green-eyed monster.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Ah, the green-eyed monster.

Did you and your family gather around the crystal set radio, with you in your shorts and long socks, Father in his pipe and slippers and Mother making tea and hobnobs, to listen to thier boy have his story get read out on the magic box...?

And when your name was changed was there an awkward silence in the room with furtive embarrassed glances...?

Did you find yourself sweating nervously..?

But “God bless family”, said the poor put-upon little atheist as he appealed to his normative group.

@divegeester said
Did you and your family gather around the crystal set radio, with you in your shorts and long socks, Father in his pipe and slippers and Mother making tea and hobnobs, to listen to thier boy have his story get read out on the magic box...?

And when your name was changed was there an awkward silence in the room with furtive embarrassed glances...?

Did you find yourse ...[text shortened]... “God bless family”, [/i]said the poor put-upon little atheist as he appealed to his normative group.

So just to be clear, this is all because Ghost speculated that you might have been involved in FMF messing with his name on the radio? It's not like you're usually involved in the things FMF gets up to or anything. You're now going to post about it ad nauseum and moan that your posts attract red thumbs while you're doing it.

BTW wasn't it messing with the name in 'the real world' that took this into 'the real world' or am I missing something?

Cue the playground name calling.

@relentless-red said
So just to be clear, this is all because Ghost speculated that you might have been involved in FMF messing with his name on the radio?

Ghost of a Duke didn't like a light-hearted pseudonym I used. He should have contacted me and asked me to use a different one. The idea that I was somehow using a radio programme in the UK to attack and humiliate him in public is ludicrous. The accusation that divegeester had any editing and production involvement in the making of the programme or that he was somehow involved in a conspiracy to ridicule Ghost of a Duke is industrial grade Suzianne-type self-obsessed paranoia and he still hasn't apologized to divegeester for it.

@relentless-red said
BTW wasn't it messing with the name in 'the real world' that took this into 'the real world' or am I missing something?

I disagree. The programme is teeming with pseudonyms and always has been, even now though we have more writers. I think contacting the radio station behind my back ~ with a complaint so hysterical that it got the plug pulled on a whole slate of radio programmes made by more than a dozen people ~ was an example of actual vindictiveness in the real world, whereas the pseudonym I used was nothing of the sort.

@relentless-red said
So just to be clear, this is all because Ghost speculated that you might have been involved in FMF messing with his name on the radio? It's not like you're usually involved in the things FMF gets up to or anything. You're now going to post about it ad nauseum and moan that your posts attract red thumbs while you're doing it.

BTW wasn't it messing with the name in ' ...[text shortened]... that took this into 'the real world' or am I missing something?

Cue the playground name calling.

I’ve explained several times why I have an issue with Ghost of a Duke, let me lay it out for you yet again, in very simple terms, so that even you can understand it.

1) I DO think he was upset about the name change (that’s his sensitive vulnerability), BUT I think the way he behaved about it was utterly over-the-top, narcissistic, spiteful revenge based overkill, which attempted to bring down the entire radio program and caused a lot of short term (a week) strife for the radio owners, and producers.

2) I didn’t even know about it until it was all resolved. I have absolutely nothing to do with any of in any way whatsoever.

3) The thread in the ghost chamber club is a slanderous, bitter and SUCCESSFUL attempt to use this non RHP issue to drive a partisan divide between longstanding members of this forum. Members are making quite nasty comments about people not even in the group, making inaccurate assumption the non RHP issue and Ghost of a duke does NOTHING to correct them.

4) in the midst of all the crap throwing Ghost of a Duke implicated me ... and then posters started dissing me too.

This issue is important because it ISN’T rhp banter and handbags. It involves real life integrity and principle. I am not going to sit back a let some gutless thin-skinned narcissistic online gang leader smear my name in a private forum like that.

It’s quite simple.

@divegeester said

But “God bless family”, said the poor put-upon little atheist as he appealed to his normative group.

Oh dear, you missed the intended irony of an atheist saying 'God bless family' to a theist.

@divegeester said
The thread in the ghost chamber club is a slanderous, bitter and SUCCESSFUL attempt to use this non RHP issue to drive a partisan divide between longstanding members of this forum. Members are making quite nasty comments about people not even in the group, making inaccurate assumption the non RHP issue and Ghost of a duke does NOTHING to correct them.

There were accusations that I had ignored a request to stop using Ghost of a Duke's stories [not true]; that I was making money out of the programme [not true]; that I was asking people "to work for" me "for free" [it's an all-volunteer programme and station]; that perhaps I [or the radio station?] should be sued [and closed down?]; that divegeester was involved in the "attack"; that the radio station to stop the programme and sack me; that the radio station might be liable if they don't take action against me; that I should be confronted and beaten up; that I was trying to sabotage my own show; that the programme will not be able to succeed without Ghost of a Duke's stories because it makes "no sense from a business perspective"; etc. etc.

@fmf said
Ghost of a Duke didn't like a light-hearted pseudonym I used.

Did you seek permission?


Deathly silence...

@divegeester said
I’ve explained several times why I have an issue with Ghost of a Duke, let me lay it out for you yet again, in very simple terms, so that even you can understand it.

1) I DO think he was upset about the name change (that’s his sensitive vulnerability), BUT I think the way he behaved about it was utterly over-the-top, narcissistic, spiteful revenge based overkill, which ...[text shortened]... d narcissistic online gang leader smear my name in a private forum like that.

It’s quite simple.

Okay, so why are you dealing with it in an RHP handbags way e.g. the first line of this post and the post that I responded to if it is not like that?

If you don't want to do it in an RHP handbags style, then why were programmes suspended if the complaint was as trivial as depicted here? That kind of drastic action didn't used to happen in my bit of the real world unless the Management thought things were very wrong.

@divegeester said
I’ve explained several times why I have an issue with Ghost of a Duke

And each time inaccurately.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Did you seek permission?


Deathly silence...

Did you knee-jerk overreact to your name being changed by writing a histrionic threatening letter to a radio program rather than going direct to the producers?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
And each time inaccurately.

I think my clearly laid out bulleted post is a correct précis of the situation. People can and eventually will make their own minds up.

@divegeester said
Did you knee-jerk overreact to a name change by writing a histrionic threatening letter to a radio program because your name was changed rather than going direct to the producers?

FMF was ignoring emails. (And you couldn't produce a coherent sentence).

And as a heads up, my email to the radio station simply retracted permission to use my work.

@relentless-red said
Okay, so why are you dealing with it in an RHP handbags way e.g. the first line of this post and the post that I responded to if it is not like that?

You say “OK” as though you are accepting my explanation to you, so why not address the content instead of deflecting about style?