25 Mar 14
Originally posted by PudgenikYou choose to lump all the contributors to this thread in together under the catch all "vipers, snakes, trolls, those who are quiet, versus LOUD"? What about the countless attempts by people to remain civil with each other in the course of this thread? Do you acknowledge their attempts? 🙂
Man, reading all the posts of vipers, snakes, trolls, those who are quiet, versus LOUD. Hmmmm, forum etiquette, good one. What of just being civil with eachother?
25 Mar 14
2 edits
Originally posted by PudgenikDo you think that after reading all these posts that civility is the solution the issues being challenged and opinions being expressed. What are you a hippy?
Man, reading all the posts of vipers, snakes, trolls, those who are quiet, versus LOUD. Hmmmm, forum etiquette, good one. What of just being civil with eachother?
Edit: smiley added for context, civility and tonal punctuation 😛
25 Mar 14
8 edits
Originally posted by FMFi think that i have already stated that I do not consider your private correspondence with Galveston to have contained any sexual content and indeed its a rather dishonest gross misrepresentation of the facts to say that it did. You as far as I can discern you like your friend divesgeester followed him around the forums showing more than a little amorous interest in him personally to which he merely replied that he was not gay and was not interested in any designs that you may have been harboring.
You said something similar about the abusive PM galveston75 sent me, the one with sexual content and threats. Do you try to keep inappropriate communications connected with sex, sexual insults and/or sexual taunting secret in your Kingdom Hall too? Do you urge victims/recipients of this kind of material to keep it secret?
If you had followed around a co-worker in the same way that you followed and badgered Galveston would they have good grounds for reporting you for harassment at work? I think they very well might have had good grounds to be perfectly honest for you must have known that your constant badgering was causing him some discomfort even stress and yet you persisted.
As for you question it also seems quite indicative of the type of bullying that has transpired here for why you should single out Jehovahs Witness and Kingdom halls is known only to you. I do not know of any inappropriate communication connected with sex or insults and indeed if you have examined the literature of Jehovahs witness you would know that it has very excellent and practical advice urging victims of any kind of abuse or harassment to come forward and report it. This literature is also freely distributed to the public by unpaid volunteers in vast quantities in over 400 languages.
25 Mar 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMany of the people you debate with here saw the PM in question because I showed them a copy. These people know you are not telling the truth when you now claim that it did not contain sexual content.
i think that i have already stated that I do not consider your private correspondence with Galveston to have contained any sexual content and indeed its a rather dishonest gross misrepresentation of the facts to say that it did.
25 Mar 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf we stick with this analogy, then galveston75's job ~ and mine too ~ as "co-workers" here would be to respond to posts in this debate forum. If galveston75, as a "co-worker" reacted to forum posts he didn't like by sending abusive "secret" sex messages in the workplace, then it would be galveston75 who'd be in trouble and not me. This is your analogy, remember.
If you had followed around a co-worker in the same way that you followed and badgered Galveston would they have good grounds for reporting you for harassment at work?.
25 Mar 14
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo, when it comes to inappropriate unsolicited sexual comments, sometimes your 'principle' in this matter is that the victim is obliged to keep it secret. But presumably the "very excellent and practical advice urging victims of any kind of abuse or harassment to come forward and report it" you mention tells victims that they are not obliged to keep it secret. Keep abusiveness secret or don't keep it secret, what is your principle exactly?
As for you question it also seems quite indicative of the type of bullying that has transpired here for why you should single out Jehovahs Witness and Kingdom halls is known only to you. I do not know of any inappropriate communication connected with sex or insults and indeed if you have examined the literature of Jehovahs witness you would know that ...[text shortened]... freely distributed to the public by unpaid volunteers in vast quantities in over 400 languages.
25 Mar 14
Originally posted by FMFI have my own opinion and i don't think it contained any sexual content, indeed as far as i can discern all it stated was that he was not gay and was not interested in your rather unsavory designs (if you had any). Indeed if you had shown the same level of interest in a co-worker I am quite sure they would tell you where to get off as well.
Many of the people you debate with here saw the PM in question because I showed them a copy. These people know you are not telling the truth when you now claim that it did not contain sexual content.
25 Mar 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMy "unsavoury [homosexual] designs"? You sound like a school bully with a fifteen year old's mentality trying to taunt someone.
I have my own opinion and i don't think it contained any sexual content, indeed as far as i can discern all it stated was that he was not gay and was not interested in your rather unsavory designs (if you had any).
25 Mar 14
Originally posted by FMFwhat I have actually stated is that the victim, as encouraged by the practice and literature of Jehovahs witness should report the matter, how its possible to misconstrue that I cannot say. I will repeat it again, if anyone is subject to any kind of abuse they should report the matter, this has no bearing on my principle of keeping private correspondence on a chess site, private. If for example someone came to me and stated that they were the victim of abuse i would direct them to report the matter, there is no conflict of interest and no conflict of principles, which for your argument, is quite sad.
So, when it comes to inappropriate unsolicited sexual comments, sometimes your 'principle' in this matter is that the victim is obliged to keep it secret. But presumably the "very excellent and practical advice urging victims of any kind of abuse or harassment to come forward and report it" you mention tells victims that they are not obliged to keep it secret. Keep abusiveness secret or don't keep it secret, what is your principle exactly?
What you have in fact done is to allege sexual content where none exists for reasons stated above and then to attempt to propagandize that misrepresentation not only exaggerating the claim but of slandering the individual who called you out for inappropriate attention by showing a private correspondence to others. You cannot be trusted in any matters pertaining to confidentiality and even less so in others.
25 Mar 14
2 edits
Originally posted by FMFhow else are we to describe your rather unsavory infatuation with pursuing Galveston? after all you did show him more than the usual attention, did you not?
My "unsavoury [homosexual] designs"? You sound like a school bully with a fifteen year old's mentality trying to taunt someone.
25 Mar 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo what you are saying now is that if I felt that I was the victim of an abusive PM then I was not obliged to keep it "secret", right? The people I showed the PM to agreed that it was abusive and also confirmed that it was sexual in nature. They stated this in public.
what I have actually stated is that the victim, as encouraged by the practice and literature of Jehovahs witness should report the matter, how its possible to misconstrue that I cannot say. I will repeat it again, if anyone is subject to any kind of abuse they should report the matter, this has no bearing on my principle of keeping private correspon ...[text shortened]... You cannot be trusted in any matters pertaining to confidentiality and even less so in others.