To Ramble, or not to Ramble...

30 replies [Last post]
Diplomat
Offline
Joined: 2011-10-23

Diplomat wrote:

(EDIT: Does anyone know how to quote another post?)

Got it! Press the big button that says 'Quote' on it! That wasn't obvious!

Chris Martin
Offline
Joined: 2011-08-20
Edit, I can't get the paragraph breaks working. Back in a minute. C.M.

 

Chris Martin
Offline
Joined: 2011-08-20
Got it, it works if I disable rich text. Didn't want to be accused of 'rambling' did I? Chris M.

 

Chris Martin
Offline
Joined: 2011-08-20

Ok, to clear things up once and for all.
First, despite his protestations to the contrary, it did not take an Oxford English scholar to recognise that petrolhead and diplomat are the same person. The again unprovoked tirade from diplomat on the greatest cars thread, regarding 'rambling', 'bullying' and 'hypocrite' were phrased in identical terminology to petrolhead's previous rants. The construction of sentences and use of the same limited vocabulary gave that away immediately. As did the timing of each other's replies, too much of a coincidence when two members who have not been around much can respond to each other within an hour.

I fully expected him to adopt a new persona after I continued to ignore his earlier attempts to bait me and it was all so obvious.

He will respond to that by saying, as before, that I am paranoid. Again, all very predictable, but let's give him/them the benefit of the doubt and just say that if they are not the same person, they certainly went to the same school together, share the same address, and have remained good friends ever since!

He has taken every opportunity to post something negative in response to any of my posts ever since he got upset when I suggested an Audi A4 "was hardly worth mentioning" on a site for Classic and Sports cars, of which the Audi is neither. But why was it taken so personally? Who knows?

He has also repeatedly stated how boring he finds my contributions. So what? I never expected everyone to have the same interests and if it has no relevance to one's own taste in old car reading, move on, ignore it and read something else. No need to continually advertise one's own ignorance. He has nothing to say,and is saying it too loud.
I don't agree with a lot of things I read, but I do not feel the need to shoot the messenger. I have deliberately chosen to write about the more obscure subjects on the margins of our hobby, hopefully to inform or amuse others, but if I had wanted to quantify my own popularity just to satisfy my own ego, I would have stuck to the more obvious MGB vs MX5 type debate, or question which is your favourite Ferrari, Lambo, Bugatti etc.

Either way, I will continue to ignore any further bait, whatever name is attached to it.

As for GBt, I did not mean to drag him into this again. I only mentioned him because he was instrumental in the original string of Rambling and Ramblers jokes, referring to both obsolete American cars and people who take long walks in the country. Nothing really wrong with that, this type of humourous banter is common on all interent forums. I never took his jokes as a personal insult, and it gave him inspiration for more cartoons. I did question whether it was right for him to list his medical history on here, but even then only as a justification to mention my wife's condition.
Likewise the Gwyneth jokes, no offence taken, but I still think I got the better babe!

I will also admit to being a bit over-keen in the past to criticise his wandering off-topic, and that was only to suggest if the main part of someone's post is going to be about something other than the content of the thread so far, why not start a new one? But call me pedantic. Sorry.

The main point of me posting this thread is to question how this forum should be moderated. The offensive posts I referred to were offensive when they were made a few weeks ago and still remain on the forum for all to read despite repeated complaints to 'admin'. I realise I could be accused of dragging up old rubbish that is best left forgotten, but it should have been dealt with at the time and leaving it on there sends the wrong messages to those who would continue to offend.

There was an accusation that "if I have children I probably abuse them", and it was allowed to remain, along with many others, but to insult family members who have never even joined in on the forum is beyond tolerance.
The offender was not to have known of my wife's serious condition and ongoing stay in hospital, but that does not make it any less disgraceful.
James did ask us "to be nice to each other" at which I said, "ok, game over, let's kiss and make up" but the insulting, offensive, and probably even actionable remarks were not removed.

I repeat, my purpose in going public with this thread, knowing exactly what responses it would elicit, were to alert the forum admin to their responsibilities. Any other similar forum I have used has always had some form of moderation where offensive remarks are removed immediately, and I would expect the same to apply here.
If the offensive remarks I referred to are removed - and then I suggest likewise that this thread joins it in the deleted bin - we may have a chance at moving on to peace and harmony all round, but there are rules and guidelines and they need to be enforced.

Chris M.

 

Chris Martin
Offline
Joined: 2011-08-20

And just to pre-empt the expected replies, I will repeat that the post by diplomat on the 'ten greatest classics' thread was an uncalled for attempt to stir things up again where petrolhead had failed, and the expected cries of 'paranoia', or protests of innocence will be just as unconvincing as was the content of the original post. Own up, you tried and failed, now have a rest.

Of course while some would excercise their right to free speech, and feel the need to still try to score points, he has nothing left to say (though I doubt that will stop him saying it), but as in previous arguments will probably continue to dig a deeper hole.

No, what is needed now is action by whoever runs this forum to stop offensive behaviour, deliberate stirring of trouble, and the practice of using mulitple identities to promote argument.

Chris M.

 

Diplomat
Offline
Joined: 2011-10-23

OK Mr Martin. If you insist that we are the same person, then fair enough. Neither Petrolhead or myself have to prove ourselves to you. To be honest, I don't really want to talk to you on this forum, and neither, I suspect, does he. I didn't read everything you wrote there by the way. Too much 'rambling'. I'm sure most of it was designed to get Petrolhead's back up, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what's coming up in yet another predictable and endless post.

Chris Martin
Offline
Joined: 2011-08-20

Well thank you at last Mr diplomat/petrolhead for owning up. I would like to be able to say my job is done, but until we can get assurances from 'admin' that there wil be suitable policing of members and offensive posts, I will keep chewing on that bone as it were.

I doubt anybody wants it to degenerate into a 'he said, she said' type argument but that is exactly what will happen if that is what it takes until the matter is resolved.

Chris M.

 

Diplomat
Offline
Joined: 2011-10-23

Chris Martin wrote:

Well thank you at last Mr diplomat/petrolhead for owning up.

Chris M.

I don't recall owning up to anything, but if it makes you happy, then in your mind at least, I can be Petrolhead.

Chris Martin
Offline
Joined: 2011-08-20

Yawn....................

 

petrolhead
Offline
Joined: 2011-07-02

Chris Martin wrote:

Yawn....................

Sums up this pointless thread perfectly.

As for your last four post (yes, four), that you did on this thread overnight, I read one. After that, I knew where it was going, so I didn't bother reading the rest. Now that I haven't argued with you about whatever it was that you said at all, I think that we can end it here. I didn't rise to your first few 'challenges', so you may as well stop now. Give it up Chris.