| re: Don't you ever get bored with your long, dull, repetitive and oh so frequent posts?? | |
|
Posted by: |
steven_stuart 07:55 pm UTC 07/08/09 |
| In reply to: | Don't you ever get bored with your long, dull, repetitive and oh so frequent posts?? - Jacqueline 06:09 pm UTC 07/08/09 |
| That's very unfair. I was trying to understand what you were meaning in your first post on this thread. I was not trying to be critical of you. I don't understand why you have taken this attitude. As the other poster said, "Just trying to figure out what's going on." Sorry if my posts are too long and too dull for you. I guess you have to read all the posts, so you can't just ignore me. You have banned me several times in the past, so I am surprised to still be able to post this reply. I am sorry that I said (earlier this week) that I was amazed you allow some of the things you allow on this board. That was rude of me. Also, I should not have said that you are the boss of the board and I hope you believe in democracy. I was upset by the way you said that I could lick Ryan's wounds. But that is probably not an excuse. However, I don't think the moderator of the board should use the thread line to insult me in the way you have. What was wrong with my post? Was it stupid? Badly written? Are there no points you could answer? Was there something specific that offended you? It may have been long and dull but it didn't take that long to read. I don't understand your reaction. The reason I repeated some information is because two of my posts were removed (even though they were not offensive) and Smeg was going on about spewing yolk. > I do. > > > > This board allows a ton of NJC and is very liberal. That > > > said, pornographic images, or "google cues" for them - > > > I'll pull. The stuff posted or posted about isn't nudity > > > or sex - it's way beyond that. For the sake of the > > > under-18 (and the vast majority of over-18 that don't want > > > to see or read that on a songwriter's message board) - I > > > pulled the threads. > > > > The original thread was started by Conas. He was talking > > in a positive way about Michael Jackson. I didn't have > > time to read the rest of the thread but when I came back > > it had all gone. Pudding told me that the thread had been > > removed because it was full of "filthy sexual" stuff. I > > assumed that the people making fun of Michael Jackson > > further down the board had replied to Conas in a horrible > > way. My post regarding this assumption (which may have > > been wrong) upset Pudding and he called me a "wanker". Was > > it that word that got the thread pulled? You say about the > > under-18's but there are many threads where Pudding and > > Jughead use words like "cocksucker" and "cunt" and they > > don't get pulled (if you are worried about under-18s). > > Smeg once wrote that: "I wish I was a cunt so that I could > > play with myself all day". Some might find that funny but > > again, if you are worried about the under-18s. I know that > > alot of middle aged Bat Out Of Hell fans in the UK > > wouldn't like that either. I don't know what it has to do > > with Smeghead being "moved by Jim's words and music". > > > > I admit that I have used some foul language when replying > > to Pudding and Smeghead because I get hit by a barrage of > > foul language from them. > > > > I wonder if the thread was pulled because I paid tribute > > to Michael Jackson on the day of his funeral and memorial. > > Pudding said that I was stirring up more "Michael Jackson > > shit". So I guess that this NJC might have been annoying > > to some board members who don't like Michael (I have also > > recieved support for my pro-Jackson views from some other > > posters - they are not all negative about it). > > > > I am glad that you said you tolerate NJC because it can be > > interesting. Especially at a time when Jim is not allowed > > to talk about his work to his fans. > > > > Although Michael Jackson is not exactly NJC. Both Jim and > > Michael shared (or share - Michael is still with us) an > > obsession with all things JM Barrie. As you know, Jim has > > fought tooth and nail for his Neverland script, in the > > past and currently in the present. Many people have tried > > to change his mind but he bravely sticks to his guns and I > > am proud of him for that. And Jim is a fan of Michael. > > Maybe because he was a Peter Pan figure but also probably > > because Michael was the best song and dance man of all > > time. He could have done wonderful versions of Life Is A > > Lemon or Angels Arise. > > > > In this thread, Smeghead talks about Mr. Egg spewing his > > yolk. I was not trying to spew yolk. I was just asking > > Pudding why he had a problem with Michael Jackson (who is > > innocent - as the congress lady so powerfully said) but > > not Roman Polanski (who actually pleads guilty). Is it > > simply that Roman directed Tanz, so he is not to be > > criticised? > > > > I have recieved negative posts from a number of posters > > but it is mostly the team of Pudding and Smeghead who let > > me have it. Probably I will end up being banned because of > > their provocation. Like someone else who I am not allowed > > to mention. Who should be allowed back on if you really do > > want "a raw and uncensored mirror into the lives of the > > people that have been so moved by his words and music". > > People who have been moved by Jim's music are all > > different. They won't all post things that fit in with > > what Pudding and Smeghead want. I have read posters > > declaring that they are sometimes scared to post things in > > case they get it from the dynamic duo. > > > > > > I don't know, last week I remember we were told that "this > > > > board is run the way Jim wants it - as a raw and > > > > uncensored mirror into the lives of the people that have > > > > been so moved by his words and music". I do not say this > > > > as a knock in any way on Jim or Jacqueline, but rather to > > > > try to understand why threads may have gone missing. > > > > Personally, in the past I've seen stuff allowed that I > > > > would have pulled - so I'm definitely not screaming about > > > > "censorship" either. Just trying to figure out what's > > > > going on. > > > > > > > > > Seriously... what is up? | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | Don't you ever get bored with your long, dull, repetitive and oh so frequent posts?? - Jacqueline 06:09 pm UTC 07/08/09 |
| Next: | re: Don't you ever get bored with your long, dull, repetitive and oh so frequent posts?? - Pudding 08:23 pm UTC 07/08/09 |
| Thread: |
|