| I Thought Dave Was Rude | |
|
Posted by: |
steven_stuart 11:02 pm UTC 11/24/09 |
| > I'll keep this brief. Pudding is a mod on that board, and > therefore can act on posts as he sees fit. Aside from > anything else, he's "down under" which means there should > be an active mod during most of the 24 hours in a day. > > If you want to discuss the board, and oh boy you seem > intent on doing so, the correct place is the board on > discussion section on that board and not here. > Copying posts from there, and starting a discussion here > about them, is just rude. > > Dave Why is it rude? And you are never rude? Give me a break Dave. I try my best to have a sense of humour but you have been very rude to me and a number of people. Please Mr. Akerman, don't condem me for what you also do. Caveman is being discussed all over the place. Even you recieved a phone call about him. What's the difference between talking about your board here or talking about your board in Jim's living room? It is possible that someone here might read something which could help to identify Caveman. As you know from Rink's call, it is something that people in high positions want to know. There are many theories going around but I have to remind people that Caveman has inside knowledge from the past and the present. Most suspects only have knowledge from either the past or the present. Not both. Also, I think that simply copying select posts from your website is really not much different than copying extracts from Broadway World. Like Broadway World, you have an independent site which contains Jim Steinman information. What is wrong with copying some of it to post here? On Jim's website. I have also tried to encourage people to visit your website. You know that I was complimentary about it. I have decided not to discuss things there because I think that my posts will be deleted. When I thought that you would be the deleter, that was bad enough. But with Pudding, I stand no chance. I don't think that someone who tells me I am writing shit(regardless of whether or not I actually am) will be an unbiased moderator. I doubt that all the Wordnix and Caveman posts which Pudding deleted needed to be deleted. If there was nothing controversial on your board, I wouldn't post about it here. But there were actually posts that the higher ups found threatening. And Pudding can delete Wordnix and Caveman just because he doesn't like them (we are never going to catch Caveman if his latest posts are deleted - he's bound to give some clues in his posts). May I remind you that Pudding himself talked about your website activity here. I had no idea that he was deleting Caveman and Wordnix until he posted that he was doing that on this forum. I also think it is slightly unreasonable for you to expect this forum to be completely seperate from your forum. I think that Caveman is the only poster over at your place who has never appeared here (or if he has appeared here, he's never used that much inside information). Everyone else I know. Here I find many Pudding posts. There I find many Pudding posts. Of course Pudding will dismiss this post as "shit" (I thought Yorkshirmen said "shite"). But that is to be expected. I notice that the Wordnix introduction has been viewed 160 times (I believe a record for your forum). Either Wordnix keeps viewing his own post over and over again, or he is very popular. I hope its the latter because that would back up my arguement that the Jackster should be allowed back on this board now that Richard Haase is ancient history. I would like to quote Rob, when he asks: "Just out of interest, why the need for another board? Surely the best place to discuss Jim's musical is on his own discussion board?" Food for thought. And you will have an unbiased JD deciding what should be deleted and not some chap who constantly puts other posters down (unless they are fellow High Priests). Ooops. Sorry. That was rude. Almost as rude as when Dave's moderator Pudding wondered how many times a day my Mum wished she had an abortion all those years ago(when it was me who urged her to contact Jim in the first place - thank goodness JD forwarded the letter - the rest is history). And if I may, I would like to ask Bellminer what he means when he says that I am using this forum for my own personal grievances? I have no personal grievances. The Smeg/Egg Wars was toungue in cheek. And some people thought it was funny. May I quote Conas: "Clearly Steven Stuart/Mr. Egg is in Jim's inner circle. Either that or it's Jim posting as Mr. Egg. I think this is really interestng. I don't know why people are getting upset.. it adds a bit of fun to the board." Thank goodness some people like Conas and Ryan have a sense of humour. Instead of constantly saying: "oh that's bullshit". Maybe the constant insults are what tickles Bellminer's funny bone. I don't know. Bellminer thinks that my attitude is ruining the board but in response to JD, Pudding wrote: "Typical. You'd put me off the board but allow that daft cunt to post his constant spamming shit." He says that over and over again. But what is the "spamming shit"? Does Bellminer really think that this constant repetition of a false accusation is good for the board? Even Smeghead has said that I should not be banned. Smeghead, who hates me. I think that Wenners got it right when he recently said: "I know there are people on here who truly love Jim’s music but the vast majority would rather spiel crap than actually post something of value." Maybe I am one of the bad guys but I am not the only one and I am not in a minority. Even Klasien, who used to be very level headed, becomes negative every now and then. Ask Conas if you don't believe me. Things will be better when Jim is allowed to tell us all what is happening. A new golden age will begin and hopefully we will be too busy talking about positive things on this forum to bother with the kind of bickering that goes on at the moment. BTW, Steve Rinkoff asked my mother why I had posted that he was Caveman. I never said that. I posted: "I wonder who caveman is. He certainly seems to have inside information. He's probably not Steve Rinkoff. Hmmm. Who could he be?" | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: To Jim - Klasien 04:40 pm UTC 11/25/09 |
| Next: | Oh and Dave, Are You Being Fair? - steven_stuart 04:09 pm UTC 11/26/09 |
| Thread: |
|