In reply to:

---

Sadoldman put it into words better than I could have.

---

Don is entitled to his opinion, as am I. I think he's wrong.

As a moderator, he has powers which it would be unwise of me to ignore- for example if he tells me to desist from posting in this forum then I will. But those powers don't extend to telling me what to think.

However, I will stop posting in this thread until the matter of Simon's evidence is settled one way or the other. If I'm wrong then I will apologise to anyone I have affronted. If I'm right then I will expect apologies from those who have attacked me.

Fair enough?

Edited by billford (Mon 06-Nov-06 10:50:49)

My only issue, is that I think it is wrong to post statements regarding other individuals, if you cannot produce evidence to back it up. Saying that you have the evidence but cannot produce is easily done. For example, if I made a post saying that Billford receives payments from his ISP to bash plusnet in the plusnet forums, and I have the evidence to back this up but cannot produce it, I think you would feel rightly annoyed.

[censored] hell! I just asked if James still worked at PN, and this thread erupted! I had hoped the thread hijacking bickering days were gone on this board - clearly not.

Not aimed at you footys, just yours is the last post. And I haven't read the thread, because I have better stuff to do with my time. I've got hold of James and had my query answered satisfactorily. My apologies to James (and anyone else) for inadvertently opening up this can of worms.

>he has powers which it would be unwise of me to ignore

Not powers Bill, responsibilities. for good or ill.

The only "opinion" I hold on this subject is that allegations have been made against a named individual who it seems has to "prove" that these allegations are unfounded, I cannot see that as being right.

All this again is belly button staring I reckon. If a poster wants to address the issue of an ISP manipulating users for their own ends as a general topic fair enough but some evidence would be needed to to maintain such a stance if they wished to maintain credibility.

This is a case of a name being dragged in from someone who was not involved with the thread. Once you name an individual it is not a general "issue" it is then very personal to the person named I would think.

James does still work at PlusNet, btw - just in case your original question never got answered.

Yep, I know, thanks. He got in touch with me following this thread! Issue resolved, I shall return to lurking mode.

Edited by deleted (Mon 06-Nov-06 11:59:14)

I think PN have been underhanded and found out and PR100 did do a good job in showing us all what PN were doing , but now it looks bitter and twisted and the record needs changing. Then we get the simplistic" they deserve to go bust" as the cherry on the cake .

In reply to:

---

If we got anything for free we would tell you but we just don't.

---

Fair enough, but for those that jumped on me, read my post again, I said IF as well.

But anyway, fair play to you if you want to spend your own time helping Plusnet. Its not something I would do for a good ISP, never mind Plusnet, but if thats what you want to do, then so be it.

I'll say no more about PUG getting freebies, I accept I was wrong on this particular point, sorry to those on PUG for any offence I may have caused on this matter.

Why (even if I had seen the post) would I feel the need to comment when the suggestion was officially refuted by James?

<quote>To suggest that we give some forum-going preferential treatment over others is ludicrous to suggest and does not happen. If you have any evidence to suggest this, then I would be happy to address it.</quote>

Did you put forward any evidence? No (but then that's your style to make wild accusations and then twist and turn things for your own agenda).

Anyone can make allegations, to make assertions without being prepared to back it up with the evidence just makes it look a complete fiction, I think the expression is

Put up or shut up!