thats exactly the kind of post that tends to cause the wind ups. A one line personal opion, based on no fact, calculated to reflect PN in the worst possible light. PR and yourself have brought much to the table.. but this mystical opinion that he/you are responsible for all/most change is egotistical in the extreme.

> Not to put too fine a point on it - you did do exactly that.

Put as finer point as you like on it. If it comes down to pantomime:

<Ian Says> Oh no we didn't.

And, because it's pantomime, that is the last post I'm making in this thread. I'd love to discuss the wider unresolved issues though if that interests you?

Ian

Here we go again...

>A one line personal opion, based on no fact, calculated to reflect PN in the worst possible light.

The facts are there, discussed ad nauseam and thoroughly documented (even Seb and PN admit as much). Do you really need me to dig them up again? I certainly don't have any intention of doing that and I don't need to shine a light on PN to support the claim about their poor actions, they managed to do that all by themselves. One question, why do you feel the need to jump up in support of an ISP when a post is made directly to a member of staff? I didn't actually make the comment directed at you, so why did you feel the need to respond to me in that manner?

>but this mystical opinion that he/you are responsible for all/most change is egotistical in the extreme.
You have just claimed that and not me. When you can show me where I have made such a bold claim we will discuss it....

PS: I would have been as vocal against you being silenced (from two months ago in any case) as I have been about Simon. I did the same for Jelv too, and not because we agreed on issues but because, in the main, he was an opponent that tried to remain on topic. Opposing views are never a problem, it is the manner of those statements that counts.

Edited by rsharma (Fri 11-May-07 14:40:35)

Very mature...I'll leave you to it.

"
presumably following the logic above... if a number of pro-pn posters had been banned this would be the bestest, most impartial BB ever..... "

Your logic eludes me. No one said that, just another inflammatory post from your imagination. But the logic is that if only pr is banned he must be the worst offender, 3 months makes that a dreadful offence and with not even some other minor bannings, on the whole everyone else has behaved not too badly.

That is just not true and worse than not fair.

If silencing pr is seen as the needed thing to quieten these boards then victimisation is the correct wording.

Here we go again. Feels like that to me too.

If they don't pay your salary or give you free broadband they ought to do.

Look forward to the links to such, or is this just one of those posts that seem to present as fact, but you know will start a flame war?

" I'd love to discuss the wider unresolved issues though if that interests you?"

I think the precipitous actions on here have now prevented that.

"but this mystical opinion that he/you are responsible for all/most change is egotistical in the extreme."

rsharma rightly says where have either pr or rsharma claimed this, links please.

Others, including myself, have claimed it on their behalf. I

If you agree they have not claimed it for themselves, perhaps an apology would be nice and help to bring that contentment that you so desire to these boards.

In reply to:

---

And, because it's pantomime, that is the last post I'm making in this thread. I'd love to discuss the wider unresolved issues though if that interests you?

---

In another thread please

seb