Arcadia Discussion Zone

Just take a look at your own blogs, forums, boards, and all the other people's blogs and boards where you post.

I don't need to elaborate because your own paronioa compels you to falsify claims about people you don't know, who you have nothing in common with and, most important, want absolutely nothing to do with you.

Quite right too. You should not be divulging the contents of private messages on a public forum. Perhaps you should look up the word "private" in a dictionary?

It is easy to take four words out of context and make them appear to mean something quite different to what was intended.

Why should you be rattled? What was the context of those words?

You've gone this far in betraying confidences. Why stop now?

That is you superimposing your distorted perception on a now ex-member who can't respond.

A bit cowardly of you, isn't it?

There is nothing in what you have said so far to intimate that George was trying to intimidate you. Quite the opposite. You have tried to intimidate him by using cry-baby tactics and getting him banned.

You didn't get your way immediately, so you stamped your feet like a spoilt brat and threw all your toys out of the pram!

Maybe somebody ought to raise more about you publicly and summarily deal with you?

Jeez, Caledfwlch. There was no need to fragment your response in such an annoying way.

But here goes...



Between you and me, I doubt that highly. If you're a follower of the blog, is your profile featured on it?



So, essentially, it's ok for you to say I was making offensive and abusive comments (an accusation), but not actually say what they were?

What a bloody joke. I mean, how about I accuse you of libel for making false claims against me (which they are).

For the record, I certainly wasn't being abusive or offensive. Content removed

That's not abusive or offensive. And look at the way he decided to cover his tracks. Absolutely pathetic.



Why am I not surprised.



First you'd have to show where I've said the Bishop thinks I'm a Farrant follower. Then, you'd actually have to bother reading the link I provided, rather than continuing your childishness.



Yes, that's correct. The messages were harassing/stalky in nature. Thus, I deemed him worthy of reporting. It wasn't my intention to ban him, per se. But I guess his actions were against forum policy. So, good riddance to him.



Sending me along an private address that is not publicly available and then saying "you should be rattled", well, any sane person could see what his game was.



Well, if he did that, he'd simply be proving me right, wouldn't he. I mean, "revenge" for being banned off a public forum, then publicly revealing a private address? That's pretty f***ed up, I'd say.

Keep in mind he was also yabbering away about David's personal residence too, so the guy's clearly a nutter.



Um, considering the wealth of stuff I've written, you're gonna have to be a lot more specific there.



Wow, you gave yourself a get-out-of-jail-free card!

I took the time to link you to info, you can't be bothered doing the same. Says a lot about ya, sport.

In fact, I'll go so far as to say you're now libeling me. So, if you can't back up what you say, I'd suggest you retract your accusations. You know, for courtesy's sake.



Except I'm also backed up by the actions of the Mod. Their decision to ban him, not mine.



Not at all. You're the one who keeps discussing him. I'm just responding.



Intimidate him how? Reveal his private address? Personal info, what? Gimme a break. The guy used a single name. Didn't talk much about himself and discussed the location of Patsy as well as David. Clearly, the bloke had an obsession with private residences.



Nope, I contacted the authoritahs, who promptly (and justly) showed him the door. The way such loonies should be dealt with.



Again, it's not like I told people where George lived. I didn't reveal anything personal about him. I talked about the harassing actions he was taking against me. Get a grip, Caledfwlch.

"Clowns"?

How many people have been sending you PMs of which you disapprove and feel threatened by? I thought it was just poor old George?

You have said absolutely nothing that is remotely threatening in what was sent to you privately. Nothing whatsoever.

If the mods "agreed" with you, it is only because they sought some peace and quiet after all the headache they must have been receiving from you about your paranoia.

You are not only subtlely threatening other forum members on the one hand, but also, on the other, advising the membership to take a leaf out of your book and get more people banned who indulge in the private messaging facility?

As far as I'm concerned, no evidence of harassment against you has been shown.

If it has happened, you have certainly provided no evidence to support your allegation.

Now you know exactly how a good number of members feel who view your comments.

And before you ask me to back that up, ask any member of this forum!

Strewth, Caledfwlch - that's a bit rude.

Given the trouble that George caused I'm glad to see the back of him. Why was he discussing Patsy Langley in private anyway? What has any of this got to do with him??? Private messages often lead to tears and tantrums - which is why I try and avoid them. Someone always blurts out something they have been told in confidence which causes trouble and division. Anthony obviously felt threatened otherwise he wouldn't have taken the action he did. "Poor George" obviously felt he was above the law - and paid the price.

Love
Jen
x.

My apologies. I clearly should have written do note that I very carefully wasn't calling either of you schizophrenic.


How silly of me to confuse your lack of grace with His Grace.

I'm sure he'd regard that as an impertinence, just as his altar ego (pun intended) ignored all my requests for information about his services in Glastonbury.

Why are you discussing these matters with me?

They neither relate to this thread or the general topic under which these threads are bunched.

Nor am I qualified to discuss something that does not interest or concern me.

I don't remember saying I'm a "follower" of the blog. Why do you always presume things that are not the case? I am not a member of blogspot and you need to be registered to become a follower. I select what I read on the internet without joining everything like you.

I am not interested in what you doubt, only what is fact and you are rather short on facts.

Are you totally ignorant of the law? To repeat libel made by someone else renders you vulnerable for a law suit as much as the original defamer. And you are a defamer.

The bishop thinks no such thing and has never made such a claim anywhere.

You are the one who has repeatedly and falsely claimed that the bishop has said you are in league with this man. He has not and you have failed to demonstrate that he has.

And you are the one being very childish (I know you were a child in reality only a few years ago).

You have revealed nothing whatsoever of a harassing or stalking nature about this ex-member.

If anyone is a harasser and a stalker it is you!

How many years is it now that you've been pursuing strangers on the other side of the world about matters that were over before you were born?

None of these people want anything to do with you. Yet you still harass and stalk them.

If it is "not publicly available" how did he find it?

I note you still refuse to put those words "you should be rattled" in the context of how they were delivered. Let's have the entire sentence in which they were sent.

You're a devious youngster, Hogg, even if people can see right through you.

Well, has he?

The only person to go running to the administration telling tales out of school is you.

Why are you so concerned about this private address which, let's face it, George revealed to you in confidence? It sounds like it must be your address. Is it?

And what did George reveal about the other address? We will all be imagining the worst unless we know. But, of course, that is precisely what you want.

You're a stirrer, Hogg. You fuel disquiet and disharmony. That's your raison d'etre.

No, I don't have to be any more specific than I already have been.

You're blogs and boards concentrate on two people who live on the opposite side of the planet to you, are more than twice your age and want absolutely nothing to do with you. You harass and stalk them almost every day of your meaningless existence and have done so for years.

What I am discussing is a principal, not a person.

I am assuming a certain amount at face value, but you have produced no evidence at all to support the allegation that you were threatened, harassed and stalked.

I believe you made a false allegation against another member out of malice because they had information about you which you resented them having even though they kept it confidential.

So what did he discuss about other people's addresses? Let's be hearing it.

I'm beginning to think you are a compulsive liar as well as a malicious stirrer.

You have quite obviously got a paranoid obsession with people and matters that do not concern you in the slightest. It hasn't stopped you, though, has it?

There is only one "loony" from where I'm sitting. And it's you!

I mean, how many years has it been now that you've obsessed from Australia about two strangers living in the United Kingdom and written about them on how many blogs and boards?

I've certainly lost count.

Who did George tell where you lived?

Who did George reveal anything personal about apart from what he revealed about you to you?

What harassment? I've seen no evidence of any so far. You're paranoid.

You are the one who needs to get a grip! And soon ...

... before the men in white coats arrive on your doorstep.

All this really proves is that Private Messages casuse nothing but trouble.

Anthony, am I right in thinking that George sent you my address as well? I don't live in Feltham by the way.

Cor blimey! Did he send you my address as well?

Is everyone posting here completely and utterly PARANAOID?