fakelondongenius at yahoo.com
Fri Jul 30 07:46:20 PDT 2004
D Olner said:
> ... but I object to Cuthbert being moderated.
I hadn't mentioned the individual's name concerned.
> It wasn't done maliciously -
In my opinion this was one of the most vicious examples of trolling that I
have ever seen on Sheffield Indymedia.
> how about I or someone just outlines what we think was wrong, and how it
> can be done differently next time?
Yes, please outline what you think is *wrong* with this individual's
behaviour - the rest of us have made our position clear.
> And where on earth is the persistent and continual disruptive behaviour???
Trolling from accounts such as machinevsman and his latest persona - we
haven't got time for this.
> If you mean that he's dissented occasionally... er, well, I think we
> approve of dissent, don't we?
Don't give me that - you don't have a monopoly on defending 'free speech'
but you consistently assume that you do. This holier-than-thou attitude
wears thin very fast.
We're all in favour of _constructive_ dissent but this individual has run
a consistent and systematic negative campaign for several months now - he
prides himself on 'winding up lefties' - which has done nothing to improve
how Sheffield Indymedia is run or the quality of the website and is
everything about childish pranks and provocation.
Posting the 'Danger' article has been a step too far in my opinion.
Why should _I_ have to defend my position?
How have this individual's actions been at all consistent with the
_spirit_and_letter_ of the UK Mission statement - you answer me that.
> I don't recall any incident where Cuthbert's comments have been in any way
> disruptive. If you can find some, please show me. There's certainly
> nothing in the past month.
Go back to previous months archives - I haven't got the time.
If I were to post anything to the newswire that was as bigoted as the
'Danger' article then I would expect my submissions to the mailing list to
Respect and all that
More information about the imc-sheffield