Off Topic Argument (Moved from Home Office Report thread)

[Ally]

I don't agree that how he presented it is irrelevant. How you present something is relevant to how seriously it will be taken. Doing a big "ha ha, you can't see it" is not going to make your credibility soar. But we can agree to disagree on that.

And you are right, I and everyone else ripped AP Wolf a new one for the things he was saying. So because one person, one widely criticized nutbag made some outrageous statement--a nutbag who actually got banned for saying what he did-- it hardly seems a sufficient reason for you to make a general claim that people who present finds here get mauled.

The find was not presented here. It was discussed here. And one person did something out of line and was booted for doing it.

And yet you want to make a blanket statement that "people who present finds here get mauled"??

That doesn't seem a fair and valid judgment.

[Monty]

Ally,

Yes, we can agree to disagree, and I do.

However I do agree that AP was dealt with correctly, no issue with that.

Come on Ally, honestly, you stating finds, new evidence has not, at any stage whatsoever, been unfairly judged, ridiculed with the presenter being abused? Even old evidences are now being questioned and accusations flown. The site is rife with such posts.

We are also going to agree to disagree on this too.

Now that's my final say on the matter. I've given you the attention you crave for

Monty


PS Just re read this and felt it unfair to solely state 'This site'. It happens elsewhere to.

And, to clarify, this is my opinion. You may agree or disagree, I don't really mind. No, honest, I don't.

[Ally]

Darling, I know you live for the days when I cast my eye at you.

Come on Ally, honestly, you stating finds, new evidence has not, at any stage whatsoever, been unfairly judged, ridiculed with the presenter being abused? Even old evidences are now being questioned and accusations flown. The site is rife with such posts.

Well yes, my goodness, it is a shame when people ask questions and re-evaluate old established truths. Everyone should just sit quietly, and accept what they've been told by the legends and gods who have come before us, for we have no right nor reason to ever question that which is established truth.

Abbbbbsolutely. It seems to me that any time anyone asks any question at all that is not what the established believe, they are immediately labeled abusive sh!t-stirrers just out to cause trouble.

When you present something as fact, it is right that there be questions. If ones ego is too fragile to handle that then one should only engage in hobbies that doesn't require being held to account--like rock polishing.

[Monty]

I did say my final word, however as I'm being misrepresented....

I am not saying we should accept all, old and new. And I'm not saying we shouldn't question. What I am saying if if you want to accuse someone of forging a doucment then present the evidence and show some respect.

Until then quit insinuating.

If you wish to twist and turn my posts Ally then that's fine, the fact is I knocked you back before and will do again.....and stop sending me photos, I'm not in to fly fishing.

Monty

[Ally]

What I am saying if if you want to accuse someone of forging a doucment then present the evidence and show some respect.

Wait...so you are saying if you believe someone forged a document, you should show them respect? Well that just makes no sense at all. Why would you show respect to someone that you believe is a forger? But that's beside the point...

You make it sound like people are constantly being accused of forging documents. Which isn't happening. And every time someone does make an accusation of that nature, without a shred of evidence to back it up, there are consequences to those people.

[Monty]

Wow, that such a difficult concept to grasp?

Yes, if you merely believe, as opposed to know, someone has forged a document you should show them respect for you may be completely wrong and you will look an arse. I cite AP again, oh wait, you agreed with me on that.

I'm not stating that at all, I'm saying (and you've pretty much showed this to be true) that people abuse others when evidence they are presented with doesn't ring right with them.

Now I believe thats game, set and match

Nite Ally

Monty

[Ally]

Yes, if you merely believe, as opposed to know, someone has forged a document you should show them respect for you may be completely wrong and you will look an arse. I cite AP again, oh wait, you agreed with me on that.

AP wasn't "disrespectful". He didn't call the guy names, he didn't say he was a dirty bugger. He said he thought he forged the picture. How precisely do you respectfully suggest someone has forged something? "Oh my good man, I do believe you are completely an upstanding chap, and completely beyond question except for this tiny matter of this forgery you appear to have done"?

You cannot "respectfully" accuse someone of forging. Accusations of forgery and respect cannot be in the same universe, there's no "polite" way to do it, and if there is, technically, AP did it. He was not offensive in his manner. It was the matter of what he was suggesting and implying that was offensive.

And what kind of universe are we now living in where I appear to have just defended AP Wolf? I need a shower.

I'm not stating that at all, I'm saying (and you've pretty much showed this to be true) that people abuse others when evidence they are presented with doesn't ring right with them.

And you boys have led a very sheltered and privileged life if you consider some words on the internet to meet the definition of abuse.

And that is indeed game set and match.

[Monty]

Ally,

The lights are off, crowds gone home, what you doing in the dark playing by yourself?

No, AP was abusive, I've got the messages.

Its unwise to accuse without evidence, therefore you hold respect. Innocent till proven, once proven then fine....abuse away.

If you believe someone has forged a document, do you go full bloodied into that person? And then, when its proven they didn't, are you willing to pay the monies once the libel/slander case which will arise in the coming weeks?

Its over hun, go home.

Monty


PS, I can hear the swear words from here.

[Ally]

I've got the messages too. Actually, most people have the messages, they are still on the site except for the last direct one and a couple surrounding ones that made the blatant accusation. I think the only abuse was directed against the site administration for not bowing to the great and mighty.

There wasn't anything contained within them that could remotely be considered "abuse" by a reasonable and objective standard. Of course, you all are British and therefore more delicate than most people. So maybe from your perspective of frailty...

And why would I be swearing? The mere fact you keep coming back means you know you aren't winning this one. But I do appreciate your attempts to add your own little spin to your inability to keep away from me.

[Monty]

Ah, propoganda and deflection.

An expected tactic from a sage campaigner, and a classic.

No, I'm referring to private Emails. He was too wise to run them through the Casebook PMs.

Seriously, bedtime, sleep well Ally.

Monty

[Ally]

Come on Ally, honestly, you stating finds, new evidence has not, at any stage whatsoever, been unfairly judged, ridiculed with the presenter being abused? Even old evidences are now being questioned and accusations flown. The site is rife with such posts.

I cite AP again, oh wait, you agreed with me on that.

No, I'm referring to private Emails. He was too wise to run them through the Casebook PMs

[Monty]

I really should be in bed Ally,

Ok, quote 1 is in reference to accusatory posts, with some posters being abused. Not specifically AP/Philip example.

Quote 2 is in reference to AP stating Philip forged the document with no evidence to prove it. You asked, he couldn't provide, ergo he look an arse.

Quote 3 Private Emails received in relation to subject matter situated on Casebook.

Do I have to explain and justify every post? I will, but you have to give me something in return, and it involves a Leotard and a paddling pool full of chocolate. Though how you get Stephen in a Leotard and then into a paddling pool full of chocolate is your issue.

Monty


PS I am very sleepy now.

[Ally]

Monty, you said this in regards to why people are wary of sharing information here on the boards:

However it has been the norm here that when 'finds' have been shared they have pounced upon and mauled.

And you used the AP Wolf thing as your support, which is the only incident I know of in which a find has been "mauled". Except by your own admission, the "mauling" occurred in Private Emails because he was too smart to do them here.

So this find was not displayed here, there was no "mauling" that took place here, and yet this incident is repeatedly being held up as the gold standard of why people are leery of sharing information here?

I guess no one should publish books any more either, because the emails that flew around after that split photo was published were positively scathing! But I suppose that can be laid someway at the forums door as well.

Though how you get Stephen in a Leotard and then into a paddling pool full of chocolate is your issue.

That's a regular Tuesday night around here.

[Monty]

Ally,

Straws, grasping.

There has been more incidents than this AP thing. My point has been made.

I know for a fact people won't post finds here because they simply cannot be arsed with the unsupported accusatory crap and, in some cases abuse, which follows.

This isn't Casebooks fault obviously, this site is a fantastic resource and we have all used it for research at some stage. However due to ill conceived comments and unspported accusations, researchers are reluctant to share such finds. That said, I competely agree with you, finds/evidence should always be scrutinied, I'm just saying accusations of shenanigans should be proven before the abuse starts.

So, to be clear, I'm not attacking Casebook, I've no grounds to. Its just that some of its posters are too free at dennouncing and lambasting without anything to back them up. And researcher would just rather avoid that bollocks.

That's my point.

Monty

[Ally]

Ally,

Straws, grasping.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

I know for a fact people won't post finds here because they simply cannot be arsed with the unsupported accusatory crap and, in some cases abuse, which follows.

Yep. And you've provided excellent examples of how that has happened in the past. Oh wait...

The interesting thing is of course, that all the "abuse" and shenanigans that goes on in those private emails is ten times more virulent and nasty than anything than gets posted on the boards--as you yourself conceded and everyone else knows as well. And far more ranging, as people who are nice as pie to "your face" on the boards and say oh, what a great find, will privately say "what a piece of crap and can you believe he's going on like this" --in private of course where they are less likely to be held accountable.