11 May 2009

Daily Chat 11/05/09

On this day in 1985, fire broke out in the main stand at Valley Parade in Bradford, killing 56 and injuring at least 265 people.  Celebrating birthdays today:  Eric Burdon, Jeremy Paxman, Martha Quinn (one of the original US MTV veejays), and Andres Iniesta.

192 comments:

  1. Ooh, Andres Iniesta. I knew that actually. I sent him a dozen red roses on Wednesday night, and another dozen today.

    Great banner at the Camp Nou last night - 29 May in Rome, the beatification of San Andres Iniesta.

    Jeremy Paxman's good too, Happy Bday, Paxo.

    Wow, it's weird since Hank DrWho'd into MrPinchy. I'm so much nicer and shallower..

    Big hugs and kisses to all

    xx

    ReplyDelete
  2. Amazing how fire can take the lives of 56 people in a location like a stand in a stadium. It would seem like there would be plenty of opportunity and time to escape, however, in crowds, inside buildings, nothing is guaranteed.

    People who padlock exits in open public buildings should be heavily sanctioned by the law.

    I think it behooves every individual to discover and mentally plan an escape route (for self and dependants) when in a crowd, inside a building. Yet how many of us do?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Montana Wildhack, how come you stopped closing the old Daily Chat pages? Did a few people gang up on you behind the scenes?

    What's the point to leave them open, when the conversation CONTINUES on the next day's page? Wouldn't it be more user-friendly to close them, and thus assure readers that there will be nothing new posted to have to check for on those threads once the next thread has been started?

    I think some people are still having trouble understanding the concept of ONE Daily Chat thread, spread indefinitely over many PAGES (one per day). There is absolutely no reason to have responses to posts on the same PAGE of the ongoing Daily Chat thread.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If, after a few days or weeks, someone wishes to respond to a point or a post read on an old DC page, they would be far better off doing so on the current Chat page, perhaps providing a brief synopsis of what they were responding to, or quoting the actual passage.

    I can see no point in anyone posting (or being able to post) a response on an old thread. Who's going to read it?

    ReplyDelete
  5. hank, pinchy? wow! good man.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Exactly, Bill, I was about to make the same point about the pointlessness of leaving yesterday's pages open- nobody's going to read old threads.

    I met this Italian doctor on Saturday who knows Berlusconi's personal physician and apparently since B had his cancerous prostate removed he can only get an erection by pumping it up manually...

    Thanks for kind comment on depression strip, Anonymous.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I have noticed the fights still goes on even off CIF! That's the spirit! :-)


    Mr Pinchy/Hank when you have a moment please email me:

    pishi91@yahoo.com

    Thanks

    friendly cifer (honest!)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Morning all,

    Just read the full details of Blears expenses - astonishing and sickening in equal measure and i cant bloody even comment on cif (the article is rubbish but comments good).

    These little shitbags should be charged with fraud and theft and the public should not shut up until its done. In Blears case she seems to have told parliament and Inland Revenue two different tales of where she's been living, so for her it seems even the old bollocks "it was within the rules" is out the window. That dirty little dwarf deserves a visit from the old bill and a few months behind bars.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yes, Jay, I agree with every word.
    What a grubby bunch of cheats they are...

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'm with the late great Douglas Adams on this one, only those who don't want to rule should be allowed to..............

    ReplyDelete
  11. Totally, Jay. Just been reading about Tony Blair's remortgaging of his constituency home for more than its value, as a deposit for another London property.
    Not only a warmongering c*unt, but a greedy tw*t too.

    ReplyDelete
  12. And Baroness Thornton lives with her mum in Shipley so she can claim £22k a year, even though she's lived in London for 30 years, FFS.
    And £100 odd to change 25 light bulbs - I hereby offer to change the light bulbs for them if that's how much they're willing to pay!

    ReplyDelete
  13. What I want to know is "when did the MPs realise the system was so rotten?" as they're all now proclaiming. Shortly after the FoI request to publish all their expenses was upheld?

    And now Gordon Brown's apologised on behalf of all parties for the expenses system. Doubt that'll save him (or the reputation of Parliament, come to think of it).

    Mind you, the gravy train will be calling in at Brussels soon, as usual, so at least some in the political world will be able to carry on regardless.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hiya. A couple of questions about here:

    I don't know if 'anonymous' is always the same person, or a number of different people. Shouldn't people choose a user name - it would still effectively be anonymous?

    What is 'The Other Place'?

    What is the Phone Booth?

    Just curious.

    ReplyDelete
  15. @yeractual:

    I think the Phone Booth is a place to leave private messages for individual posters hereabouts. Something about you have to email Montana and she'll give you the URL or something. Not sure though.

    The 'Other Place' I've assumed to mean Comment is Free.

    Re. anonymous, maybe some people don't want to sign up to (or haven't signed up to) one of the blogger sites.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "Not only a warmongering c*unt, but a greedy tw*t too."

    Indeed, i was probably too lenient on him in my infamous four letter address...

    What makes me more angry about this country than anything else is apathy - anger is always just verbal, just a tut to the neighbour, the colleague, a rant at the local, we should be stringing these fuckers up by the balls, marching on parliament and refusing to leave until a police investigation is launched into theft and fraud and some of these cockroaches are charged for all to see. I wonder how the French would react if their MPs did this.

    One of these scumbags, at least, should be imprisoned - i dont see how you can keep any faith in this political system without that. Get that bloody dwarf in a cell.

    The System stuff is beneath contempt - they made the system, they happily abused the system, and then when they got rumbled they are claiming the system really is rotten and simply must be changed. The system was only rotten because it didnt adequately protect against the despicable attitudes of these common criminals.

    I need a lie down... Newlabour overload...

    ReplyDelete
  17. Thanks SwiftyBoy,

    Why don't anonymous posters sign in with the Name/URL option and just put a user name in there? (No need for a URL).

    It's not a problem if there is only one anonymous, but there's no way for me to know that . . .

    ReplyDelete
  18. yeractual
    See your point here, but I'm one of those who haven't signed up to a blogger site as swiftyboy has said because I don't have time for regular blogging. And I'm skiving from work today ... so don't want to use my CiF nick.
    2 of the posts are mine, on MPs expenses. Looking forward to checking out my MPs expenses later in the week.
    swifty - yes, when did they realise the system was so open to abuse that they could play it to their advantage?

    ReplyDelete
  19. @yeractual

    careful where you tread if and when you enter the Phone Booth - I've just been kicked and out denied re-admittance, I haven't heard why but I'm imagining it's for dissent.

    Deeply ironic given the premise of cif refugees.

    I don't think the booth's run by consensus necessarily, probably rule by decibel measured in stroppiness. It's mainly a site for bitching about other posters, from what I can see. I'd be surprised if my eviction was determined by community vote - I wouldn't imagine olching or heresiarch or biskieboo voting me out, but I could well be wrong.

    Still, there you go - constantly surprised by 'democratic' dynamics and the behind-the-scenes string pulling.

    ReplyDelete
  20. @jay:

    I've joked before that I wished I lived somewhere where the natives were a bit more "excitable" - like Baghdad, or Hyderabad, or Athens, or Calais, for example. Just so I could see the good burghers racing out onto the street and demonstrating their bloody heads off like there's no tomorrow.

    Mind you, "Little Afghanistan" in London gives me hope, at least if it's anything like the way it's described in the CiF article currently generating huge amounts of bitterness over there. If those particular residents ever get wind of what our MPs have been up to with taxpayers' money, there'll be some fantastically vibrant scenes on the streets of, um, Hyde Park.

    @yeractual: anonymous is maybe because they don't want to put a user name? Dunno why, but each to their own.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Too right Swifty, perhaps that could be a real benefit of multiculturalism - they certainly know how to protest/riot/implode. Perhaps we might encourage our Somali communities to travel to Westminster and educate our honourable MPs in Somali justice resolution methods...

    ReplyDelete
  22. Jay,

    No matter what system is in place, scum will always rise to the top. It will always be like this. The only real changes we can expect will be for new schemes to emerge designed to hide the shenanigans from the public.

    If the bomb were to drop, and all that remained of society were small disparate groups of survivors, all would be equal for only a very short period. In each group, someone would emerge who felt it was his role - not to work on the land - but to manage the others, to organise trade with the other groups and to receive a bigger part of the pot in return.

    ReplyDelete
  23. So, what are you saying, parallax, that I needn't bother applying for phonebooth access, but that I'm already there in spirit?

    "It's mainly a site for bitching about other posters, from what I can see."

    That sounds extremely sad.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "See your point here, but I'm one of those who haven't signed up to a blogger site as swiftyboy has said because I don't have time for regular blogging."Yes, but you don't need to be signed up for anything.

    From the 'Comment as:' drop-down box, choose Name/URL and enter a user name in the 'Name' field. It's easy.

    ReplyDelete
  25. JayReilly: "What makes me more angry about this country than anything else is apathy - anger is always just verbal..."

    So, can we expect to see you on the six o'clock news? Will you be screaming curses at dwarfs as you're led away, or is there some other way we'll be able to recognise it's you?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Yeractual,

    Thats very true, that is why it is the most primary responsibility of the land tillers is to hold the 'managers' to very, very strict account, and if they steal from the tillers, there should be tough community action.

    Many people are responding "general election now!" on that thread and that sums up how pathetic our system is - the only sanction we have, the only justice we can imagine is that we swap one load of thieving parasites for another. There are better ways than this, there are better democracies, and better methods - we just seem to think the structure's fine, the best we can hope for, and a general election will right all wrongs.

    We could have a constitution, an elected upper house, an elected head of state, a disestablished church, PR, move towards a more direct democracy, etc. None of these things in isolation will solve everything, and they all have problems of their own, nothing is perfect, but i think they would certainly be a big improvement. It just seems such a big undertaking to clean up this democracy and prepare it for the 21st century that no one can be arsed.

    What have we got to look forward to - tories or lib dems, two neolib parties with a handful of policy differences.

    ReplyDelete
  27. parallax,

    So the Phone Booth is someone else's private site or blog?

    Ok, cheers, was just curious.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Why is there no open invite to this phonebooth? Is it a private site?

    ReplyDelete
  29. yeractual

    The booth was setup by Montana so banned posters could alert others to their new monikers without mods/staff being able to read it, so it couldnt be open, it had to be invite only.

    Parallax - you werent evicted for "dissent", as i understand it, if you email montana she will explain.

    ReplyDelete
  30. @billp: you asked:

    "Why is there no open invite to this phonebooth?"

    Can't say I'm overly exercised by the fact that it's invitation only (I'm not part of it, I should add). That's up to the people who participate in it, surely?

    @yeractual: as I said above, I think it fulfils the function that "PM me" does on some other boards.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Alternatively, email Georgina, and she'll try to sell you the exact same bolocks.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Swiftyboy, I only asked why. That's still allowed, surely?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Jay,

    Having two main Parties (or three), each serving themselves before discharging their wider duty, merely gives the rabble the illusion of democracy. It is the least they can get away with, and it is therefore the least that we get.

    Imagine a house of 670 Independent candidates. In order to form a government, there would be a flurry of coalition-building. What kind of person would end up comprising the largest coalition? Those with reason, ethics and intergrity, or those with ambition, greed and hunger for power?

    Power = greed. It always has done.

    ReplyDelete
  34. @billp:

    "Alternatively, email Georgina, and she'll try to sell you the exact same bolocks."

    Mate, you didn't really need to deliver the coup de grace there, I think most of us knew what you were getting at.

    Put the sledgehammer down, old son.

    ReplyDelete
  35. jay
    the only sanction we have, the only justice we can imagine is that we swap one load of thieving parasites for another
    Exactly.
    And ultima & BTH are back on the gender thread, where Ally & annetan have already made some good points

    ReplyDelete
  36. Shouldn't there be some kind of "moral" understanding that people don't take issues from here into a private "phonebooth", in order to discuss them, reach some kind of consensus, then return here and implement their "policy"?

    Wouldn't that be devious? The forum equivalent of behaviour prompting the passing of antitrust laws to regulate the business world?

    Is it the kind of behaviour that a friendly community is usually built on.

    ReplyDelete
  37. @billp:

    (At the risk of this post crossing your response in the ether...)

    "Swiftyboy, I only asked why. That's still allowed, surely?"

    I presume so - and that's why I offered an explanation (which it turns out wasn't entirely accurate, pace Jay's explanation).

    Not sure who would disallow a question like that - your thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Swiftyboy, my response was to Jay's "MW will explain" comment. I hadn't been getting anywhere near that previously.

    Please know that I won't be taking any advice from you as regards expressing my opinions here.

    ReplyDelete
  39. billp yes it's a private club run on the lines of *executive* power.

    This was my first post yesterday - I'd been an invited guest watching the state of play from the sidelines, then I decided to intervene and was apparently booted out for it. And before you read it, you've got to come to terms with the fact they you are a difficult bugger billp and you have to realise that you get people off side which ain't helping you communicate:

    parallax said...

    Hi guys.

    About billp: I like him. Admittedly, it took a while - but he can be as funny as fuck.

    My first encounters with him were frustrating, he's as tenacious as a terrier, dogged and entirely committed to his world view. He sticks to his guns and you have to admire that to some extent. He does wind people up relentlessly - only because they can't change his perspective on life and they end up shouting at a brick wall.

    It's interesting to watch ATLiners argue with him and lose their cool - billp has the capacity to reveal the uglier side of some personalities. On a thread about abusive BTLiners Linda Grant totally lost her rag with him and called him an areshole. To his credit he had not used any bad language but had worn her down with his line-by-line questioning. The result was illuminating - Linda Grant was thrown from her high horse after writing a piece about abuse from posters only to end up abusing a poster - it was pure theatre.

    Then Adam Rutherford had a go at billp over the course of his series of articles, eventually calling billp an idiot - but then grudgingly, AR ended up respecting billp's commitment to his cause which was diametrically opposed to AR's worldview. You have to remember that billp is pro-life and lives his life with the guidance from the words of Jesus - and there ain't nothing gonna shake him from that.

    I got to 'meet' him on one of Sarfraz Mansoor's threads - it was a bit of an anorak sit-in-thread - and we were talking about nothing really, just hanging about waiting for the thread to end. Fuck, he was funny. He has these amazing screen-writing skills where, with just a handful of words, he can conjure a scenario so vividly - you can see a bit of that happening with his Heathcliffe scar rubbing picture.

    Trust me, if you accept him warts and all, he's excellent value. Just accept the fact that there's no point arguing with him - he's immovable - because he *believes* he's right, without a doubt. But, that's OK - people are different, and there's some beauty in that.

    And anyway you don't want bland, do you?

    ReplyDelete
  40. Swiftyboy, I asked:

    "Why is there no open invite to this phonebooth?"

    You responded:

    "That's up to the people who participate in it, surely?"

    That's an unreasonable response. Especially, as it came from someone who doidn't know the answer.

    ReplyDelete
  41. @billp:

    "Is it the kind of behaviour that a friendly community is usually built on."

    Hmm.

    Anyway, as to your point about the "moral" probity of adjourning to the phone booth, I suspect you are leading up to another stunning QED with your superior debating skills and fearless tilting at windmills. Awaiting said QED with baited breath, old boy.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Oh dear, I see it arrived while I was typing. Typical, you wait weeks for a good bit of JCR-type debate, then two come along at once.

    ReplyDelete
  43. parallax, I know I'm a "difficult bugger". I don't apologise for it. I'm a whet stone. Sharpen something on me.

    I reiterate that I think it's entirely sad that people from here should be discussing me on a parallel site. I'm not important.

    The trouble with you though (from a phonebooth perspective), is that you have a sense of humour. You always had.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Swiftyboy, stay with ball, the man has sold you a dummy.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Yeractual,

    Scum will rise to the top and it is always a power game, but there is a great big grey area here - there are ways we can improve things - this isnt the best possible democracy, there are changes that can be made. It may always be shit, that may be an inevitable fact of living in a state, but it could be made much less shit than it is, and general election wont do anything towards achieving that.

    This is all im saying, i think the public need to take a step back and think about what changes they want and how those changes will be met - election manifestos arent worth the paper they are written on (though you can be sure they will be claiming for the price of the ink).

    ReplyDelete
  46. parallax, who ISN'T immovable? Have you ever witnessed any poster say something like "Well, that argument has certainly opened my eyes to the fact that I have been dead wrong on that issue all these years"?

    ReplyDelete
  47. @billp:

    I'm in a Quixote-kinda mood today myself, so I see this could get quite enjoyable:

    "That's an unreasonable response. Especially, as it came from someone who doidn't know the answer."

    Yes, I "doidn't" know the answer. Mea culpa - I was only trying to help. I thought I did, and only realised I didn't when Jay explained how it was.

    Blimey, I reckon you could have an argument with yourself if you were so inclined.

    Anyway, wondering whether there are other insights waiting when I hit the Post Comment button... hope so!

    ReplyDelete
  48. @billp: you mentioned

    "the man has sold you a dummy"

    Yep, he sure did. JPR Williams springs to mind. My grandad knew him, liked him very much. I think I rather like you, too. I certainly respect your trenchant opinions and your tenaciousness, all admirable and much needed qualities when posting on the internet.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Oh, I see what you did there. You put my very obvious typo in quotes, and thereby made me look like an idiot. Good one.

    Again, I asked a question:

    "Why is there no open invite to this phonebooth?"

    You, not knowing the answer to that question, decided to offer the following:

    "Can't say I'm overly exercised by the fact that it's invitation only (I'm not part of it, I should add)."

    Overly "exercised" {titter}.

    "That's up to the people who participate in it, surely?"

    All of that statement of fact that it IS by invitation only bollocks, proffered from a position of 100% ignorance as to whether it IS by invitation only.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Please don't take any of this personally, Swiftyboy. I'm just a stickler for logic and reason. If it doesn't make sense, I question it.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Anyway, I see that a phonebooth consensus has indeed been reached to ignore me (as I predicted to dan it would about three days ago or so).

    Again, sad. I'm actually embarrassed for whoever is involved in that.

    ReplyDelete
  52. "Blimey, I reckon you could have an argument with yourself if you were so inclined."

    Don't think the thought hasn't crossed my mind during periods of quality opponent famine. I've often considered changing in mid-thread and arguing the other side of the debate.

    ReplyDelete
  53. There is no open invite to the phonebooth - it is by invitation only. Your invite is in the post, bill. It was felt by all that your exceptional use of logic and reason and your warm and friendly personality would be an asset to any thread. Enjoy.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Oh no, not the comfy anonymous postings!

    ReplyDelete
  55. @billp:

    Nothing taken personally, old son, it's not like you know me or anything. You're just pointing out my total, 100%, complete and utter ignorance on this topic, which is fair enough, although in mitigation I would say I was trying to help Yeractual initially.

    PS What's wrong with using "exercised" in that context? As in "overly exercised by"? Just curious, really.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Exceptional use of logic and reason? Warm and friendly? No wonder I'm the talk of the phonebooth! Would you like me to give a talk?

    ReplyDelete
  57. Yes, but you directly responded with guesswork to a question I posed. That's a no-no under the code of billp.

    Is "I'm not overly exercised by..." a colloquialism where you live? Does it mean "I'm not overly concerned by..."?

    I'm not familiar with it.

    ReplyDelete
  58. I shall sign on as pishi91 to avoid confusio.

    What is a phonebooth in internet terms? you guys are moving too fast..

    any news from the mods PinchyHank!?

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  59. *THE* phonebooth is Inquisition HQ.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I wonder if a poster CAN get banned from this site? If I get banned, please find me on www.hypocrites.blogger.aargh

    ReplyDelete
  61. @billp:

    Illogical and careless thinker that I am, I think even I detected a certain amount of cold shoulder being dished out to you. Don't know if this is orchestrated or whether you're just feeling a tad got at.

    Anyway, people don't have to engage with those they find difficult to talk to, do they? Even here among the banned, those in Purgatory and those who are just not playing any more. Whetstone or no, some folk seem to find engaging with you an uncomfortable experience. Surely you can acknowledge that, even if you can't understand it?

    ReplyDelete
  62. As I said before, I recognise the right of each individual to choose with whom they wish to engage. Choosing to ignore another poster, for cause or not, is perfectly fine in my book.

    Openly calling for another poster to be ignored, or conspiring off-site to ignore another poster as a group, is probably unhealthy.

    I am not responsible for other people's comfort.

    Do you suppose I an entirely comfortable having to respond to what appear to be emotional humunculi? And yet, I manage to take the rough with the smooth, without making either complaint or calls for censorship, in the form of marginalisation.

    ReplyDelete
  63. I try and ignore him now, Swifty, because i get nothing from engaging with him, he reminds me of a stroppy teenager that has to row with everyone about everything, so i cant be bothered with him. This is echoed from a number of other posters, but certainly not all, and the actual main 'consensus' at the "fireside pow wow" is that people can talk to whoever they want, but for those who feel billp constitutes a glorified troll, ignoring seems the best option.

    Far from parallax being marginalised, quite a few were actually in agreement and supported him - he just seems to have missed that bit out when telling the story.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Soon, Jay and Hank, etc., are going to come back on appealling to posters to ignore me or risk losing their input to the site. That is, they'll threaten to ban me by leaving me intact, while removing the surrounding site (or site membership, or regularly posting membership).

    Perhaps they've decided to punish me by exiling themselves to a life of utter obscurity on phonebooth island.

    That'll show me!

    ReplyDelete
  65. Is parallax still allowed in the phonebooth or not?

    ReplyDelete
  66. I haven't rowed with everyone. I've rowed with those who either attempted to restrict my freedoms, or began a row with me.

    What's wrong with rowing, anyway? Whoever made "no rowing" a forum rule?

    ReplyDelete
  67. @billp:

    "conspiring off-site to ignore another poster as a group"

    Who's conspiring where? I ask in all sincerity, I like a good conspiracy theory.

    "Do you suppose I an entirely comfortable having to respond to what appear to be emotional humunculi?"

    (Mate, please type more slowly. You give the impression of someone who doesn't know how to spell words like "homunculi", which I'm sure isn't the case, and it's slightly getting in the way of my enjoyment of our chat. Very precious of me, I know, but I can't help it.)

    Unless you were born on the planet Vulcan, or are some kind of advanced chatbot, we are all subject to emotion. You know, even us rough, tough types who've knocked around the traps a bit make decisions based on emotion, not reason, sometimes.

    And don't sweat it - I'm sure people will come to appreciate your contribution to this site, given sufficient time ("uh oh, good ol' billp's off on another one, this should be fun" etc). You may say you don't care, but you're spending a goodly amount of time going on about this place and its practices, so I presume you want to be here? Even if just to highlight others' inconsistency and fallibility?

    ReplyDelete
  68. @jay:

    As I said to the man himself, mate, I'm that way out meself today. Anyway, I can see both sides of it, and so can he (he feels discomfort engaging with us emotional homunculi in the same way that some round here feel uncomfortable engaging with him).

    Up to the individual poster, I reckon. He'll have you for the "fireside pow wow", though.

    ReplyDelete
  69. "Who's conspiring where? I ask in all sincerity, I like a good conspiracy theory."

    The phonebooth members are conspiring in the phonebooth.

    "Unless you were born on the planet Vulcan, or are some kind of advanced chatbot, we are all subject to emotion. You know, even us rough, tough types who've knocked around the traps a bit make decisions based on emotion, not reason, sometimes."

    So, what's your point? I appreciate that people are emotional creatures. I am. Some people though, appeared to be ruled by emotion.

    "You may say you don't care, but you're spending a goodly amount of time going on about this place and its practices, so I presume you want to be here? Even if just to highlight others' inconsistency and fallibility?"

    I'm here, at the moment, for one reason. To defend my right to post whatever opinion I want to post.

    ReplyDelete
  70. @billp:

    "Some people though, appeared to be ruled by emotion."

    You pointing that stick at anyone round here? Again, just out of interest, and don't feel you need to answer.

    "The phonebooth members are conspiring in the phonebooth."

    Oh I see. Hope you raised that with them while you were in there. I mean, you were in there while this was going on, correct?

    "To defend my right to post whatever opinion I want to post."

    Who's attacking your right to post whatever opinion you want to post?

    Anyway, you won't care one way or t'other, and nor should you, but fine by me if you post the most inflammatory, challenging, mind-blowing stuff you can think of. I'm pretty sure I'll have heard or read something worse (or better)in my 42 years.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Well said, bill. All you need to do now is find an opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  72. @ Jay "Far from parallax being marginalised, quite a few were actually in agreement and supported him "

    yes, Jay and thanks (I only posted my comment, I didn't want to reveal who said what) and I appreciated your voice in support - but in the end it didn't help. I was turfed out and access denied. That's why I was asking how many hands were on the eject button.

    Look I'm not fussed - I know who said 'why is parallax in the phone booth' and I know who said 'why don't you and billp set up your own blog and fuck off'.* I was just drawing attention to the fact that I was banned and I wasn't sure how many votes were counted.

    Anyway I don't want to go back and rub shoulders with aggressive footballers, plus come Friday I'm on the road for six weeks - so reading and posting on blogs is not an option.

    But I hope that the instigators of *banned from the phonebooth* feel their collars being touched by the fingers of hypocrisy.

    * not exact quotes obviously, I have no access

    ReplyDelete
  73. It not that he says anything outrageous or even offensive Swifty (though he does try), its really the simple case that this place has been pretty good natured, even amongst posters who disagree a lot on CIF, ie me and PeterGuillam - there has been no raised voices, no capitals, no line by line aggro and petulance - and then along came billp and suddenly this place felt like CIF - confrontational and point scoring.

    I've happily told him i think he's a total twat, as have hank and scherfig, and bru. Others are more polite and so havent. Others dont mind him, so havent. He has interpreted this situation as a sneaky little cabal determined to limit his right to free speech.

    Not as fascinating as his martyr narrative but there you go...

    ReplyDelete
  74. Just posted this in the phonebooth:

    "I am quite comfortable with telling people to fuck off from here if it is for 'the greater good'"

    Isn't that CIF's line?

    I'm outta here, can't be arsed if it's going to be CIFmk2.

    Have fun folks, I've got work to do anyway, might see you over at CiF where I can say what I want and not worry if no-one wants to be my friend.

    ReplyDelete
  75. @Jay:

    I understand perfectly mate, I was trying to find out from the man himself what makes him act the way he does around here. Indeed, on other days, I feel the selfsame way about Mr billp as do you, scherfig, bru et al. His very handle suggests that he has some kind of image of himself as an iconoclast, an outsider, the kind of person who challenges society's norms etc (billplasters "not allowed", after all) but I do wish he'd aim his sights a wee bit higher than tilting at this tiny corner of cyberspace.

    Anyway, good weekend old man? Took the family racing at Lingfield for the Derby Trials, £58 up on the day. Paid for a curry and a few drinks among friends afterwards.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Parallax - the reality is much less interesting, no vote, no group ejection or anything like that, and nothing personal either, i should say.

    ReplyDelete
  77. What Derby trials? Ah, horses... Wherebouts is this Lingfield? I didnt know there were little Swifties running around the country, how alarming. £58 eh, not bad, not bad, thats more than i have ever won in my entire life, though i must confess i received a cheque for £3800 today - compensation for a car crash! Happy days... but £58 is still good, and your face didnt get smashed in to get it (I presume, unless MrsSwifty is particularly brutish).

    Weekend - watched Star Trek film, ate shit, ordered a replacement for my gorgeous tv that was destroyed by the colonial girl, got a free PS3 by mistake, wrote an article for a friends site, then got this cheque through this morning, not bad actually...

    As for billp - this sort of behaviour of his is fine on CIF - people go to cif for a row, its a big public arena and its one of Britains big broadsheets. Rowing and being a twats fine - i indulge regularly. But i just dont understand why anyone would want to come to a low key little place like this and start throwing their weight around. Everyone else has managed to get along, even with people they dont share many views with politically.

    ReplyDelete
  78. @ Jay "Parallax - the reality is much less interesting, no vote, no group ejection or anything like that, and nothing personal either, i should say."

    Oh right, no vote - arf.

    Good on ya Biskieboo, yep I agree. See around Cif sometime.

    Which leads me to say to the *cough* Untrusted - see you guys, six weeks, maybe later.

    ReplyDelete
  79. See ya later parallax, safe travels.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Lingfield is in Surrey, doncha know. Very lovely part of the world, too. And yes, there are Mini-Mes running around, thankfully not so bruised by life that they actually think like me yet. Give 'em time, though...

    My neighbour got 20 grand compo through recently for a car crash. He's been pissed ever since, I think.

    That Star Trek film gets good reviews. Not usually a Star Trek fan, oddly, given steep sci-fi leanings on my part, but will watch it when it comes out on Sky.

    As for billp... well, I think all's been said that needs be said, really. I'm sure he'll be back with more when he's good and ready, he just can't seem to stay away...

    ReplyDelete
  81. Well what a sad state of affairs if parallax really has been booted out of the phone booth. It's sad on several levels:

    Firstly, because this is of course the Cain and Abel moment.

    Secondly, because Billp has achieved what I think he always sets out to do, namely kill a thread (in this case he's trying an entire website) and divide people over the largely uninteresting issue of Billp. His aim to be at the centre of attention and thereby ruin everything else, and hey presto scherfig and parallax have an altercation over a prat, and parallax (so it seems) has unjustly been denied access to the phone booth.**

    I wonder if it's ever occurred to this oh-so-witty contrarian (billp, just to spell it out) that his whole 'I'm against any form of self-censorship and external censorship' approach is of course one giant external censor imposed on others. I think it probably has, because it seems to be his only rationale, his raison d'etre.

    Never noticed him much on CiF, because I usually ignored his endlessly repetitive, empty nonsense, but here's he's far more in everyone's face.

    That said, I'm disappointed with parallax's treatment. I disagree with him on the issue of Billp (if we can term that an issue at all), but other than that, parallax is mostly interesting and courteous. Very bad move guys.

    **On the issue of the phone booth: What's the problem with private access? None. There are public and private spaces. This one's public, the other is private.

    ReplyDelete
  82. I know Surrey reasonably well as my grandparents live by Epsom race course but never heard of thid Lingfield place. Jesus, mini-Swiftys, how old?

    20 grand sounds like good fun to me, though i presume he got quite fucked up to get that sort of money?

    Im not much of a Trekkie myself but the film is quite enjoyable actually, worth a watch...

    ReplyDelete
  83. @olching: Well, if that doesn't smoke billp out of his hiding place, I don't know what will. Or maybe he's choosing not to engage?

    @jay: Lingfield is about 3 miles north of East Grinstead (billp, it may actually be a bit more or less than 3 miles and equally may be slightly to nor'east of Grinny, apologies if I've committed a no-no there). Usually race on the all-weather but dust the old turf down for the Derby Trials. Lovely little course, great visibility all the way round the mile and something furlongs.

    Re. Mini-Me, only one, a feisty little 5 year old daughter. Bless.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Anyway, MPs expenses. I was really hoping this would be some kind of watershed moment (God knows I've been banging on about it for long enough), when public revulsion at the oinking and snuffling led to a wave of parliamentarians "doing the decent thing", "lost the confidence and support of my constituency" etc etc.

    I now feel rather let down, in an anti-climax sort of way. Maybe it's just that the grasping has been going on on such a huge scale that, like the robot in Lost In Space, I cannot compute. Or that, obviously, no one's going to stand down despite hairshirt acknowledgements all round that the system is rotten.

    I feel rather like I do after Bonfire Night - is that it?

    ReplyDelete
  85. I'llask the old folks about this place, they've clearly been depriving me.

    A 5 yr old MsSwifty - is she a cricket fan? I trust you are going to teach her the fine arts of the gentleman's game...

    ReplyDelete
  86. "I was really hoping this would be some kind of watershed moment (God knows I've been banging on about it for long enough), when public revulsion at the oinking and snuffling led to a wave of parliamentarians "doing the decent thing", "lost the confidence and support of my constituency" etc etc."

    not with Newlabour - its been a defining mark of theirs, no one ever resigns for anything, no one ever says sorry, the party never makes mistakes...

    I've given up weighting for the scum to do the right thing, i just have a tiny, tiny hope that the public will do and not let up until one of them is in the docks. Blears espeically, the police should get involved asap - flagrant fraud.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Look, back in February when I started this place, I thought I'd be lucky if anyone showed up. That people did and that the place seemed to develop into a nice, well-mannered and fun place to be was just totally unexpected. For nearly three months this place was going along smoothly. It has only taken the presence of one person to derail that. In these last few days I have been in tears over this and I have lost sleep over it. Currently, I'm not feeling welcome here on a blog that I started.

    Parallax, you didn't bother to respond to the invitation to the Phonebooth until a few days ago, when you popped in to tell us that we should keep engaging with someone most of us were choosing not to engage with because it amuses you to read it. Last night I made the decision to drop you from the reader list because your presence there was causing too much tension there. I made the decision on my own -- no behind the scenes consultation with anyone, so I'm the only person you should be angry with over that. It just felt to me like your only agenda there was to stir up shit. If I misinterpreted, I'm sorry. I am not sorry for wanting to at least keep that place free from bickering.

    To clarify: I didn't start this blog as a place for people who'd been banned from Cif. At the time that I started this place, I was new enough to Cif that I was as yet unaware of bannings and byzantine modding decisions there. If you'll go back to the 15 Feb post which started this place up, you'll see that my motivation was primarily frustration with threads closing while active conversations were still taking place. As soon as I am done writing this comment, I'm going to remove the GB & B list from the right-hand column. I think it is giving an inaccurate notion of what this blog is about. Unfortunately, so does the new name, but I'm not going to change it.

    No one is being banned here and no one has ever been censored here. But I'm not going to apologise to anyone for wanting to keep the Phonebooth at least somewhat harmonious. If that seems cliquish or elitist, I am the only person any of you should blame. I am the sole administrator of that blog.

    ReplyDelete
  88. @jay:

    The daughter and heir does like cricket in the back garden, she has stumps, bat, ball etc and is developing into a rather handy 20/20 player, I reckon. Not much finesse, but a good eye for the ball and can thump it over next door's fence no worries. Obviously I'm not bowling off the full run up yet (I'm not Competitive Dad off the Fast Show) but she's not fazed by tricky underarm spin, those tend to go the same way as most orthodox deliveries. She just needs to remember to hold the bat the right way round occasionally, and she'll be jostling for top honours soon enough.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Afternoon everyone

    I am amazed to see the Little Afghanistan thread is still running. I thought it would have disappeared into obscurity during the night. I shall mosey on down there and kick some Fash arse again.

    My son made me laugh on Friday - I got home and he said "The BNP put a leaflet through our door" - so I asked if I could see it and he said "No, me and Nathan took it into the garden and burnt it". LOL. So I have no idea what my local Fash are going on about now! :D

    ReplyDelete
  90. doesnotexist11 May, 2009 15:16

    Glad this thread has calmed down, it was getting a bit People's Front of Judea-ish a while back.

    On the subject of "What has Cif ever done for us?" there's another pathetic Mary Midgely thread with all comments pre-modded - heavily so, it would seem. Presumably this mollycoddling is at MM's own insistence - the fatal flaw for her is that, despite having a dodgy ref who send half the opposing team off, she keeps scoring own goals.

    ReplyDelete
  91. doesnotexist

    I tend to keep away from her threads for that very reason. Deciding in advance what we can and can't post - might as well go to the Times website, frankly. No dice.

    ReplyDelete
  92. @BB:

    I thought it was a bit of an oddity, that one. Interesting enough in its own way for those (surely a small constituency at the best of times) wanting to know about how Afghan ex-pats behave, but I wasn't sure why it was included on CiF unless to provoke outrage in the less enlightened?

    ReplyDelete
  93. Montana - don't be upset, you shouldn't have to shoulder all this shit. (Check your email - I wrote 13 hrs ago and I'll write again now)

    ReplyDelete
  94. Montana, please, please don't let the actions of a few (one?) cause you distress. I am fairly certain that a huge majority of us are very appreciative of your efforts and grateful for the time and work you've invested.

    If there are those who want to give vent to criticism, I suggest that they start their own blogs and lead by example.

    ReplyDelete
  95. What doohnibor said. You do a brilliant job of this place Montana, the person causing shit is certainly not you.



    @Swfity - this disturbed me:

    "Obviously I'm not bowling off the full run up yet (I'm not Competitive Dad off the Fast Show) but she's not fazed by tricky underarm spin,"

    So not a FULL run up, but a run up nonetheless, good man. Hope you havent gone easy on her with the sledging either...

    ReplyDelete
  96. What Doohnibor said.

    And, after reading kiz's and especially Biskieboos's comments on an earlier thread, I am ashamed of myself and apologise for the meds comment.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Montana...

    what doohnibor and jay said........

    ReplyDelete
  98. @jay:

    I'm normally the sledgee, sadly, not the sledger. But OUT is OUT, and if daddy says you're clean bowled, then you're clean bowled and it's daddy's turn with the bat. Tears or no tears, and while we're on the subject, your mother is NOT the third umpire and appealing to her in the kitchen won't get the decision overturned.

    And obviously, @montana, what everyone else has said. Thanks for providing this site for me to enjoy posting on.

    ReplyDelete
  99. SwiftyBoy

    "I'm normally the sledgee, sadly, not the sledger. But OUT is OUT, and if daddy says you're clean bowled, then you're clean bowled and it's daddy's turn with the bat. Tears or no tears, and while we're on the subject, your mother is NOT the third umpire and appealing to her in the kitchen won't get the decision overturned."

    LOL :D

    ReplyDelete
  100. @Swifty - what BB said. The thought of you being sledged by a 5 year old MissSwifty is possibly the highlight of the day.

    Right, i gotta run folks, hopefully we can all get this mess sorted out this week and back to normal.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Meanwhile, over on CiF we now have some tw*t MP justifying the expenses scam!

    @Montana
    I agree with everyone else

    ReplyDelete
  102. @anonymous1:

    It's at times like this I wish I hadn't hung up my CiF'ing boots. Anyway, I daren't even read brother Channen's piece for fear of blowing a gasket without anywhere to vent spleen, bile etc.

    ReplyDelete
  103. tuppence worth (sorry lost the receipt)

    montana,,i already read your post for today (about tears)
    late last week and it was on my mind when i posted about seeing many blogs start but few survive,,i have seen this exact process grind along many times,,all the blog hosts end up in grief,,

    Biskie,,i still have a crush on you but i dont trust motorbikes
    Bru,, your looking spectacular (as usual)
    Para,,have a good trip mate
    olching & hankscorpio,, between the two of you you account for about 70% of all the "recommend this post" clicks i leave on cif,,


    Billp,,one small part of one post sums it up for me,,
    paraphrased
    " poster x said "calm down" and in christmas dinner speak that means shut up"

    i cant (choose not to ) respond to those kind of ears,,




    AND NOWWWWWWWW,,,, LADIEEEEEEEES AND OTHERS,, THE MOST AGGREGIOUS DELETION IN THE ANNALS OF CIF
    REPRINTED FOR YOUR DELECTATION AND EDIFICATION IN ITS ENTIRETY,,COMPLETE AND UNABRIDGED

    "even if we all speak with the same voice, we hear with different ears"

    deleted by george soros' lawyer

    ReplyDelete
  104. swiftyboy
    zounds puts it rather well (and within the mod policy)!

    zounds

    11 May 09, 3:58pm (15 minutes ago)

    What do we want from MPs?

    Their b****cks on a plate!

    When do we want them?

    NOW!

    ReplyDelete
  105. By the way parallax, have a good trip, mate.

    Anonymous, thanks for the compliment :0)

    ReplyDelete
  106. Thank you all for the support. I think we're getting things sorted out, I've apologised to Parallax and hope he'll be back in the booth soon. I misinterpreted him, that is clear. He's been quite gracious in the face of things.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Well done, great job & take it easy Montana.

    Olching, haven't seen you around here for a while, hope you are well.

    Montana, did you say you have removed the name of the banned posters on the right of the main screen? Why? Has the group objective changed now?

    Hank & others thanks v. much for your ongoing support to reinstate banned cifers; good on you.

    Good luck & Wishing you all well...

    ReplyDelete
  108. parallax is my mate and he is OK

    i will be waiting here when you guys are done in the phonebooth,,take your time,,there is plenty to listen to out here in public,,


    still trying to get a name to work for me,,stead of anon

    ReplyDelete
  109. so there is a ghost in the machine but i finally seemed to have figured out how to post with a name,,

    ReplyDelete
  110. i really liked having the list of noteworthy cif monickers on the home page,,i would like to see that idea revisited and brought back in some community coordinated fashion,,

    ReplyDelete
  111. 3p4

    "so there is a ghost in the machine"

    Well, we are spirits in a material world, after all... ;)

    ReplyDelete
  112. @swiftyboy

    i only drink a half and i wobble,,three pints i am under the table,,i have to thin my wine down with apple juice at dinner time,,( i am skinny,,
    if i were a dog i would be a whippet)


    sigh

    ReplyDelete
  113. Pishi91 - no, the objective hasn't changed. The thing is, the 'objective' was never specifically to reinstate banned posters. This blog was started back in February & at that point, I just wanted a place to continue some threads that were being closed down while they were still interesting for me. The banning issue has been fairly recent. I took the list down because, as I said upthread, its presence seemed to be giving people the impression that that was the raison d'etre of the blog. I still want all banned posters to be allowed back on Cif, but I don't want that issue to define this place.

    3p4 - Yes, it is clear to me now that Parallax is a good guy.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Montana, got you, cool.

    all the best

    ReplyDelete
  115. hi BeautB,,do you know drag racing terminology ?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    i dont think we have ever directly adressed one the other before,,but as you may have gathered i was around cif for quite a while as Dropinbucket
    which is when i made most of the connections obvious in my posts,,since i have returned to the internet after almost a year away i dont really post much on cif but i still read everything there,,you are one of the new names that has really caught my attention since returning,,as you may have wondered when (i.e.)i seconded Hermines call for your ATL potential.

    i was on cif before Cath and Ally and Frank et al
    went ATL and so i have seen the influence that the right person at the right time can have on the overall composition of the GU ,,these three posters having grown up BLT would respond frequently and vigourously in the debate which was a big big change,,up till then pretty much only Seth Freedman responded to the comments BLT
    and he was not very good at it (severe Bp's) which people tended to hear as a right TB ,,

    if you go ATL you get the BIG BOLD BLUE LOUD VOICE OF RESPECT BADGE which is a very recent development and one that i feel imrrho has give great impetus to the "community" feeling that has been so oft expressed in the recent moderation thread,,it is possible to actually make a difference

    i have seen a post from you wondering about "subject matter" ,, i would suggest "competence" ,,very specific and yet totally indefinable,,except by allusion to your posting archive :)

    and thats a really long post for me,,pheww,,im pooped

    ReplyDelete
  116. Dear Montana, thank you for explaining the origins of your blog- all is now clear to me. I am so sorry you have had grief for your troubles.

    I have gritted my teeth and written a grovelling letter of apology to Cif asking to be allowed back so we shall see what happens...
    Best wishes,
    Dan

    ReplyDelete
  117. "Those things, to me - a woman born in 1982 - just are not shocking: we seem to have made more progress, identity-politics-wise, in the last 40 years than Star Trek predicted we would in the next few hundred years. Nope, what I notice, looking at the main crew of the Enterprise in the original TV series, is that most of them are white dudes, there are only two people of colour, there is only one woman - who has to do her job, unlike everyone else, while navigating the problematic confines of a miniskirt - and that all of them, unlike George Takei, are straight."

    Isnt this faeces usually left to Bidisha?!? This stuff is too fresh for even the flies to be flocking round. Every concievable facet of daily life is poured over by these slithering ism-hunters...

    What did she expect, Captain Jenny Kirk? Or Kirk being an effete queen who has a secret homosexual passion for Spock? Or perhaps a wheelchair bound Kirk, or a combination of all three, a wheelchair bound Jenny Kirk who has a crush on Ohura, thereby managing to squeeze in an inter-racial love interest to boot...

    Pitiful shite.

    ReplyDelete
  118. montana

    . In these last few days I have been in tears over this and I have lost sleep over it

    if you ever post ""boo hoo hoo" a thousand posts will spring up to say "hugs xxx "



    hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx hugs xxx

    sample :)

    ReplyDelete
  119. 3p4

    Thanks! I still haven't heard from them so I don't know whether I should just write something and put it forward, or wait nicely.

    Jay - haven't looked at the Star Trek thread yet. Sounds interesting...

    ReplyDelete
  120. Whoops...kinda thought that phonebooth might prove an issue.

    Btw, has anyone actually been in touch with cif and been reinstated?

    I'm thinking of going back as monkeymagic. I know they read this but WTF. I'm just vain enough to suppose the style would be obvious anyway.

    Can't stay away, all my dreams are coming true: status of the political class at an all time nadir; identity and single issue politics heading for the dustbin; the free market exposed as a get rich, stay rich scam for the corporate shite and a one way ticket to old age misery and penury for the rest of us. It's time people got angry, got politicised and stayed politicised.

    And so what's cif doing about it? hmmm...basically sorta sticking with NL while giving the BNP continual legups and spewing lifestyle and religious fluff.

    ReplyDelete
  121. A kind friend has just provided me with this definition of politics:

    It’s from the Latin apparently – poli meaning ‘many’ and tics being ‘wee bloodsucking creatures’.

    Jay - the farcical thing about that extract you've quoted (haven't read the piece either - bloody work getting in way of Ciffing) is that Star Trek was considered quite revolutionary in that it portrayed women and minorities working in respected jobs! One of the first programmes to do so, I believe.

    ReplyDelete
  122. monkeymagic

    Reminds me of Animal Magic with Johnny Morris.

    All good!

    Yes, what IS it with all the fucken BNP threads?!! I am so tired of having to fight these gits, really I am. Why are CiF giving the white supremacists a platform?

    I just complained about it on WDYWTTA. I have no trouble with the people who express their legitimate concerns about immigration, but I can't be doing with racist twats.

    ReplyDelete
  123. Hmmph. A comment that I made on the Barbara Ellen bit on the M&S bra surcharge debacle stood for more than 24 hours and is now gone. Last time I'd checked in over there, it was the most recommended comment on the thread. Nothing abusive. Unless saying that her tone throughout the piece was so snide that she had me feeling sorry for Liz Hurley & David Cameron can be classified as abuse. I didn't even call her B-cup Babs, like I wanted to.

    ReplyDelete
  124. "Star Trek was considered quite revolutionary in that it portrayed women and minorities working in respected jobs! One of the first programmes to do so, I believe."

    Its all before my time of course but i understand thats correct, for its time it was pretty right on. So sticking to the oringal 'identities' just isnt good enough any more because new right on guidelines have emerged, now its essential to have gays, disabled and Muslim (preferably Shia). They really do live in another world and it is one that is going to get turned on its head when this recession reaches its zenith.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Montana - well of course you were deleted, you were insulting Ms. Ellen's stock in trade.

    Isn't one of the new guidelines "try to be pleasant"? Do you think she regularly contravenes this rule? Discuss.

    ReplyDelete
  126. christ, new polly article calling for brown to go!! This is big news in the newlab/graun world, Polly you big beast you.

    ReplyDelete
  127. 3p4 - THANK YOU! I'm done with the self-pity now, I promise.

    Thauma - ST was certainly a ground-breaker for American TV, at least. The very first inter-racial kiss on Am TV was one between Uhura & Kirk. Roddenberry was quite a progressive and those things were deliberate. *Sigh* I'm gonna have to read that thing now, aren't I?

    ReplyDelete
  128. "The morning after the 4 June ­election a majority deputation from the ­cabinet, bearing a long list of MPs' names, should knock on the door of No 10 to tell him his number's up. Plot it now, do it fast."

    Ouch.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Fuck

    monkeymagic's taken...behold...monkeyshark.

    Back...with teeth.

    We're gonna need a bigger boat.

    ReplyDelete
  130. I do, on balance, think it's a good thing to portray diversity in the meeja, especially as that seems to be where most of the yoof (well, just most people actually) are getting their perceptions of the world from these days.

    But forcing it in where it doesn't fit is ridiculous. Especially in historical contexts.

    ReplyDelete
  131. Bloody hell, Kirk and Uhuru had a snog? I never knew that - must have missed that episode!

    Hmm, might have to read the Polly filla.

    ReplyDelete
  132. @monkeyfish - a word of warning, MrPinchy's been banned even though none of his posts from last night were deleted...

    More over at the phonebooth when I regain my composure.

    ReplyDelete
  133. "We're gonna need a bigger boat."

    One of my fave lines from one of my fave films.

    Also love the bit where Quint crushes his beer can (back in the days when beer cans were made of sterner stuff than now, of course), and Hooper pouts and crushes his plastic cup! :)

    ReplyDelete
  134. BB - lovely first post on the Polly thread!

    ReplyDelete
  135. Hah - now have just read Koolio's post. Don't personally know anything about Alan Johnson - this could be interesting!

    ReplyDelete
  136. thanks thaum. I swear to god the title has changed, though. It was all about Alan Johnson before, and so was the sub. Now it is just Gordon Must Go - I wonder what brought that on?

    ReplyDelete
  137. Gene Roddenberry and Nichelle Nichols (Uhura) had an affair prior to Star Trek, so no big surprise about the Kirk snog.

    ReplyDelete
  138. You're right BB, the title did change very quickly after the Polly filla (love that btw, thaum!) thread went up.

    ReplyDelete
  139. BB, you're right. I haven't looked at it yet, but when I first saw it on the page it was titled "Alan Johnson's the man for Labour".

    Dammit, Hank. A girl could've fallen for a guy like Pinchy.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Mr Pinchy got banned, damn CIF, damn damn damn. Bastards.

    Please do not discuss new monikers here, they are bloody watching.

    I am going in hiding again, sorry!

    p.s. thank goodness I didnt reveal my true moniker here!!!

    Happy cifing everyone... time to ditch the old monikers and avoid pathetic pre-mods.

    ReplyDelete
  141. Interesting, Anon. Not sure I'd want to put an ex-lover on screen snogging someone else, myself, but to each his own!

    BB - am about to make an uninformed comment. My instinct is that, yes, the title has changed, but I wasn't really paying attention.

    ReplyDelete
  142. They have put Polly's filla article on the front page, so maybe that's why the title was changed.

    frankverismo

    11 May 09, 7:20pm (12 minutes ago)

    "Am I imagining things, or did the title just change from proposing Alan Johnson as a successor to Gordon Must Go?"

    No, BB - you are correct. The original title was "Alan Johnson is the Man For Labour".

    Not exactly poetry, was it?

    ReplyDelete
  143. OMG!!

    CiF have really pwnd themselves this time. Zounds has a comment recommended in the You Said It section on the right - and when you click on it, it has been moderated!! This has got to be added to Georgina's thread! :D:D:D:D

    ReplyDelete
  144. Hi pishi91 - re your post at 8am-ish - are you happy to discuss on here or do you want me to email you?

    ReplyDelete
  145. Shit - georgina's thread is closed, so I have posted on WDTWTTA instead.

    ReplyDelete
  146. @BB - strangely enough, Georgina's thread seems to have been reopened. Yeractual posted something a couple of hours ago.

    ReplyDelete
  147. pls email me when you can. thanks

    ReplyDelete
  148. Ha. Mschin - as my son would say, "Jinx! You owe me a soda!"

    ReplyDelete
  149. "CiF have really pwnd themselves this time. Zounds has a comment recommended in the You Said It section on the right - and when you click on it, it has been moderated!! This has got to be added to Georgina's thread!"

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  150. Just got back from Plymouth. What have I missed ??

    ReplyDelete
  151. "Glad this thread has calmed down, it was getting a bit People's Front of Judea-ish a while back."

    That's what I thought. The revolution barely a month old and already descending into factional in-fighting.

    Anyone would think that you lefties actually enjoy living up to the stereotype ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  152. there is an archive of bizarre deletions on Wordnerd7 site and it already has an example of
    main page recommendation being deleted,,

    once upon a time i cared and i use to collect the weird stuff,,parallax says i am an anorak

    November 29, 2008 at 7:00 am
    lordsummerisle
    Nov 28 08, 6:23pm (about 11 hours ago)
    Priceless! thebookseller’s comment that is an Editor’s Pick proudly listed on the CIF front page has been removed by a moderator.
    It’s true!
    Time to hit the bottle. Real life is getting too weird for me. G’dnight all!

    ReplyDelete
  153. Welly, welly, welly, well. There's been some very large talk behind my sleeping back, and no error. What's all this about a new way?

    Perhaps this is all a case of different people seeing things differently. I really can't see where I've been so "evil" as to cause anyone tears and lost sleep. I don't see where I've actually said anything that bad. I don't expect that anything I've written here would even have been deleted by the most strict Cif mod.

    The way I see it, I made some good faith, good sense suggestions re site structure/policy. Some people, in lieu of expressing disagreement with those suggestions (e.g., "I disagree. I think the site is fine how it is."), decided to tell me that I had basically no right to even make them. I defended my right to make them, and they then attacked me as a troublemaker and font of discord. Apparently, the idea of this blog is that all posters are supposed to agree with everything everyone else writes, or keep their disagreement to themselves.

    Upon querying my troublemaker status, JayReilly, Hank and others informed me that although I hadn't actually said anything untoward or offensive, my TONE was that of a troublemaker. That appears to me as a very weak argument indeed, and I have no reason not to continue suspecting censorship and control as their motive.

    So, would all those who have a problem with my posts here, please take the trouble to QUOTE the MOST egregious example of my "troublemaking" (perhaps adding in some context, not necessarily quoted)?

    What exactly have I done that has reduced you to tears and loss of sleep, Montana Wildhack? And what exactly has offended everyone else?

    I'm looking forward to being shocked and surprised as you reprint the myriad foul-mouthed, personal attack-filled examples of my playing the man, wholly for reasons of furthering my own celebrity and sowing diaharmony.

    **********

    Meanwhile, we're on an open forum (as far as I can gather). That is, participation is open to all, even when sniping under "anonymous", always or on occasion, and there is no editing, deletion, moderation or any other kind of censorship of opinion, and no premodding, suspending, banning, or any other kind of control over posters, EXCEPT attempted control by means of whining and sending to Coventry, specifically for the grand crime of "being unharmonious on an online forum".

    How is that supposed to work? Exactly which grade of Stepford High School are you people currently in?

    **********

    Montana Wildhack has just explained her decision to remove the list of former Cif posters. Perhaps people would be interested to read, or be reminded of, what she wrote when she decided to put it up.

    The Untrusted, 15 April, 2009

    "Too many good Cif contributors are being banned. Comment is free, as long as it doesn't offend the sensibilities of the moderators. The truly frustrating thing is, there doesn't seem to be any effective means of protesting these decisions. Sometimes we don't even know if someone's been banned or if they've just drifted away. One thing we can do is to keep a record of the Cif posters who've been silenced by the arbitrary whims of the powers that be. You'll notice just to the right a new feature - a "Roll of Honour" list of Ciffers who've been banned."

    "Comment is free, as long as it doesn't offend the sensibilities of the moderators."

    "One thing we can do is to keep a record of the Cif posters who've been silenced by the arbitrary whims of the powers that be."

    Hmmm. I'm guessing MW and the powers that be here are coming around to Cif's way of thinking.

    Can anybody see the irony? Anybody at all?

    The truly frustrating thing is, there doesn't seem to be any effective means of protesting these decisions.

    ReplyDelete
  154. "Just got back from Plymouth. What have I missed ??"

    Put the kettle on and make yourself comfortable...

    ReplyDelete
  155. *yawn*

    time for bed

    night all

    ReplyDelete
  156. billp

    When you are on your own blog you can make your own decisions. This is Montana's blog. She has the right to make the decisions she chooses. She, and anyone else, also has the right to pay not the blindest bit of notice to you if they choose. It really is that simple. Pages and pages of rant about how hard done by you have been and 50p won't even buy you a cup of coffee.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Bitterweed -- you are forbidden to go to Plymouth ever again.

    ReplyDelete
  158. Meanwhile, this "phonebooth" does not house a clique, according to a clique member who wished to remain anonymous for fear of being expelled from said clique.

    Meanwhile there are no rules here, and, as I've been told on more than one occasion, by more than one power that be, none are needed. That a poster must meet the powers that be's idea of "pleasanthood" should not be seen as constituting a rule, per se. It's just a casual posting guideline that will be enforced by the casual ostracisation of offenders.

    Meanwhile, it is my suspicion that people like JayReilly and Hank don't want me here, due solely to their fear that any shite they come out with will be taken down as evidence of a lack of critical thinking and reason, and may be used against them in a court of public opinion. A wholly justified fear, as it happens.

    ReplyDelete
  159. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    ReplyDelete
  160. Watch that BillP, he's wearing you down, Colombo-style!

    "Just one more thing..."

    ReplyDelete
  161. I see zounds is still there in You Said It ..

    ReplyDelete
  162. BeautifulBurnout: "When you are on your own blog you can make your own decisions." This is Montana's blog."

    Montana Wildhack is on record here as stating "This is not MY blog". So, according to MW, it's not her blog. I have been given the impression that it is Jay and Hank's blog.

    "She has the right to make the decisions she chooses."

    In a hypocritical sense, yes (given her earlier dienial of ownership and statement that she didn't wish to make such unilateral decisions). I reserve the right to comment on those decisions. You agree that I have that right, don't you? If so, what's your beef?

    "She, and anyone else, also has the right to pay not the blindest bit of notice to you if they choose."

    I agree, and have stated my agreement with that on several occasions here. What I'm against is their trying to control my input AFTER having taken a blind bit of notice of me.

    "It really is that simple."

    I agree that what you write is simple. It's just that some of it is inaccurate and/or unreasonable.

    "Pages and pages of rant about how hard done by you have been and 50p won't even buy you a cup of coffee."

    I don't claim to have been hard done by. I claim that some hypocrites have attempted to, and still are attempting to, restrict my freedom of expression, by unfairly attempting to marginalise me as a troublemaker.

    ReplyDelete
  163. Tum tee tum ...

    ReplyDelete
  164. Sorry for turning up so late tonight. As I’m sure Hank and BeautifulBurnout will be thrilled to hear, I’ve just spoken to my mum on the phone (she sends her best wishes to you both, BTW).

    BB, last night you said something about giving five years of your life for five minutes with your Mum. At the risk of sounding flippant or even callous, I’d almost give five years of my life for the ability to restrict a phone conversation with my mum to only five minutes. Tonight’s lasted over an hour, though it was worth it, I grudgingly admit.

    Also BB: your son’s political views and arsonist tendencies are admirable; I’m sure he’s got you to thank for at least one of those. But you really need to sort out his English:

    “me and Nathan took it into the garden”?

    It’s “Nathan and I” FFS!

    Montana: I just wanted to add my voice to the chorus of support you’ve been getting. You’re doing a great job with this blog; I hope the obvious ups and downs don’t upset you too much.

    Regarding your deleted post: are you sure you didn’t report it yourself? I’ve heard some posters are so desperate for a bit of attention they’ve chosen this despicable tactic. I’m sure you wouldn’t stoop so low though; as I said elsewhere, I only expect the best from you.

    That thread of Georgina’s kind of faded away like a damp squib, didn’t it? Not altogether surprising, but still disappointing. Ah well, shit happens.

    ReplyDelete
  165. Andy

    Glad you called your mum. :)

    And LOL: “me and Nathan took it into the garden”?

    It’s “Nathan and I” FFS!

    ReplyDelete
  166. Thanks, Andy. Well, I'm now finding out that, in addition to being a self-hating man-worshipper, I'm also a hypocrite and a liar, so I may well be an attention-seeking self-reporter. I can tell you one thing, I'm learning patience.

    ReplyDelete
  167. Montana ma belle,

    Do yourself a favour. Light some scented candles in the bathroom and take a nice long soak while listening to your favourite music. I'm sure you have much better things to do than play some kind of surrogate mother/therapist to the One Who Shall be Nameless. You know what they used to do in ancient Egypt when a ruler fell foul of the priests? They chiselled the name off all the public and sacred buildings.

    Where's me chisel?

    Have a nice evening and keep up the good work.

    I'm off to make myself some tea and toast.

    Bru

    ReplyDelete
  168. Nah, Montana; you’re being too hard on yourself.

    You’re not any of those things, you’re just a little confused.

    I’m sure there’s at least one person here who could explain to you how you should look at it all ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  169. Bru - that sounds like a plan. Soaking in a tub, listening to Tezza and thinking about all the fun things I'd like to do to him... :-)

    ReplyDelete
  170. @Andy: Either that or I could call my mother. She's always happy to tell me what's wrong with me, too.

    ReplyDelete
  171. Are some of the repsonses directly and indirectly made to me here "pleasant" and apt to add to a sense of "communal harmony"? If not, why are they not being highlighted, and the commenter reprimanded.

    Is it one rule for "us" (i.e., you) and another for "them" (i.e., me) here?

    Surely, a genuine desire for such harmony should see my posts, and me, being entirely ignored, at best.

    And is it not just a tad hypocritical to rant here about what the Cif site owners SHOULD do as far as FoE and censorship, etc., in concerned, then attempt to lat down some spurious, casual "rules" here with a view to emulating those owners? Is Jay's "being a twat and a troublemaker is justified on Cif, but not here" comment reasonable?

    ReplyDelete
  172. Early bath for me too. Night night xx

    ReplyDelete
  173. andysays: "I’ve just spoken to my mum on the phone (she sends her best wishes to you both, BTW).}"

    See, I just can't get my head around that.

    ReplyDelete
  174. Bath time all round, I reckon.

    Now, where did I put that rubber duck?

    ReplyDelete
  175. Montana I think you needed a hug earlier

    (((((((((((((((((((((Montana)))))))))))))))))))

    ReplyDelete
  176. I suggest you change the name of this blog to The Johnny No Mates Club.

    Thre more reasonable readers here have to admit that it's pretty weird. And not a little sad. {sniff} Won't someone at least beat me up to prove they love me? A verbal black-eye? Anyone?

    ReplyDelete
  177. andysays, if you're male, are you a homosexual? I mean, if it's not a personal question.

    ReplyDelete
  178. Right, show of hands. Who's laughing at my comments in spite of themselves?

    ReplyDelete
  179. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. You just can’t beat a good long soak in a Radox bath after a hard day in the Forest (other bath time products are, of course, available).

    Time for some of Wyeth Pharmaceuticals magic elixir, then I’m off to bed.

    Goodnight all.

    ReplyDelete
  180. Is it that you CAN'T ban me? That you don't have the capability to ban commenters? If so, I'll absolutely accept and honour a notice of banning issued me by Montana Wildhack.

    That is, if Montana Wildhack tells me I'm banned, I promise never to post here again under any username, or under "anonymous", or AT ALL, EVER AGAIN. No excuses.

    All Montana Wildhack has to do is tell me I'm banned and state the posted rule violation that brought that banning about. In fact, in an effort to be "harmonious", I'll forego receiving notice of the posted rule violation.

    Just issue the public banning notice on this forum, and I'm gone.

    ReplyDelete
  181. Just passed thru - out of boredom. I think I can help clear up some confusion.
    Bill: During branding, bull calves are typically neutered - these days the most common method, because it is the least stressful, is to, by utilizing an emasculating pliars, place a rubber band around the scrotum.
    To clarify, it appears(to this interloper), that you haven't been banned.
    You've been 'banded'.
    Hope this has been helpful.

    9milerancher

    ReplyDelete
  182. hey 9mile great to see you here,,great cure for boredom,, plus its time zone friendly,,back to the hockey,,

    ReplyDelete
  183. Nineeeeeeeeeeeee, get back home, Now!!! missed you! xx

    ReplyDelete