EnviroLink Forum
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/

DELETED
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1807
Page 2 of 3

Author:  wijim [ Mon Jan 23, 2006 4:22 pm ]
Post subject: 

xveganx wrote:
wijim wrote:
because i dont believe hypersensitivity on your part constitutes resolution.


Oh so you decide to join in with other members and trash with your recipes digs? :roll:


yes

Author:  Donnie Mac Leod [ Mon Jan 23, 2006 4:33 pm ]
Post subject: 

xveganx wrote:
It seems that some people on this forum have got away with too much and think it a green light to take liberties.



Actually we are defending our liberty to live as we wish without some dictator telling us what is right to eat hunt or farm.

Author:  DELETED [ Mon Jan 23, 2006 4:33 pm ]
Post subject: 

DELETED

Author:  Bean [ Mon Jan 23, 2006 4:52 pm ]
Post subject: 

xveganx wrote:
It seems that some people on this forum have got away with too much and think it a green light to take liberties.


LOL!!

You're joking, right?

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jan 24, 2006 1:51 pm ]
Post subject: 

As this thread is in two sections, I am posting this in both to ensure coverage.

Ok, I have had a chance to get a little more information and while it does not change the outcome it does change how I would have affected the correction. Wijim did not know of the Jerky thread being removed and thus should have been given a more detailed response on the situation initially. This was an error on my part in assuming he knew and this is a public apology to go with the private one he has already been given.

I am reminded that not everyone knows everything and would like to remind everyone else of that fact. When you see someone make such an error you can nicely point out that it is a problem and if there is no response then things can be handled by a moderator. This seems to be the trend at times and I hope that it continues. So, if someone you agree with makes a mistake point it out to them so they can correct it. It will look better on both of you. If you see a mistake by someone with whom you disagree you can also nicely point it out to them. If they do not correct it they are the only ones looking bad. However, if you make them defensive you can come across as a bully to. We are mostly adults here and we should be able to be civil at least during the times where there is not a philosophical difference being discussed.

I know there is a perception of a dichotomy and to some extent I believe there is, but there is a bit of a difference in trying to inflame your opponents and trying to inflame your own side. That is the significant difference in the two situations as I see it.

You will now be returned to the regularly scheduled program already in progress ...

Author:  DELETED [ Tue Jan 24, 2006 2:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

DELETED

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jan 24, 2006 3:55 pm ]
Post subject: 

xveganx wrote:
I remember a certain UK poster was rebuked for doing just that by Josh and was told to use the feedback forum. I cant see any point in back peddling.


Not back peddling, but an attempt to continue getting these situations resolved without resorting to moderation by the board volunteers or Josh. I like to think we are progressing more into adult discussion, but I am a bit of an optimist ... :wink:

Author:  DELETED [ Tue Jan 24, 2006 4:08 pm ]
Post subject: 

DELETED

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jan 24, 2006 4:14 pm ]
Post subject: 

xveganx wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
xveganx wrote:
I remember a certain UK poster was rebuked for doing just that by Josh and was told to use the feedback forum. I cant see any point in back peddling.


Not back peddling, but an attempt to continue getting these situations resolved without resorting to moderation by the board volunteers or Josh. I like to think we are progressing more into adult discussion, but I am a bit of an optimist ... :wink:


Wijim looks at it as an apology I look at it in another way.


Wijim looked at my apology to him for not being clear in my discussion with him and assuming he had information that he did not have as being an apology. He also tried to explain his views, which can be accepted or declined depending on your personal belief. The pictures and discussion on preparation were removed and we are moving on, just as we have moved on in the past.

Author:  DELETED [ Tue Jan 24, 2006 4:24 pm ]
Post subject: 

DELETED

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jan 24, 2006 4:35 pm ]
Post subject: 

xveganx wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
xveganx wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
xveganx wrote:
I remember a certain UK poster was rebuked for doing just that by Josh and was told to use the feedback forum. I cant see any point in back peddling.


Not back peddling, but an attempt to continue getting these situations resolved without resorting to moderation by the board volunteers or Josh. I like to think we are progressing more into adult discussion, but I am a bit of an optimist ... :wink:


Wijim looks at it as an apology I look at it in another way.


Wijim looked at my apology to him for not being clear in my discussion with him and assuming he had information that he did not have as being an apology. He also tried to explain his views, which can be accepted or declined depending on your personal belief. The pictures and discussion on preparation were removed and we are moving on, just as we have moved on in the past.


He was also made aware of posting recipes but ignored it but again that was over looked. Yes we have moved on. Shame others felt the need to come back and back paddle.


I think you have made your point, I have made mine, and now I am going to do something more constructive than your misunderstandings of what I did or did not tell him ... :wink:

Author:  DELETED [ Tue Jan 24, 2006 4:38 pm ]
Post subject: 

DELETED

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:15 pm ]
Post subject: 

xveganx wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
xveganx wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
xveganx wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
xveganx wrote:
I remember a certain UK poster was rebuked for doing just that by Josh and was told to use the feedback forum. I cant see any point in back peddling.


Not back peddling, but an attempt to continue getting these situations resolved without resorting to moderation by the board volunteers or Josh. I like to think we are progressing more into adult discussion, but I am a bit of an optimist ... :wink:


Wijim looks at it as an apology I look at it in another way.


Wijim looked at my apology to him for not being clear in my discussion with him and assuming he had information that he did not have as being an apology. He also tried to explain his views, which can be accepted or declined depending on your personal belief. The pictures and discussion on preparation were removed and we are moving on, just as we have moved on in the past.


He was also made aware of posting recipes but ignored it but again that was over looked. Yes we have moved on. Shame others felt the need to come back and back paddle.


I think you have made your point, I have made mine, and now I am going to do something more constructive than your misunderstandings of what I did or did not tell him ... :wink:


Yes we are aware of your hidden agenda ;)


My hidden agenda? Just what would that hidden agenda be, pray tell.

Author:  Donnie Mac Leod [ Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:58 pm ]
Post subject: 

Considering what hidden agenda usually means I suppose a whiner would consider that remark by xveganx as a personal attack Wayne. Kinda make you look devious and sneaky.

Author:  Sandra John [ Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:34 am ]
Post subject: 

Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Considering what hidden agenda usually means I suppose a whiner would consider that remark by xveganx as a personal attack Wayne. Kinda make you look devious and sneaky.


Speaking of personal attacks, what do you call suggesting that someone is a, "whiner", and a, "dictator", Donnie? xveganx and RF seemed to be having a rational, amicable discussion about the conservation status of red and grey squirrels until you joined in; with a typically provocative remark focussed on killing, and derailed the debate. Then, not to be outdone, RF makes a derogatory remark to the effect there was no, "debate", then, ..... yes, we see the usual, "ganging of anti's", making offensive comments during which wiijim admits he's out to trash the thread.

xveganx.

Donnie MacLeod calls it defending his rights against, "dictators", I call it provoking people whose views you don't agree with it so that they'll, "chuck a wobbly", and look aggressive and irrational (and perhaps get banned). Have you considered NT-Spcssm's past advice of just treating this obvious strategy with the contempt it deserves?

Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/