The London Trip Review

[EveWasFramed]

i dont see why you'll are making such a big deal out of what LB said. 'Consider yourself warned'? would they really ban someone over a simple comment that was taken back?

He was permabanned from the forum, and was allowed back, based on his continued good behavior. He should choose his words more carefully. And while others aren't aware of this fact, he certainly is.

 

[EveWasFramed]

This is his recent post:

"Who has a partner who knows they go on ALL?

I know some of the people on ALonelyLife.com have partners. If I told my girlfriend I use a forum like this she would be confused and unable to handle it. Does anyone else's partner know they are on ALL? If not, why haven't you told them?"

I never said "lie",

"Your last comment doesn't even make sense, because if you tell her you're meeting people from "a forum" you're being misleading already, so why not just lie about the whole thing? "

Oh gee...looks to me like you DID say "lie." (see above)
And you may not consider yourself warned, but trust me, you are.
And the only thing I am arguing against is the way tend to put words in people's mouths and insult them, as evidenced in your most recents posts.

 

[darkwall]

OK, firstly, what I was banned for was this:

It was the confessions column and I said "what if [x] makes a confession like her dad ***** her?"

I got banned for being rhetorical. And while I'm not arguing that it was a bad thing to say, it was obviously one of those things that looks worse when you post it. I used an extreme example because it was meant to be like "what if someone confesses to this completely horrific thing?" X then responded, "How could you say such a thing?" as if I'd actually implied that happened and I got banned.

But really, I got banned for arguing with the mods, particularly you, Eve. And I was banned by you, of course. It's hard not to feel that I'm being bullied by you, when you follow me around saying personal things and bringing up the past. With regard to the "lie" thing, not that that's really what we're talking about, I never said that he lied, but instead ASKED HIM WHY NOT LIE.

 

[darkwall]

I'd like to say another thing. You've completely ruined this whole post for me. It was meant to be a "positive experience", but you've called me nasty, humiliated me by forcing me to bring up the past, and further upset me by "warning" me.

Since this is dirty washing time, would anyone like to know why they let me back in? Because the week in which I got banned, I told them I'd considered suicide. So it was hardly a normal frame of mind week. Eve, I just ask one thing of you - could ya just leave me alone, and leave it to the other mods to say if I get out of order? Because you can hardly argue that you're being impersonal about this.

 

[EveWasFramed]

OK, firstly, what I was banned for was this:

It was the confessions column and I said "what if [x] makes a confession like her dad ***** her?"


But really, I got banned for arguing with the mods, particularly you, Eve. And I was banned by you, of course. It's hard not to feel that I'm being bullied by you, when you follow me around saying personal things and bringing up the past. With regard to the "lie" thing, not that that's really what we're talking about, I never said that he lied, but instead ASKED HIM WHY NOT LIE.

OK first, if you will read the post again, you will see that I didnt say that you said he lied, only that you used the word "lie", which you said you didn't.

Second, the decision to ban you was made three mods, not one.

And I'm not "following you around" bullying you. I asked you nicely, the first time, to refrain from insulting people - thanked you in advance even. Other than this thread, I cant recall posting in reference to anything else you've said.

Quit while you are ahead.

 

[Steel]

Indeed, it was a joint decision, and it wasn't actually Eve who enacted the ban.

You are also completely wrong about the reason you were allowed back. The reason was you apologised.

I have noticed you slipping back into your old mannerisms... recent posts by you have been confrontational in the extreme. People are generally banned for behaviour which intimidates others, and so I believe a warning to you was well placed.

You may choose to disregard any warning given to you, but it should not be too difficult to realise the eventual conclusion of such an action.

 

[EveWasFramed]

I'd like to say another thing. You've completely ruined this whole post for me. It was meant to be a "positive experience", but you've called me nasty, humiliated me by forcing me to bring up the past, and further upset me by "warning" me.

Since this is dirty washing time, would anyone like to know why they let me back in? Because the week in which I got banned, I told them I'd considered suicide. So it was hardly a normal frame of mind week. Eve, I just ask one thing of you - could ya just leave me alone, and leave it to the other mods to say if I get out of order? Because you can hardly argue that you're being impersonal about this.

First, you were let back in because I agreed to let you back. Ask Steel if you doubt me. You apologized and that is the reason I felt compelled to let you come back. It had nothing to do with a threat of suicide. Nothing.
And actually, I was being impersonal - I felt that you were picking on another forum member.

As for your request, I think it's a good idea. I will let Steel or Minus give their opinion, if they are inclined, in THIS case.

EDIT: See above post by Steel.

 

[stella]

Honestly Little Buddha you didn't do anything wrong and you're far too good a person to be subjected to this ****. I wouldn't waste your time arguing with Eve, the woman is an *** and is on a mega power trip, if anyone should keep themselves in check its her, she's had so many complaints made to Bjarne about her behaviour on this forum that i'm suprised she is still here.

 

[EveWasFramed]

Honestly Little Buddha you didn't do anything wrong and you're far too good a person to be subjected to this ****. I wouldn't waste your time arguing with Eve, the woman is an *** and is on a mega power trip, if anyone should keep themselves in check its her, she's had so many complaints made to Bjarne about her behaviour on this forum that i'm suprised she is still here.

Actually, it was ONE complaint. Get your facts straight. And that person was actually BRIBED to do it.

 

[Minus]

Since this is dirty washing time, would anyone like to know why they let me back in? Because the week in which I got banned, I told them I'd considered suicide.

Since i was not aware of that it was hardly a deciding factor for me in allowing you back in. My decision was based on your claim of having had an attitude change.

 

[Steel]

Honestly Little Buddha you didn't do anything wrong and you're far too good a person to be subjected to this ****. I wouldn't waste your time arguing with Eve, the woman is an *** and is on a mega power trip, if anyone should keep themselves in check its her, she's had so many complaints made to Bjarne about her behaviour on this forum that i'm suprised she is still here.

Take a couple of days to cool off.

No, I insist

 

[darkwall]

OK, I think what you guys are picking up on is the BNP thread. It was probably the wrong idea for me to enter the debate, given how passionately I feel about the BNP, but I thought about it and if a guy who said he'd rather vote for the BNP than Labour can't take being called a political dinosaur ... and as for calling him ignorant of politics, then as BNP leader Nick Griffin has said racist and homophobic things ... isn't that his only excuse?

The suicide thing was mentioned only because it shows the mental state I was in when I said that, not because it says anything about the mods. I really resent what Eve said about me being nasty and "making people aware" I was permabanned, and no I don't consider her behaviour to be impersonal. I applaud her agreeing to sort of let other mods handle any outbursts I might make, as we do have a history of bickering and she wouldn't be human if this didn't affect her sensitivity etc.

I accept that my posts have been getting darker lately, and perhaps I was seeking out trouble by looking at the controversial column in the first place. I have been depressed recently, and this has resulted both in a return to ALL and as it grew stronger a sort of self-destructive aggression perhaps. I have explained to the mods that ALL has been a wonderful system of support for me, and I will try my best to curb anything hurtful in my comments.

As I also have said, I have asperger's, which means I find it difficult picking up on the "colour" of my language, as well as sometimes what others may mean (often I will fixate upon a single word). What appears to me as passionate debate may appear to others as deliberately cruel. Consequently as my mood grows darker it becomes harder to pick up on what may or may not be offensive. But one thing I will do is leave the Controversial thread alone.

 

[Zak]

That's sort of a negative comment to post, and I don't really know why you did. A.) You never said you WERE going, B.) It's not necessary for you to say you found the idea "unappealing" and C.) Slag off London, D.) Your last comment doesn't even make sense, because if you tell her you're meeting people from "a forum" you're being misleading already, so why not just lie about the whole thing?

Okay I had to quote this again because I see a series of misunderstanding here in this thread. It's the way LB chose his words that led to that misunderstanding. He himself took the other person's post as negative, which he later knew that he was wrong and he apologized. But the apology seems to be towards me. I would say that, it's the other person that you should apologize to for taking his posts in the wrong way LB.

Now the controversial part of LB's post. "because if you tell her you're meeting people from "a forum" you're being misleading already"

What he meant by this was that (or what I understood by reading the whole thread), LB meant is like this - the other person haven't told his partner that he is a member of "this" forum (from his other thread) in the first place and since that remains unknown to his partner, if he suddenly says that he is going to meet someone from a forum, that would be misleading like as in suddenly a forum came up which she didn't even know and suddenly there's a meet up. That's really enough for a suspicion.

@ Sanal: Yeah, sorry, it seems I misread.

@ Eve: withholding pertinent information is still misleading, e.g. "I was out with a friend last night [and slept with her]" - not telling her it's from a depression forum is deceiving her, so why talk about meeting someone from a forum at all?

Now here the first part shows his apology (though it seems to be towards me) but yeah he at least agreed that he was wrong. That's fair enough for everyone else to understand that he regrets it but for the 'other' person I guess LB owes another special apology.

I guess here what he said to eve was what started everything. What he meant (as I assume) was, "if you (in general) were out with a girl and slept with her (not saying it's gonna happen but as an example), and you told your partner about the meeting then as long as your partner (to whom you are saying this to) doesn't know that this girl you met is from a depression forum it would be deceiving your partner, to believe that you and the girl met somewhere else"

So I think LB just recommended "lying" as an option to save yourself from all suspicions.

I have explained to the mods that ALL has been a wonderful system of support for me, and I will try my best to curb anything hurtful in my comments.

As I also have said, I have asperger's, which means I find it difficult picking up on the "colour" of my language, as well as sometimes what others may mean (often I will fixate upon a single word). What appears to me as passionate debate may appear to others as deliberately cruel. Consequently as my mood grows darker it becomes harder to pick up on what may or may not be offensive. But one thing I will do is leave the Controversial thread alone.

Now he himself said this, so I hope that concludes the argument.

 

[EveWasFramed]

Well, if you will notice, we didn't post anything after his, Zak.

 

[Zak]

Well, if you will notice, we didn't post anything after his, Zak.

lol yeah but I just thought I would make stuff more clear.

 

[Nyktimos]

Good Grief! The things that happen while a person is at work!

If I'd been around to respond immediately to LB's post I would have apologised. This is a positive thread (supposed to be anyway), and my post made a negative comment which detracted from the achievement of the meetup.

LB has apologised to me and I would like to apologise to him. It was bad judgement on my part. I'm very sorry for responding with negativity.

Your last comment doesn't even make sense, because if you tell her you're meeting people from "a forum" you're being misleading already, so why not just lie about the whole thing?

I've always said I have nothing against people lying simply for the sake of obscuring truths that don't really concern others. My girlfriend's not really able to deal with me having problems. To her it just means I can't be what she wants me to be. So instead of making things her problem, I tell half-truths and avoid the truth.

I also have always said that if there is anything morally wrong with lying it is that it's deceitful, so anything else that deceives must be equally wrong. LB makes a good point that if I'm not willing to tell her I'm on this forum why not just lie about everything. Fact is, I'm rubbish at lying, and hate not telling her what forums I go on, even though I know she can't deal with it. So compounding the lie would be impossible for me. I thank LB for reminding me of the principles that used to be so important to me, but which I've compromised because it's 'easier' to do so.

This whole thing has got out of hand. We shouldn't be talking about someone being banned over this.

 

[EveWasFramed]

This whole thing has got out of hand. We shouldn't be talking about someone being banned over this.

The warning was not about just (what I felt) was insulting you, Nyk. It was also about the hostile way he (seemingly) replied to my very polite request to calm down (the very first post I made on the thread). He wasn't officially warned until my next post. From that point on, it didn't really have anything to do with what he said to you specifically.
Now, having said that, I think this thread should likely be ended, to avoid any futher fighting or misunderstandings.