Why am I not surprised. Your correct about a pannel Robert.
Few people have the backbone to speak out. You open a thread about a better system but when people give a example of what can happen people head for the hills.

Perhaps everybody should enter parliment.
They already have the training.

PALEIF I'm up in the hills on that one too. I think we both know that we have some fundamentally different views about how the forum should operate and on the value of alias's. Were not likely to reach agreement and I don't feel like I've got anything new to add.

I'd rather be able to have productive discussions with you about animal welfare than long running debates about posting choices (nor do I want to see either of us banned).

R0bert

Just to clarify the claims made by PALE here - those posts are being attributed to me. At no time did I state that PALE "supported FGM", I merely pointed out that when I spoke out against the practice, PALE accused me of "upsetting Muslims". Let's be absolutely clear about that.

The other post refers to a series of questions I asked PALE following its comments about fundraising activities of other animal advocacy groups, in the context of it not raising funds itself. PALE had/has a "PayPal - donate now" link to its website, and I asked why that was there if it doesn't raise funds, and what it did with the funds it did raise by that mechanism.

PALE, after avoiding the questions for some time, chose to use several of its posters, using the same PALE formatting and grammatical style, to issue a series of heated denials. One claimed she "disabled" the Paypal link in 2003, but had elsewhere claimed that she joined the organization in 2006.

Just thought I would clear that up. There has been no defamation on my part, but possibly the reverse is true, with various comments made by PALE and/or its contributors about my mental state. I chose not to request deletion of those despite their libellous character, seeing them for what they really are.

Nicky

Nicky
There you go again. Only one person posts under pale as you very well know.
Over and over again you claim pale are breaking forum rules.

FYI A list of your comments were sent on to our lawyers- It is 'their legal opinion' that they were defamation.

Despite what you may think by my making comment on this thread regarding this it really was to point out that one person making descions IMO isnt a good system.

So it really was about how OLO should operate.

For example if there was a board all your comments about our fund raising could have been voted on. Including this one>

What sort of "organization" is PALE?

"Not one to do with animal welfare, honesty, accountability and transparency, obviously."

Nicky you raised pales funding dozens of times and the answer was always the same.
It was that pale in conjunction with RSPCA QLD is funded by RSPCA QLD and five kind lawyers and myself who put in from their own pockets.

So your aware those types of comments also causes RSPCA QLD distress.
We do not pay ourselves unlike 'any other group.'

We also pay for feed when we can and deliver it to farmers.

For the life of me I can not understand why you have spent two years rubbishing fellow animal lovers.

Its beyond the pale

I think a pannel would be a much better system with perhaps at least one of those people with legal knowledge.

Far more fair to everybody- including yourself.

I also think Robert makes good sense and we should drop this before we both are banned.
Which kind of says it all really.

PALE, I was simply correcting your mis-statements (and trouble making).

At the risk of repeating myself. I have never accused PALE of anything, merely asked questions which would attract a "public interest" or "fair comment" defence at any time. Furthermore, only a "living person" can be defamed, (except in Queensland where such action has been extended to the dead, and you appear not to be dead). Perhaps your "lawyers" might care to revisit their definitions.

Speaking of OLO rules, perhaps you would care to explain, if only one person posts under the name of PALE, whether or not that person also posts on occasion under the name "TarynW" and "Macropod Whisperer", because there are distinct similarities with some of their posts and those of PALE (grammar, formatting, spelling and punctuation), while on other occasions their posts are markedly different (more coherent).
I'm sure a "panel" would readily identify that too.

It was not I who began the accusations either, and my lawyer certainly regards any remarks about a person's mental stability as libellous and actionable.

You shouldn't dish it out if you can't take it. Are your "lawyers" aware of some of YOUR more startling accusations? If not, I suggest you seek their advice on that.

Nicky

Nicky
From your first post you attacked us
We are the only ones prepaired to post our real names- complete with pictures.


I do not have a problem with anybody working to help animals what so ever- never have.
As for your legal advise I suggest you get another lawyer.
Regarding the posts you are 'again ' calling me a liar.

"Macropod Whisperer",is as you are aware Antje. Taryn is Taryn . Its as simple as that.

Your insults speaks volumes for all to see regarding spelling. One person is Germann and one aboriginal. Both have limited english and a heart of gold. They both work for animals in their own time.

Nicky said

You shouldn't dish it out if you can't take it....
Ah Nicky talk about calling the kettle black. Perhaps PETA and their mates may have just learnt that message themselves.
We will continue to work towards reopening abattoirs to faze out live exports.
Despite theirs and your best efforts to warn everybody about those awful 'animal killers'

You see Nicky the real difference between you and I is that I think for myself.
I understand PETA has made it harder to help the animals in regards to live exports.

I get that- but you do not.

I can see the Government are delightered to be able to call these people extremists.

If you want to make changes you MUST present the farmers and the industry with 'sensible' alternatives.
Now after twenty pluss years none of the groups world wide have done that or even tried.
We are very young and at least we have tried. Until others do someone about reopening plants nothing will change.

But- Do you know what? I suspect Yabby may be right when he says thats not really their intention.- sad.

btw guess who raised live exports eight years ago and your friend said they did not do it because it was too political= Umm indeed.
I`ll say it is.!