1)

First of all R0bert, Foxy has made her point clearly. I did not misunderstand it, and don't need it explained.

Secondly, it is not for Foxy or anyone else on this forum to advise anyone to moderate their behaviour. Even Admin will allow extraordinary leeway, because I suspect (I don't know), that they accept that we are mature individuals even though they may believe that some of us behave in an immature manner!

It has only been on rare occasion when they have stepped in. We can, and even have taken potshots at Graham with no fear of recrimination.

It's the way it should be.

Thirdly, if I had had the facility of a PM,..., lets just say I would have contacted three people when I first joined this thread; Foxy being one of them. I won't elaborate.

Continued:

2)

'Without the efforts of someone like Foxy to clean up the rubbish'?!!

THAT is the kind of thing that will inflame,-particularly against the female contingent. There is a large membership base here, perhaps one third of them post regularly.

Are you seriously telling me that it is for a specific member to self-appoint to clean up the rubbish?? No damn wonder females are targeted (and from SOME quarters, they are, if one of them feels she is setting herself up as class monitor!!).

But I doubt that Foxy does feel that,- though she DOES comes across like that on occasion.You've done her no favours suggesting that R0bert.

(I'm sorry to talk ABOUT you Foxy, but I am responding to R0bert).

If you R0bert feel that you do not want to post because of this aggression, then don't! That is your decision. This is a large site with different 'rooms', all of which have stimulation discussion/opinion. MOST; yes most of it is not beset with that which bothers you or Foxy.

Finally; I find Foxy's comment provocative and jarring, because it came when matters on this thread were clearly coming to a close. It was unnecessary-AT THAT POINT. And has done nothing but stir up things again.

I find that appalling;-as is the assumption that people 'delight' in aggressive debate. Some do; no question about that; they are sociopathic in the pleasure of nastiness and control, but others do not.

I do not. God! I'd love to elaborate, but I'm not going to.

Suffice it to say that I have just spent quite sometime on this thread strongly deflecting the view that I should see things as others saw them and if not, be subject to some fairly stinging criticism (yes, fella's-and vicky verky).

And now at the tail end....this!

Gee thanks.

Wow classic, such drama!

Wonderful, Wonderful! Bravo!

I was thinking it was funny I was getting so much entertainment out of you all, and that you claimed to be getting none from me.

But how wrong I am! Such fun I have provided in giving you all a villian to castigate, someone to feel superior to, someone to be put in their place.

Perhaps my sin is to 'attack so many people indescriminately', indescriminately being the key word. I notice it's only the clique that are so indignant, and Bronwyn further confirms my point about them seeing it as their 'house'. If I was to 'attack' antiseptic or some random, well, the thread would be long over.

BTW: It really can be 'life affirming to stand in the street at 3 am and scream obscenities', you should all try it sometime, I guarantee you'd be much less uptight.

Bronny,

'admit you've slipped up, and as such let us all move on?'
Let you? Haha. Slipped up? Only in your eyes dear. I think this is a fine bridge to burn the more I see the rotten foundations. Anyway, that's all I was originally asking from Fraccy, calling everyone dishonest as she was. Didn't see an apology there. Oh that's right if you're in the house, then it's ok man. Put your feet on the table!

'We're not vindictive. This episode won't be forgotten'
Bit of a contradiction. Rest assured I may well be moving on regardless. I was getting bored anyway (I'm sorry that hurt your feelings so), and although I've been tempted back by the potential of a leading role as Devil Incarnate, I feel if I stay as long as some of you seem to have, I'll end up just like you.

Ginx,

I get what you're saying about Foxy, but I've also identified examinator as part of the police force. Robert has the makings of a keen young constable too. I'm an equal opportunity employer. Also you've slipped down to my second favourite poster now. I'm just not over Col yet. Maybe in time.

Oh dear, this was not what I intended at all.

And I certainly do not see myself as some sort
of moderator for this Forum.

I was simply shocked by the verocity of some
of the comments and I reacted to them by
a plea for civility.

Ginx's comments - by the way -
were not the ones I was reacting to,
and I agree with Bronwyn - I do not find anything
she has to say offensive.

However, now, in retrospect, I possibly shouldn't have
said anything, or maybe I should have said it differently.
But I still believe that I am entitled to react to comments
that are made on an open Forum, especially as my intention
was not to score any points, I simply spoke my mind without
malice or anger - but from how I saw things.

Besides, if you're going to argue for the right of people
to be offensive - then argue also for the right of people
to be able to react to that offense. Other wise it becomes
somewhat one -sided.

Anyway, let's bury the hatchet.
(Preferably not in each other's heads).

Houellebecq

<< 'We're not vindictive. This episode won't be forgotten.' Bit of a contradiction.>>

No contradiction. What I meant was that I doubt we'll forget the general thrust of your words, because they were quite outside the parameters of the normally accepted cut and thrust of any robust discussion. But once we see an apology to Fractelle, I'm sure this grubby litttle episode will be put behind us and most probably never referred to again. That's what I meant when I said we're not vindictive. Besides, you're not as important as you think you are here. I'm only wasting these words on you because of Fractelle and in the wider interests of OLO. No other reason.

Ginx

I hope you understand none of this applies to you. Your only fault, if any, was to encourage Houellebecq into attempting to big-note himself at someone else's expense. :) I love robust debate as much as you do and I won't back away from giving as good as I get either, but there are basic standards. A passing dig is totally acceptable but multiple paragraphs vilifying another poster are not. Surely you would agree?

And no, Houellebecq, I'm not setting myself up as judge and jury here. It just comes down to plain common sense and basic courtesy.

Ginx

Sorry, that first sentence to you then wasn't quite clear enough and I think you could misconstue it. :) It should have read as follows:

I hope you understand none of this applies to you. Your only fault, if any, was to inadvertently encourage Houellebecq into showing off and attempting to big-note himself at someone else's expense. :)