Forrest reckoned he knew the mind of David Letterman, how he would handle the situation that had arisen on OLO this afternoon of a long weekend Monday, with posting to the Forum being of course so absolutely frenetic. David had recently received a nasty letter. Forrest had this afternoon lost 1782 nasty letters, in an opening post to an article comments thread that was deemed to be off-topic, and had been taken down following complaint to such effect by some user. Yet it had been Forrest who had made the first comment, thereby putting 'Driven by indignation at injustice' on the index!

So Forrest was about to digress again.

Forrest had thought long and hard about it, whether possibly being off-topic could perhaps even see his present post get taken down. Then Forrest suddenly remembered as the opening poster in this general discussion thread, that he could effectively define what was, or was not, on topic!

This topic was 'Power with pride going Belly-up?'. To many that would have the connotations of expectations of pride in publicly-owned electricity generation and/or self-sufficiency in sustainable energy supply, all being called into question. Some, Forrest included, had posted in that vein. There were other manifestations of power, however. One such was the responsible exercise of judicial or executive authority under the rule of law. Another was the power of the written word; the old pen being mightier than the sword stuff, and that too looked, at least here on OLO, as if it was going Belly-up.

Forrest was driven by indignation at the injustice of it all. True it was that GrahamY had invited Forrest to submit a topic along the lines of the taken-down post, but the only real inspiration that would come to him was along the lines of a topic 'Farewell to Onlineopinion: it was fun while it lasted, but its become to be too hard'. His lost post BELONGED where it had been first placed. It positively RESONATED to the Deputy PM's article title.

Here's its text about Power:

forrest what has upset you so..grayham must have been under immenmce presures...and of course i cant even guess what was deleted...but it has a political overtone for my summation

forrest quote<<..It positively RESONATED..to the Deputy PM's article title....>>ok you got me curious...must find out what julia has done gone and wrote...and take note...she has made certain promises to some fiends of mine..

and seemingly is a lawyer..[they all conspire..against us]..we that become legally wards of the court..imbisiles is the teqnical term..when the law enforces deceptivily the laws of contract..as statuted crime...and not alone seeking to remedy..the law of victim

govt was constituted to control govt acts..not police/regulate or make worse..the peoples...remember..you promised julia...i knew it wernt woirth the time spent listening fawnigly to your oaths/utterances...

but that time is past...and pehaps off topic...here..but im not getting what/your meaning forrest...when grayham censors my posts[a rare occasion..i simply shop arround for another topic allready running..to slip it in quitely...on the qt...please slip it in somewwhere..why not here...or at least give a hint

you know we love you...r-u-ok?

<<Here's its text about Power:>>>?

oug,

I thought I was all set to post the sequel to my 'David Letterman' post above within seconds of it first appearing, having set up multiple tabs with posts to go in readiness. Unfortunately, I suspect GrahamY has become the unwitting prisoner of his (?) own software. When I went to post the verbatim copy of my post that had been taken down from the 'Driven by indignation at injustice' article comments thread, one that had been taken down solely because some user had complained that it was 'off-topic', I encountered a message from the OLO site to the effect that "this post has already been posted" and that I could not proceed further.

Well, true enough, it had been, if ever so briefly, for perhaps half an hour to an hour. However, when I went to post it on this thread (one that I had started myself), although it was no longer present upon OLO, that was the message I got. To be fair, OLO has been from time to time plagued by spamming posters, who have multiply posted the same content across multiple threads: perhaps there has been a software enhancement that is intended to prevent such multiple posting, and this has been an unintended outworking of it.

To answer your question ".r-u-ok?": no I am not. As a long-time scrupulous observer of the Forum rules, I am deeply pissed off. In a way I am glad that I have not been able to post the facimile of the deleted post, because if I had been able to do so I believe it would have stood (for as long as it was allowed) as an incontrovertible witness to one of the worst moderation decisions in the history of OLO, and been very destructive of this Forum.

The deleted post was a non-politically partisan challenge to the Deputy PM to use her influence to secure due process at law on behalf of two believably innocent UK citizens facing the prospect of extradition without trial or hearing in the UK, to the US.

Regards,

Forrest

ok forrest im unfamilour with that topic that went belly up...and brits have special laws..[where they go their laws go[apparently]..but..[without knowing..of what you speak..extraditions strongly repy on in confidence evidences..[that need to be tested in courts]..on general lines alone..there is a legal weight there..that may have put the forum at risk..should the owner moderator not act

i feel we can talk about the generalities of going belly up without naming names or events...and have made certain contracts to brithish exiles myself on occasion...and would find it easy to simply generalise on their circumstance,and offer my reasoning to resolution[without naming specifics]

im one of many here that have met grayham..and know he dosnt censor lightly..there will no doudt have been a legal requirment that forced him to censure...and as i dont know any other detail...i cant gues how that complaint would have been worded...often simply leaving out names is enough to neutralise any legalities

so we have a legal issue...thus without naming names[or country juristictions involved..please advice what the offence...and what would be your remedy...that would be fair to all concerned

i dread losing your postings..oops sorry i mean losing the poster...lol..[you will have noted the joy you bought when you finished?..healing thyself..with nature and sun...[see i didnt need to spell it more clear

..your an artist in words...wheras for me language is a blinding spell/spelling matrix..i enjoy dis-spelling..you are a master at words...and could spell it out a little clearer..

[without me..needing to read..to the not-linked post]..or without grayham getting reasoned?/legal/cautio/warnings.. complaint..to retain compliance with the powers that be..

he stands between us and anarchy...a word often much represented..things are more orderly than appears..we have all had debates about meaning..[as well as meaningless issues...and should be able to discuss specifics..non specificlly...enough to help find a better solution..to many of lifes secrets..[knowable knowns]

Forrest knew about Power, that you had to be careful with it, and so too with Pride. As the saying goes, 'power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely'. Forrest wasn't proud: he had resolved to tread carefully while trying to speak powerfully. His online virtual life and incognito persona were as nothing compared to the lives of the two accused 'fugitives' in the UK facing extradition and sentences of up to 98 years each in a US prison.

Having dealt with the niceties of autonomous topicality, Forrest proceeded to address oug's concerns.

OLO user 'oug' suggests legal reasons may have been behind the deletion of the post. GrahamY said in his email, and quite courteously at that, that it was taken down only because a complaint received that it was off-topic to the Deputy PM's 'Driven by indignation at injustice' article comments thread was one with which he agreed. I'll try, by breaking the original (now deleted) post up and quoting it bit by bit here (where it is now topical) in successive posts, to let viewers make their own assessment of it. Hopefully that way its otherwise possibly damaging effect upon the Forum's credibility will be dissipated.

Here beginneth the text:

"Well Julia, here's a chance to show how driven by indignation you can be.

In the UK, Brian Howes and his wife, Kerry, are awaiting extradition to the US. They have broken no UK law in doing what it is that they are accused of by US authorities. Their alleged offence is that of selling chemicals, chemicals lawfully able to be sold in the UK, over the internet, to claimed US crystal methamphetamine synthesizers, an offence in the US."

TBC

Forrest now had the OLO anti-spamming software's measure. He would serially quote the deleted post's content. It might even become a 'killer' serial! By now OLO might be starting to benefit from the 'Dick Smith Principle': 'all publicity is good publicity, even bad publicity'. There was nothing like a good online stoush to lift the ratings!

"Cry havoc ...."

....... and let slip the dogs of Waugh" said Forrest, slightly misquoting himself.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2063#43464

Forrest had been observing the serving the Deputy PM's article 'Driven by indignation at injustice' was copping in the comments thread. It was already coming second in the 'Today's most popular' ratings on the OLO main page. And to think that it had been Forrest who had put it onto the index in the first place with his now-deleted first post to it! Such ingratitude! No wonder Forrest was pissed off. His post had been exemplarily polite by comparison.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=9513&page=0

Here continueth the deleted text:

"Whilst US officials claim the evidence against the couple includes incriminating emails, false or misleading packaging, and the evidence of undercover agents who posed as customers, and supply of enough chemicals to make 635kg of crystal meth, there has been no extradition hearing in the UK in which such claimed evidence (which, on the face of it, would seem enough to convict all US users of said chemicals the subject of this investigation) could be examined. Such accused, although they may never have been to the US, are referred to, in advance of any conviction, as fugitives in the US process.

This seems an utter travesty of justice."

TBC

Powerful enough? Forrest wondered.

Proud of it? Forrest sure was.

Going belly-up? Forrest didn't think so.

It was good, keeping autonomously on topic like what Forrest was. It gave him a deeply satisfying feeling of self-righteousness, this utter compliance with the Forum rules that he was displaying. It was almost phun. In fact Forrest hadn't had so much phun with the Forum since the days of 'Gordy the Big Engine that Could'

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=884#15532

"Could Gordy do it? Yes he could!" Those words had become the basis for the slogan of the man who had now become the most powerful man in all of Ireland, Barach O'Barmagh. To think he owed them to Forrest!

The internet (and OLO) was good for sort-of blogging. The Yanks had largely developed it, but now blamed others for its usefulness.

Scots should get off free!

Go Echelon!