PALE... whoever is posting there, you're missing R0Bert's point.

As I stated in this thread:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=953#16726

I have some sympathy for the cause of opposing Live Exports (though not necessarily the opposition to intensive animal industries) and I don't have any problem with the organisation having a presence here.
I would encourage them to write articles for comment.

The point is, a poster has commented under the organisation name, on issues that aren't related to the opposition of live exports.
They have also made unfounded accusations which I found quite offensive, such as here:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=859#15157

Which stated I was posting under two names, which is false, and I would call on whoever posted that comment to suggest which other identity they suspect me of posting under, so the other individal can rule it out themselves.
There's also a certain irony of this person accusing another of impropriety in terms of identity and posting.

Then there were the examples of emotional ploys and defensive reactions, such as here - in this instance I objected to the use of emotional ploys and the insinuation was that in doing so, I was a narcissist.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=534#10405

Look - I'm not trying to the get organisation banned from OLO. By all means, continue this style of posting if you wish, and I am quite happy to go on refuting and pointing out dishonest or accusatory methods of debate. I'm a big boy. I can handle it.

My point is - these tactics do the organisation no service. They detract from its credibility, and I would urge those at People Against Live Exports to write articles and adopt a more professional approach, because I wouldn't mind seeing them have some success in their endeavour to limit live exports.

Antje, you seem rather distressed that I could have interpreted "My names is David and I am the CEO of PALE. I dont often get involved with OLO being far too busy." as indicating that the post was not written by yourself (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=874#17174). That seems to me to be a reasonable assumption. If you can demonstrate where in that post you indicated that it was your work and not that of your CEO then I will be happy to apologise for misreading the post and suggesting that it was Davids work.

Until then I will assume that it was either David's work (regardless of who typed it up) or that you have deliberately attempted to mislead us and pass your own work off as that of the PALE CEO.

Boazy, I agree that we don't know enough about Taryn's situation to comment specifically on it other than that she chose to introduce her situation into the discussion and has not at this point offered any mitigating circumstances. My impression is that she and Antje think I should change my opposition to children being removed from contact with involved fathers on the basis that Taryn wants to do so rather than on any specific justification. There has been no input in the discussion that I recall into the impact that her decision may have on the children or on the father of the children, no claims that the father chooses to only see the kids a couple of times a year. No reported threats to physical safety. Just Taryn wants to move and why should she suffer the consequences of doing so.

R0bert

David
I will repond to you because you were not involved in the last attempt to get pale taken off OLO. Dont you just love the bagging of a group of people doing nothing more than helping animals.
I dont see Robert or any of these people giving up their time and their own funds to help others. Its all about them and their egos. Something about casting stones runs through my head.
David please take a look at Roberts post. Can you believe it. He thinks hes the police lord and master. He quite clearly said on the other thread I should be forced to choose between my kids and my second husband. Not only me everybody. That is why I stopped posting. I have made it clear that I have always been the one to work. I have worked darn hard two or three jobs pluss raised the children while my x sat on his bum and did nothing.
Now I have a second husband who works hard to provide and I moved to give us all a better life.
Read his post on the other thread and again on this one.
He expects me to give the children up to their father because I moved out of the area .
I made it clear to Robert my x could visit but he posted another comment saying the x wife and kids should be the ones made to travel because it was him who had been put out because I moved.
Robert- and others its none of your business what others do and this may sound familar but stop trying to run others lives OLO and organisations
Its not your business.

TarynW - you're missing the point and taking the analysis of arguments personally.
I haven't read the previous threads of your arguments with Robert personally, though I would suggest that if your family situation was brought up in a thread, then you have to accept that other people have a different view to your own.

In this particular thread, I've not seen anyone calling for the banning of anyone else.

I get rather tired of people ignoring central assertions in favour of taking arguments personally, and exaggerating a personal aspect instead.

Before the thread degenerates any further into personal mudslinging, may I put forward and ask posters such as PALE and TarynW to address these straightforward assertions, without either side casting personal aspersions.

1) Nobody has suggested people shouldn't be allowed to post their own points of view.
2) There has been a question raised as to the wisdom of having a number of posters operating under the name of an organisation.
3) The reasoning behind point 2) is that people who disagree with the individual posting, including topics irrelevant to the organisation, will be less inclined to support that organisation.

I am aware that in my previous post I have cast aspersions of sorts, though I have backed up each one with an example and why I disagree with it. If you wish to debate me on this, then I would ask you to address the examples and explain logically how my central assertion (point 3) is false.

From my perspective - I come to OLO to debate topics and work on my skills of critical reasoning.

Fortunately it means I very rarely take things to heart, though I don't hesitate to highlight irrational or insulting statements to illustrate how poor the arguments of these posters are. In my view, many of PALE's arguments fall into this category, and I have explained why.

I see a distinct lack of logical reasoning from many posters here, who instead are resorting to personal diatribes or attacks.
Prove me wrong by addressing the points I've outlined above, without resorting to mudslinging rhetoric.

We have returned to talking about RObert actions in another thread I took part in that thread.
RObert[no ALP plant] did not in my mind say anything out of line.
I could tell you of men now dead and men who will be because they lost contact with children.
Of wives who think children are their property or even a weapon.
Yes and of kids and wife far better of without that father.
I can tell of men who call me behind a lunch shed and cry ,totally breaking down wanting nothing but to see those kids.
Like most who posted there RObert and me too want only a better way, an understanding children are not private property or weapons, is that not the only acceptable answer?
pale I think you must understand this is not conversation, you have time to think, time to cool down and time to ask would you like us insulting you that way?
And one day think about it consider what it is pale wants? why fragment our ideas of what pale is?
mention pale in every related post but is it truly pales ideas you post.
My efforts to tell you that dreadful failure to respond may have been, just may have been a failure by the police on hand not related to numbers has you acting regrettably heated but not reviewing the case.
Some police do not respond to highlight industrial problems can you understand that.
Can I truly tell you what pale means to me? built on the only information I have your posts?
It is a lady possible middle aged who grew up in the bush, has less than enough information on the union movement, bad tempered and often gos of half cocked, no ill Will intended market research may well be interesting on the question what do you think about pale or Belly for that matter.

Turnrightleft

I correct you. Robert alleged that pale broke olo rules. He” thinks” the CEO typed the message.

HOW CHILDISH!

Antje told him she typed the message.

It’s also important we look at the spiteful nature of this thread clearly set up to discredit an organization Talk about making a federal case out of nothing Robert your such a trouble maker and with double standards



. Note that on that same thread a person was using the thread to advertise their book!



. I don’t see Robert opening a thread complain about that poster! and it’s not my intention to cause that poster any problems either.

I am simply drawing your attention to Roberts’s double standards.



His real reason isn’t about OLO rules. This other person is very much in bridge of OLO rules and if you read it he is friendly and even suggests a personal visit.

Which takes me to Robert and the other poster misusing OLO. It’s not an introduction service

However that aside who cares. I stopped posting because I found him offensive. He has re enforced that in his above post.

. Now he’s opened this thread screaming pale has multiple posters.



PALE used to have everybody able to comment on pale but Robert complained to OLO so Graham Young changed it.

That was very disappointing to the members after paying eleven hundred dollars membership. I am NOT posting as PALE as I now have my own OLO membership..



Answers to your question from Taryn not pale 1 to 3

1 yes they have

2. If pale say there is only Antje then that’s the truth

3 None of anybodies business. That’s their problem. . I would like to say I have never seen such a pathetic attempt to cause trouble.

You may think pale is not very professional but I happen to know projects they are putting together to help not only animals but Aboriginal people and Muslim Australians working overseas as well.

They have done what RSPCA Animals Australia and PETA had thirty years to do.

I am a “proud”! member.