Dossier on why Clippo needed calling out for what he is.

Hartlepool · 10-03-2008, 02:08 PM

I think that if mkpd said it,you can certainly believe it.

Hartlepool · 10-03-2008, 02:20 PM

Anyway,mkpd isn't the only one with a list on clipo I bet.

Also,what is wrong with using the word Fascist on here?

Leftist,Centrist,Authoritarionist,Monarchist,Royal ist,Federalist,Rightist,I see nothing wrong with Fascist at all,it's a very well know and generally accepted tern these days and was more so in the past.

Suggest a cooling period on here takes place(nothing to do with GW),especially on this thread anyway for 24 hours, from now.

That should do it,I think.

Besoeker · 10-03-2008, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex McKee

OK this needs to stop.
Likewise, Matt, some of your posts have been blatantly antagonistic but I accept that many have been in response to abuse coming your way. I also think you've been more restrained recently and thanks for that.

Restrained?

Quote:

You are a liar.

That doesn't seem restrained.

Clippo · 10-03-2008, 04:56 PM

Ian C wrote:-

Quote:

Whilst mkpd doesn't gratify himself to persistent direct personal insults, ....

How would you classify virtually all of the statements in every thread here - e.g. for one

Quote:

You are a liar.

I repeat what I said earlier that mpkdavies started this silly name calling several years ago but those early posts are not openly available now to prove my point. However, whilst searching for those posts, I came across a thread that I started just over a year ago because of those silly personal abuses and conspiracy theories :-

This sub-forum needs to change.

Quote:

I recently had a short break from this forum because, in my view, it was degenerating into pointless blabber. Without apportioning blame to any individual for those previous faults, I think it is now totally counter-productive and needs to evovle.

Whichever opinion you have on the the cause(s) of the current wave of GW, it is too important a subject to trivialise in pointless debate. I would like to see this sub forum bringing supportable opinions to teach post.

I suggest
1. That a separate sub forum be set up for conspiracy theories of any sort.
2. No post is allowed which doesn't refer back to the originator of the argument.
3. Rhetoric i.e method of debating, isn't allowed in the discussion.
4. A series of primers is created for the less experienced members & newcomers to the forum.
5. Simple statements like 'There's a ch4 program on at xpm on CH4 thursday be moved to a 'notices' section or Talk about anything.
(any rational debate on the program or whatever it is should be left until after but again following the earlier rules).
6. all posts should be 'value-adding' to the debate - (thus personal abuse is debarred).

I would also like to see this as a closed forum, admittance by full name, email address & postcode available to participators only.

I will explain my ideas on some of these specific points in more detail if you wish. but I'm not going to continue to debate in other topics in this sub-forum until it raises itself from garbage level significantly.

Now, I don’t wish to restart the detailed points in this old thread but I’m selecting quotes to back up my assertions that mpkdavies was at least a prime mover in the descent into insult.

From This sub-forum needs to change.

By me:-

Quote:

I do think MMGW is a done deal and and it is pretty pointless to argue a debate that was settled to most people with sufficient intelligence at least 10-15years ago . Having said I consider it a done deal, I say here again for the Nth time that I have an open mind to the possibility of other causes.
All I have wanted ever since I started to concentrate on this sub-forum is possible clear alternatives backed by independent research. MPKdavies has, since inception, deliberately provided references of dubious provenance to undermine true science and promote his conspiracy theories. In doing so he has called anyone with a divergent view stupid names.

With regard to Feldoon, pretty well all his contributions to this and most other threads have brought nothing relevant to the discussion, only silly & pointless rhetoric. It's on record that he has clashed even with many who I would label conspiracy theorists. Until he changes his technique, I won't respond further to any of his absurdities.

Thus, imo, we should be discussing here ways in which we, as individuals and for our country, can influence what little we can to mitigate some say overwhelming disaster for the world. I don't believe in every disaster scenario & I think we can do something about it.

But the tactics of some here are just to spoil - a pointless waste of everybody's time.

part of #64 by me

Quote:

Firstly, I personally don’t want the debate to be shut down. If you still want to debate AGW vs non-AGW then fine – just quote credible research to support your debating point. Perhaps Milliband and the others being accused of shutting the debate down have accepted there’s little point in debating a topic which has now such a large consensus view.
Secondly, I think the main focus of the debate should now move on to preventing wallet rape in GW name.

Akria wrote:-#84

Quote:

It is actually quite scary how often certain other posters have resorted to insults; I notice that virtually every thread made by an opponent of man-made global warming has some sort of insult against their opponents, whilst very few of their foes do such a thing to them.

Millenium3 wrote:- #112

Quote:

It is a pity that good people are being put off this forum because there is no place for serious debate.
& #116
Also, if this rule is not applied, those who are attacked are likely to resort to the same tactics.

And M3’s last remark is telling because that is what I deliberately decided to do – but only in response to an attack upon myself. I may indeed have attacked first in a few cases because experience on this forum has been particularly bitter and hidden trolls have come & gone and are probably still here.

I say again to mpkdavies:-

a. show the posts insulting me leading up to my insults
b. prove that I am not qualified as a scientist or publicly apologise.

B.A.Ware · 10-03-2008, 05:00 PM

I think both Matt and Clippo should draw a line in the sand over this issue their views are diametrically opposed and never the twain will meet.

Quote:

If the Mods continue to allow his direct attacks on members, then I am afraid you will see more like me who won't just take it any more.

As for Direct attacks ranting and name calling brings nothing to any debate and in my opinion only belittles the person doing it.

Saying that i am guilty of using the term Health Fascist when debating about smoking and i would stand by that if a person was trying to tell someone else how they should run their lives.

As for general name calling i think these occasions have to be judged individually as sometimes it is just sarcasm or a poor attempt at wit and other times it is done aggressively.

As for calling some one a liar this should be substantiated with proof or the poster should retract his statement and apologise.

Besoeker · 10-03-2008, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B.A.Ware

As for calling some one a liar this should be substantiated with proof or the poster should retract his statement and apologise.

Yes, should.

But do you have any great expectation that such a retraction is likely to be routinely given?

I have been called dishonest by a member. I asked for proof and offered to apologise in the event that such proof could be produced. No response.

I have been told that I am normally wrong 99% of the time. I asked the poster to provide any evidence to support that. None provided.

I have had the comment made about me that I can barely string a coherent sentence together.
Unsubstantiated.

I was called a hypocrite and I asked the poster to support the accusation or retract it. Given that no evidence was offered to support the accusation, I asked the poster to withdraw the accusation.

“I shall do no such thing, I meant it and stand by it.” was the response.

And, to date, no evidence to support that stance.

In short, I don’t expect any unsubstantiated accusations to be retracted.

Clippo · 11-03-2008, 09:22 AM

B.A. Ware wrote:-

Quote:

I think both Matt and Clippo should draw a line in the sand over this issue their views are diametrically opposed and never the twain will meet.

&

Quote:

As for calling some one a liar this should be substantiated with proof or the poster should retract his statement and apologise.

I am slightly disposed to draw a line soon but…..

As I said, I don’t have time or inclination to refute any or all of mpkdavies ‘dossier’ or do I intend to trawl through many thousands of his, Britannist’s, rjt’s, g hall’, Hartlepool’s, or any other posts where I may have been insulted or they may have insulted others.

However, my insults, in the vast majority of cases, were clearly responses to abuse directed towards me.

Forum management has been very negligent and inconsistent on this issue. I gather that ‘George’ (or whatever his earlier forum name was), was banned for a month for calling Britannist a ‘liar’ (albeit 10 times). Mpkdavies has called me a ‘liar’ here several times.
I don’t wish anybody to be banned but if this accusation isn’t resolved in some way, in my opinion, the integrity of the forum will be severely damaged.

I suggest that either a) mpkdavies issues some form of retraction – and it can be couched in whatever face saving terms he chooses as long as it is clearly a retraction to the reasonably intelligent reader or b) forum management edit out those statements.

Again, without wishing to snuff good debate out, I further suggest that forum management issue some written guidelines about what & what not should be posted and in what thread.

I have already decided to not try to write anything that may be considered insulting to others.

I am considering changing my forum name. Why ? because my son posts under the name Clippo, in completely subject unrelated forums and to remind you if you had forgotten, all comments in this open forum are viewable on the internet. So any damaging accusations of, whether they have a basis or not, could be misconstrued onto him.

Finally, so that it is not seen for any other reason, I may have to curtail my postings for a while. I won’t be leaving completely (unless I am banned).

This dispute needs resolution – forum management talk amongst yourselves and please do it.

Alex McKee · 13-03-2008, 12:51 PM

mkpdavies and Clippo are banned for one month.

13-03-2008, 12:51 PM	#18 (permalink)
Alex McKee Moderator Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Gloucester Posts: 6,539	mkpdavies and Clippo are banned for one month. __________________ Anything I post on this website is my personal opinion and not necessarily my professional opinion (unless stated as such) nor is an opinion necessarily shared by any committee or group I am affiliated with. Users on Ignore list: None. Please click one of these once a day: http://gloucesterr.myminicity.com/tra

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-03-2008, 02:08 PM	#11 (permalink)
Hartlepool Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: North East England Posts: 6,413	I think that if mkpd said it,you can certainly believe it.

10-03-2008, 02:20 PM	#12 (permalink)
Hartlepool Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: North East England Posts: 6,413	Anyway,mkpd isn't the only one with a list on clipo I bet. Also,what is wrong with using the word Fascist on here? Leftist,Centrist,Authoritarionist,Monarchist,Royal ist,Federalist,Rightist,I see nothing wrong with Fascist at all,it's a very well know and generally accepted tern these days and was more so in the past. Suggest a cooling period on here takes place(nothing to do with GW),especially on this thread anyway for 24 hours, from now. That should do it,I think.