progcon.org

At what stage have I ever said you created the site? I quoted your involvement being the distribution via this forum, ie you have not exercised any form of restraint in preventing or removing the distribution of the excesses of John Page for the sake of the party.

So there is no lie. You are just upset that someone is seeking to hold the way you run this forum to account.

You see. No lie. Just truth. But you don't like that, do you?

John is an officially listed supporter of Richard. Clearly Richard can act to stop this. If he can't control his own supporters, how does he expect to run a party?

So be careful with your accusations of lying, as nothing I have said is incorrect. Look back at this forum over the past week, look at the nature of language of the attacks on DCB and Nigel. You're helping UKIP? No, you're helping yourself at UKIP's expense.

Thank God DCB has pledged to bring in a members only forum.

And as this was another thread started by Basildon Boy (remember the nice guy who sought to imtimidate me when I was considering to stand in Bromley by publishing personal details online) , who I have a suspicion could be a BNP or Tory infiltrator. What is your real name BB? Are you a member of UKIP?

What are you doing to check the identity of the posters here Anthony to prevent or at least reduce the chances of infiltration? Oh yes, people can choose an avatar. I guess the bad 'uns would never consider using a false avatar....

Anthony Butcher

You said "supporters have now sought to create a website using the same name as the official campaign site as leadership candidate David Campbell Bannerman". You then listed my name as one of those involved. You are a LIAR.

That isn't what your article says or implies. I haven't received a single request from anyone, including yourself, to remove the link or comment on it. So clearly no one else has an issue with this. Making this out that this somehow involves me is just ridiculous. Be a man, say you got it wrong and issue a correction.

You will find that we are pretty reasonable at running this forum, and always deal with complaints as fairly and even handedly as possible. Given that you haven't made a complaint, you are now suggesting that I can somehow pro-actively moderate several hundred postings per day? It is just nonsense.

You still haven't given a reason why John shouldn't make a site critical of DCB's policies.

I will ignore the other attempts to deflect attention away from your dishonesty.

michael mcgough

This stinks!

progcon.org

Rather that ***** and scream, why don't we agree to do something positive.

Why don't you remove all links to the site and ask John Page to take down the sites (and ban him from here if he refuses)?

Then you would have shown that you can exercise some form of moderation on the attacks on Nigel and DCB, and then I will happily publish the action you have taken to ensure fair play is held above partisan attacks on DCB and Nigel?

Anthony Butcher

I have just realised that you also included this nonsense in your article:
1) This is an open forum. It is impossible for anyone to infiltrate it by definition.

2) BNP Members are welcome to post here, just like everyone else.

3) The party did not ask me to change the name due to BNP association. It was because they were concerned that the views expressed might be miscontrued as official commentary by the media. Hence the forum was distanced from the party. I have told you this before, yet you have repeated your nonsense.

You are utterly dishonest.

Anthony Butcher

I will tell you why:
1) Because I don't see anything libellous or illegal about the site. I am not the thought police. If you wish to complain to the Party Secretary about the site, then please do so.
2) I am not going to ban anyone because they don't comply with a demand unrelated to this forum. Otherwise I would have banned you long ago for your dishonesty. People are banned for breaching the forum rules, nothing else.

That is not my role as forum administrator. You and Christina have both given as much out, and indeed had to be warned about highjacking every thread to promote your candidate and attack Richard!

progcon.org

So are you refusing to calm down, and employ the slightest form of moderation to stop these attacks on DCB and Nigel?

What's your agenda Anthony? You've already stated that the aim of this forum is not to promote UKIP.

A UKIP NEC member not seeking to promote UKIP?

Yes, Christina and I sought to balance the anti-Nigel and anti-DCB bile, and for that we were threatened with a ban! Nice balance!

Anthony Butcher

I will calm down when you correct your lies.

This forum operates a policy of free speech as much as possible. I have no intention of interfering in anyone's opinions, including yours. I doubt very much that forum users would appreciate being told that they can no longer criticise any of the candidates.

Yawn.

You were warned for forum spamming. Again, your hypocricy makes me nauseous.... if other people criticise your candidate it is a dirty tricks smear campaign...but when you do it then it is just redressing the balance. :roll:

This is a leadership election. The members want to discuss the candidates, criticise them, praise them etc. There are only two people who have stepped out of line so far - you and Bahlambs, both of whom I note have attacked Richard.

progcon.org

Hysterical. People are beginning to rumble you Anthony Butcher. And you don't like it one little bit.

Anthony Butcher

The topic in hand is your article. Stick to it please.