In a democracy, we'd all have a say in a vote as to whether HT should be squished. I do not possess the technical means by which such a vote could be set up, yet remain grateful for those that do, and who keep this whole show on the road. Nor do I know whether fellow posters consider themselves just lucky to be able to post on here and thus be prepared to swallow the judgements passed down without available redress, or whether they feel as though they ought to have a say on matters such as HT's banishment. Why not abide by the majority? I feel more comfortable with a board that so operated. Otherwise it all smells a bit............1930's bratwurst.
But this is not a democracy. We don't run this board or pay for its upkeep. When you are on here, you abide by site admin.
How ironic that you add below your posts the following statement: "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own."
Hemsy isnt banned because of what he says - he is banned because of the reaction of a small number of responders whose sole aim is to get him banned! Would he have been banned if his diatribes had been aimed at Kennedy? I think not!
I don't want him banned. But if he (or anyone else) says summat I disagree with, I'll explain why. That's what a forum is all about. Debate, discussion etc. I've gone on record as saying I think it's wrong that he's banned (yet again). But it's not my forum to police, and I wouldn't want to.
Didn't and don't want him banned - but if you answered/engaged with him you were accused of bullying him, so it becomes a farce. I don't envy (unpaid, doing it in their own time) admin policing it all either. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Because they dont want to! There are a lot of "bullies"on this board but it is easier for admin to solve the problem by getting rid of one victim than it is to get rid of the "bullies"!