TIME FOR A CHANGE?

[Michael Wallace]

I'm coming over to that forum and I'm going to abduct your children, perform scientific experiments on you all andsend you back in time. You hapless cunts.

OH MATTHEW THIS IS HORRIBLE AND I AM SO OFFENDED AND OBVIOUSLY NOT A JOKE.

[Jon Corby]

Rather vile of Jon, but that's not exactly uncharacteristic of him, to post messages from a members only readable forum to a public readable forum.

Yeah, I'm always doing that aren't I? It's certainly way more vile than slagging somebody off behind their back, then running away when confronted by it rather than standing by your points and debating them in an adult manner. That's thoroughly decent behaviour.

Damian has made a great decision in leaving c4c, although he's left before and returned. It really doesn't look good for Countdown to have the producer writing such awful stuff online.

Only to cretins like you. Some of us recognise that he's just a member like any other, and that he isn't permanently representing the programme. (Actually, the same can be said of Charlie. He rarely posts here with his admin hat on.) He's ultimately just a regular guy, with a similarly near-the-knuckle sense of humour. It's good to have him here both for jokes and, occasionally, an insight from the other side of the TV screen. It's a real shame if he does leave, but if he does then recognise it's because of pillocks like you & Clive, not me.

Many of you, such as Jon Corby, Charlie Reams and Matthew Green, seem to enjoy saying incredibly hurtful stuff to other members in a blokey way that I really don't understand, and I don't accept the 'it's just a joke' defence. However, there are also many of you (e.g. Jimmy Gough) who are quick to leap to someone's defence in a show of empathy that I would have been incapable of at such a young age.

Also, sometimes, people (e.g. Jimmy Gough) will be slightly out-of-order to other people (e.g. Rob Thomas), and someone else (e.g. Jon Corby) will leap to his defence. But we'll forget about those times because they don't support your stance. That was actually the only time anybody said anything remotely bad to Rob Thomas as well, his exit was utterly baffling. But also probably the funniest thing he'll ever do.

[Lesley Hines]

Well that really is the greatest offer I've ever been made. Can we choose when we go to? I'd love to find out what really happened with the Princes in the Tower, or learn more about Shakespeare, or even just to a few weeks before everyone started arguing.

Time travel eh? The scientific and philosophical ramifications are enormous.

[Ian Volante]

I'm coming over to that forum and I'm going to abduct your children, perform scientific experiments on you all andsend you back in time. You hapless cunts.

I bagsies the Van Der Graaf Generator demonstration!

[Marc Meakin]

I would aim for friday night and would have told Jon not to have started this thread, as it seems to have been the calalyst for Damian to leave the forum.

[Andy Wilson]

the mild mannered Andy Wilson

my mam will be so happy

[Jon Corby]

I would aim for friday night and would have told Jon not to have started this thread, as it seems to have been the calalyst for Damian to leave the forum.

Laughable. Maybe plump for a bit earlier, and tell Clive to think about what he writes before hitting 'Submit'?

[Marc Meakin]

I would aim for friday night and would have told Jon not to have started this thread, as it seems to have been the calalyst for Damian to leave the forum.

Laughable. Maybe plump for a bit earlier, and tell Clive to think about what he writes before hitting 'Submit'?

Seriously, Jon, no regrets?

[Jon Corby]

I would aim for friday night and would have told Jon not to have started this thread, as it seems to have been the calalyst for Damian to leave the forum.

Laughable. Maybe plump for a bit earlier, and tell Clive to think about what he writes before hitting 'Submit'?

Seriously, Jon, no regrets?

Nope. Obviously I'd rather Damian hadn't left (because I like him), but it's not my fault Clive wrote that shit about him.

[James Doohan]

I dunno much about James Doohan, but I'm guessing he's a prick too.

Thanks Jon, very unfair as i've not been slagging anyone off on either forum, but I bow to your character judgement over an internet forum

[Kirk Bevins]

I dunno much about James Doohan, but I'm guessing he's a prick too.

Thanks Jon, very unfair as i've not been slagging anyone off on either forum, but I bow to your character judgement over an internet forum

I like James (met him at my finals)...think you were with your sister and I asked you to get her to come sit with us but you didn't - I'll hate you forever for that. On the serious side, I'm not sure why you feel c4c sucks and you have to defect, as it were.

[Jon Corby]

I dunno much about James Doohan, but I'm guessing he's a prick too.

Thanks Jon, very unfair as i've not been slagging anyone off on either forum, but I bow to your character judgement over an internet forum

Yeah, sorry James. You did kinda get caught up in the crossfire, as your post agreeing with Julie was the last one I happened to read before starting this thread. I was kinda just rushing to finish the post off as I was getting fed up of writing it, and I shouldn't really have said that. Humblest apologies.

Actually, there was also a character reference in here from Andy Wilson defending you, but he seems to have deleted it now. He must have changed his mind and decided you are a prick after all!

[Gavin Chipper]

It's a real shame if he does leave, but if he does then recognise it's because of pillocks like you & Clive, not me.

To be honest, Clive's post about Damian was not the shocking revelation that it was built up to be, but I still think he's easily given as good as he's got over the years on this forum, and while I've simply grown used to it, I can understand why things have been said about him. That's not to say I'm glad he's gone, though I don't think it would be unreasonable of me.

[Jon Corby]

It's a real shame if he does leave, but if he does then recognise it's because of pillocks like you & Clive, not me.

To be honest, Clive's post about Damian was not the shocking revelation that it was built up to be, but I still think he's easily given as good as he's got over the years on this forum, and while I've simply grown used to it, I can understand why things have been said about him. That's not to say I'm glad he's gone, though I don't think it would be unreasonable of me.

Yeah, I could understand you having a barney with him, since you two don't seem to get on (I think I stuck up for you in the last such incident), but Clive basically slagged him because he didn't take time to speak to him (even though he wouldn't necessarily have known who he was) during a short break in his working day. It really was painfully pathetic (an opinion which has only been reinforced by his subsequent reaction). I should actually say here: kudos to Phil Reynolds for being the only person to speak up in Damian's defence on your forum, as nobody else seemed to have a problem with it. Again, what a perfect little utopia where you can bitch freely without question (save Phil in this instance), provided your targets are on the agreed shitlist. This place is much fairer, you wouldn't get away with that. Again, I daresay your lot won't see the hypocrisy, but I can only make the point in so many ways before I give up.

[James Doohan]

I dunno much about James Doohan, but I'm guessing he's a prick too.

Thanks Jon, very unfair as i've not been slagging anyone off on either forum, but I bow to your character judgement over an internet forum

I like James (met him at my finals)...think you were with your sister and I asked you to get her to come sit with us but you didn't - I'll hate you forever for that. On the serious side, I'm not sure why you feel c4c sucks and you have to defect, as it were.

Cheers Kirk, plus my Mum was delighted to hear that you thought she was my sister

I dunno much about James Doohan, but I'm guessing he's a prick too.

Thanks Jon, very unfair as i've not been slagging anyone off on either forum, but I bow to your character judgement over an internet forum

Yeah, sorry James. You did kinda get caught up in the crossfire, as your post agreeing with Julie was the last one I happened to read before starting this thread. I was kinda just rushing to finish the post off as I was getting fed up of writing it, and I shouldn't really have said that. Humblest apologies.

Actually, there was also a character reference in here from Andy Wilson defending you, but he seems to have deleted it now. He must have changed his mind and decided you are a prick after all!

He had told me that he did that but then he remembered that I am indeed a cunt and deleted it

Cheers anyway, I think?

[David Williams]

I like James (met him at my finals)...think you were with your sister and I asked you to get her to come sit with us but you didn't - I'll hate you forever for that. On the serious side, I'm not sure why you feel c4c sucks and you have to defect, as it were.

Cheers Kirk, plus my Mum was delighted to hear that you thought she was my sister

I'm definitely not a LOL sort of person, but I'm making an exception for this.

[Lesley Hines]

only person to speak up in Damian's defence

I hadn't read it. If I had I would have said something. I also (since it came up in conversation) told Damian about the Offtopic forum while I was at the specials. I would have told the others but it didn't come up in my conversations with them. Had I seen those posts it would have been an entirely different conversation.

[David O'Donnell]

only person to speak up in Damian's defence

I hadn't read it. If I had I would have said something. I also (since it came up in conversation) told Damian about the Offtopic forum while I was at the specials. I would have told the others but it didn't come up in my conversations with them. Had I seen those posts it would have been an entirely different conversation.

Oh Leslie dearest, you lie!

You wouldn't have told them shit!

[Gavin Chipper]

Yeah, I could understand you having a barney with him, since you two don't seem to get on (I think I stuck up for you in the last such incident), but Clive basically slagged him because he didn't take time to speak to him (even though he wouldn't necessarily have known who he was) during a short break in his working day. It really was painfully pathetic (an opinion which has only been reinforced by his subsequent reaction). I should actually say here: kudos to Phil Reynolds for being the only person to speak up in Damian's defence on your forum, as nobody else seemed to have a problem with it. Again, what a perfect little utopia where you can bitch freely without question (save Phil in this instance), provided your targets are on the agreed shitlist. This place is much fairer, you wouldn't get away with that. Again, I daresay your lot won't see the hypocrisy, but I can only make the point in so many ways before I give up.

I think you're right that Clive blew it out of proportion, but on the other hand, it seems he misunderstood Damian's intentions and state of mind, so to Clive, Damian came across as colder than others would have seen it. And perhaps this partly came from Clive's experiences of Damian online. I don't think he was deliberately trying to be nasty.

And the same goes for a lot of other people, including those you describe as "my lot" and also "your lot". Perhaps there have been overreactions but sometimes I can see where they have come from and certainly in most cases they didn't deliberately set out to be nasty from the start. These situations have just escalated. But these situations need reeling in, so there reaches a point where there's no point in going back over old posts to see who was wrong first.

And that point has easily been reached and I think you're a great guy Jon, so you can join me and everyone else in moving forwards. Yeah, not everyone will be friends but I think it's time for the crap to stop.

[David O'Donnell]

Yeah, I could understand you having a barney with him, since you two don't seem to get on (I think I stuck up for you in the last such incident), but Clive basically slagged him because he didn't take time to speak to him (even though he wouldn't necessarily have known who he was) during a short break in his working day. It really was painfully pathetic (an opinion which has only been reinforced by his subsequent reaction). I should actually say here: kudos to Phil Reynolds for being the only person to speak up in Damian's defence on your forum, as nobody else seemed to have a problem with it. Again, what a perfect little utopia where you can bitch freely without question (save Phil in this instance), provided your targets are on the agreed shitlist. This place is much fairer, you wouldn't get away with that. Again, I daresay your lot won't see the hypocrisy, but I can only make the point in so many ways before I give up.

I think you're right that Clive blew it out of proportion, but on the other hand, it seems he misunderstood Damian's intentions and state of mind, so to Clive, Damian came across as colder than others would have seen it. And perhaps this partly came from Clive's experiences of Damian online. I don't think he was deliberately trying to be nasty.

And the same goes for a lot of other people, including those you describe as "my lot" and also "your lot". Perhaps there have been overreactions but sometimes I can see where they have come from and certainly in most cases they didn't deliberately set out to be nasty from the start. These situations have just escalated. But these situations need reeling in, so there reaches a point where there's no point in going back over old posts to see who was wrong first.

And that point has easily been reached and I think you're a great guy Jon, so you can join me and everyone else in moving forwards. Yeah, not everyone will be friends but I think it's time for the crap to stop.

The basis of your argument rests upon binarisitic distinctions which do not exist. There is no them and us, certainly not from my perspective. I have had arguments with almost every person here including Charlie, Corby etc.

What Jon identified, in a somewhat genius moment of parody, are a group of people (who couldn't hack it here) who wanted to attack some of the key players here behind their back. All Jon did was reveal this for the hypocrisy it is: in fact, it was somewhat nauseating.

At least here I can call Charlie, or whoever, a cunt and they can try to defend themselves: ultimately I think this was Jon's point.

[Jon Corby]

The basis of your argument rests upon binarisitic distinctions... Jon identified, in a somewhat genius moment of parody... ultimately I think this was Jon's point.

What the fuck are you wittering on about? I was just stirring shit up because I was bored.

[David O'Donnell]

The basis of your argument rests upon binarisitic distinctions... Jon identified, in a somewhat genius moment of parody... ultimately I think this was Jon's point.

What the fuck are you wittering on about? I was just stirring shit up because I was bored.

I fucking hate you, you cunt!

[Jon Corby]

The basis of your argument rests upon binarisitic distinctions... Jon identified, in a somewhat genius moment of parody... ultimately I think this was Jon's point.

What the fuck are you wittering on about? I was just stirring shit up because I was bored.

I fucking hate you, you cunt!

xxx

[Lesley Hines]

Oh Leslie dearest, you lie!

You wouldn't have told them shit!

Ha! You can forget that fork now

[Jon Corby]

Cheers anyway, I think?

Top mother/sister line btw, A-lolled at that.

[David O'Donnell]

Cheers anyway, I think?

Top mother/sister line btw, A-lolled at that.

I didn't you treaty signing motherfucker.

[Gavin Chipper]

The basis of your argument rests upon binarisitic distinctions which do not exist. There is no them and us, certainly not from my perspective.

There isn't from my perspective either - I was just taking Jon's idea and running with it.

What Jon identified, in a somewhat genius moment of parody, are a group of people (who couldn't hack it here) who wanted to attack some of the key players here behind their back. All Jon did was reveal this for the hypocrisy it is: in fact, it was somewhat nauseating.

It's more complicated than that. But to put it simply, if someone is a cunt to you (their perception - I'm not going to get into the rights and wrongs), then most people (by far) would then slag that person off to someone else behind their back. It's not necessarily hypocrisy.

This argument clearly runs much deeper than Jon's "genius moment of parody" in his initial post.

[Sue Sanders]

The basis of your argument rests upon binarisitic distinctions which do not exist. There is no them and us, certainly not from my perspective.

There isn't from my perspective either - I was just taking Jon's idea and running with it.

What Jon identified, in a somewhat genius moment of parody, are a group of people (who couldn't hack it here) who wanted to attack some of the key players here behind their back. All Jon did was reveal this for the hypocrisy it is: in fact, it was somewhat nauseating.

Five posts about Charlie in about 415, over 3 months from me.
I'll let mad evangelist Rosey Tina and the rather unfunny Mr Ultraviolet know that for a few days on a forum they earned themselves the title of 'key player'.
Hope the shop in Bakewell doesn't get to learn that I was slagging them off behind their back by making my own version of their product.

Strange too, to be considered to be such a hot bed of filthy slander, yet at the same time, derided for the fact that we have a cookery bit. Well, some people like to wank over recipes as much as others like to wank over diplomas.

[David O'Donnell]

Five posts about Charlie in about 415, over 3 months from me.
I'll let mad evangelist Rosey Tina and the rather unfunny Mr Ultraviolet know that for a few days on a forum they earned themselves the title of 'key player'.
Hope the shop in Bakewell doesn't get to learn that I was slagging them off behind their back by making my own version of their product.

Strange too, to be considered to be such a hot bed of filthy slander, yet at the same time, derided for the fact that we have a cookery bit. Well, some people like to wank over recipes as much as others like to wank over diplomas.

Yeah Charlie has a diploma ... Actually he came second in the Cambridge Tripos (I hope I didn't pick this up wrong, Charlie can correct me). So basically what you have are the highest achievers from each school going to Cambridge and Charlie is essentially one of the best of the best. Charlie and I have had our run ins but there are certain criticisms you have levied at him which do not make a great deal of sense.

"Charlie is arrogant/cocky/thinks he is smarter than everyone else" - well yeah, but he is a little smarter than everyone else and it's not like he hasn't earned it. It isn't arrogance if you are actually as bright as you make out. We should get rid of Charlie, though, because then we wouldn't have that 1% of his comments that are a little snide (or apterous or this forum).

"Charlie is socially inept" - I love the fact that Richard Brittain makes this claim. I have encountered both in a social situation. RB was continually on the fringes of any interaction and I worked to communicate with him normally by playing chess with him but always playing the leading role [don't get me wrong here, for the most part I have to say that I enjoyed Richard's company]. I was playing guitar with Tony Warren when I first met Charlie who apologised for interrupting, introduced himself, extended his hand and was already firing out the jokes. Then he had a look at the group assembled and said words to the effect of who isn't here, asked if someone had their mobile number and gave them a buzz to see if they wanted to join. I am just using one example but Charlie was easily the most sociable of all those who attended the CoC.

[David O'Donnell]

Well, some people like to wank over recipes as much as others like to wank over diplomas.

I should also point out that one of the sharpest people, on this site (or I have ever met), is Jon Corby who hasn't been to uni.

[Jon Corby]

Well, some people like to wank over recipes as much as others like to wank over diplomas.

Remind me never to accept their dinner invitations.

Sue. Charlie doesn't spend all his time here firing out the insults either. The point being made is that your forum is no different to this one, except that you're being the 'Charlie Reams' there. That is the hypocrisy. Look at the way you responded to me on there yesterday, compared to how you talk to me on here (when I'm behaving identically in both places)? How do you explain that difference, if it's not your feeling of power over there?

[Andy Wilson]

Actually, there was also a character reference in here from Andy Wilson defending you, but he seems to have deleted it now. He must have changed his mind and decided you are a prick after all!

He had told me that he did that but then he remembered that I am indeed a cunt and deleted it

Yeah sorry guys - I'll do my best in the future not to rashly comment about my feelings on other forum members!

On a slightly serious note, i felt like i should say something with regard to this whole affair, but I also didn't want to get involved so i deleted em after i knew they'd probably been seen by those interested anyway.

I've been here for just over a year now and I can appreciate how the population must have jumped after Charlie was on the box and mentioned the forum and that has, i assume, upset the atmos a little, causing frustration for those who've been around longer. It's clear that the spoiler threads for instance, are not as good as they used to be before all the pointless alt numbers solutions and lexploring beaters.

As has been mentioned, some apparantly smart fuppin baxtards hang out here and as it happens they're likely to tell you to shove your opinion up your Co:Lon if they think they know better. If this happens in an insulting way, it's best to focus on the subject rather than the manner and if you feel that insulted, shoot the person a pm, so we don't all have to witness the ugly fall-out. First and only time i've been on the wrong end of an angry post was when Matthew Green went off on one (1 year ago tomorrow no less!) for spoiling the snooker on him! http://www.c4countdown.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2100 Luckily enough, there was a pun available to stop me being merely insulting back so we didn't resort to handbags. A little while later, I remembered the incident and we exchanged a lovely pair of pm's and all was forgotten, until now, you gee-bag!

One of the best things about this forum, aside from the obvious one of it being a brilliant current info resource for countdown, is the lack of tolerance for bullshit and the strong opinions of it's brilliant frequenters. Been visiting for over a year now and feel way more a part of the show and it's community that I ever could have envisaged. It arrived in my consciousness at a time where I had only relatively recently rekindled my childhood love of the show (due to living without TV or PC for about 6 years, the previous 10 of which i was usually busy with school/work when the show was aired) and were it not for the forum, I probably wouldn't still be following the show nearly as closely as I do and I certainly wouldn't have gone to see the last series finals and met many of ye and had the brilliant time I did on the same date that surely holds the record for most disgustingly racist internet posts by Irish people in one night.

Not only was that a great day/night despite that cheating w@nker but as you might remember i brought my Mam with me, which may have seemed insignificant enough, but it's the first time in Donkey's we spent that much consecutive time in just each others company and now countdown is to her and I a bit like football to my dad and me. C4C strengthens family relationships!

So, yeah, thanks for having me and remember to try to take some things with a pinch of salt.

http://jameseliottaylor.bandcamp.com/tr ... ch-of-salt

[Sue Sanders]

That is the hypocrisy. Look at the way you responded to me on there yesterday, compared to how you talk to me on here (when I'm behaving identically in both places)? How do you explain that difference, if it's not your feeling of power over there?

Bloody hell - a new hoop to jump through. Fuck it Jon, how about I got home from the gym, all bouncy and enjoying the lovely weather - found you had been posting over at Derek's house. We started a cat and mouse game of a me chasing around responding, because you had posted on two different threads AND you came online whilst I was responding just to add to the farce of it. I was in a good mood Jon - sorry to disappoint you. Yeah, I kind of riffed about with you, asked you if you minded me if I called you Jonjon, wrote some stuff in big letters. It was fun - buzzing between the threads seeing what you were banging on about next. Seeing what new rules of my personality I was supposed to be sticking to to not upset your chosen steroetyping of the moment. I don't have some sort of persona I slip into depending where I'm posting. In fact, I even cut and pasted one of the responses, about to see if it would copy in the same format to post here, because I was aware you'd done your drive-by shooting and were off again. Then I realised I should have set off for the cinema five minutes ago and didn't have time (Great film, incidently - Shutter Island - about people having MASSIVE nervous breakdowns )

Really Jon - stop clutching at straws. There are plenty of examples buried on C4C of me throwing out random posts because I was variously pissed off, pretty happy or sometimes into my second glass of wine. One-liners, or long and I'm sure irritatingly random and rambling. Oh and some photoshop stuff that took me more time than I had spare but hey, I was doing my bit! And sometimes I was cutting to Charlie - if I was in a bolshy mood. I didn't REALISE I was suppose to create my persona and stick to it, Jonny Boy?. Is that hypocrisy? Or just being a fucking human?!!!!! When c4c started becoming a pain because the person who didn't like me was the head honcho, I stuck with it for a while, made a bit of a play at fighting my corner, gave up quietly (my treat to myself for Christmas!), popped back for a short head-to-head spat, went again. When I went to CoLin, lots of people asked me why I wouldn't come back. I told them I hadn't decided I wouldn't, but just that after a few months of it, I'd tired of holding my breath if I saw Charlie had posted in a thread I'd posted in in case I'd find something that I'd then have to either rise to or swallow my pride and let lie. Or I'd find he'd not posted about me at all but I'd have had to experience that 'oh here we go again' sinking feeling. I started posting on a different forum and posted some spontaineous responses to things that had pissed me off. HOW I post is up to me and my mood.


Get a grip - You're unravelling. Don't just decide I'm another Clare Sudbury and can be your subject in a charater assissignation.

Is that OK for you???????

[David O'Donnell]

That is the hypocrisy. Look at the way you responded to me on there yesterday, compared to how you talk to me on here (when I'm behaving identically in both places)? How do you explain that difference, if it's not your feeling of power over there?

Bloody hell - a new hoop to jump through. Fuck it Jon, how about I got home from the gym, all bouncy and enjoying the lovely weather - found you had been posting over at Derek's house. We started a cat and mouse game of a me chasing around responding, because you had posted on two different threads AND you came online whilst I was responding just to add to the farce of it. I was in a good mood Jon - sorry to disappoint you. Yeah, I kind of riffed about with you, asked you if you minded me if I called you Jonjon, wrote some stuff in big letters. It was fun - buzzing between the threads seeing what you were banging on about next. Seeing what new rules of my personality I was supposed to be sticking to to not upset your chosen steroetyping of the moment. I don't have some sort of persona I slip into depending where I'm posting. In fact, I even cut and pasted one of the responses, about to see if it would copy in the same format to post here, because I was aware you'd done your drive-by shooting and were off again. Then I realised I should have set off for the cinema five minutes ago and didn't have time (Great film, incidently - Shutter Island - about people having MASSIVE nervous breakdowns )

Really Jon - stop clutching at straws. There are plenty of examples buried on C4C of me throwing out random posts because I was variously pissed off, pretty happy or sometimes into my second glass of wine. One-liners, or long and I'm sure irritatingly random and rambling. Oh and some photoshop stuff that took me more time than I had spare but hey, I was doing my bit! And sometimes I was cutting to Charlie - if I was in a bolshy mood. I didn't REALISE I was suppose to create my persona and stick to it, Jonny Boy?. Is that hypocrisy? Or just being a fucking human?!!!!! When c4c started becoming a pain because the person who didn't like me was the head honcho, I stuck with it for a while, made a bit of a play at fighting my corner, gave up quietly (my treat to myself for Christmas!), popped back for a short head-to-head spat, went again. When I went to CoLin, lots of people asked me why I wouldn't come back. I told them I hadn't decided I wouldn't, but just that after a few months of it, I'd tired of holding my breath if I saw Charlie had posted in a thread I'd posted in in case I'd find something that I'd then have to either rise to or swallow my pride and let lie. Or I'd find he'd not posted about me at all but I'd have had to experience that 'oh here we go again' sinking feeling. I started posting on a different forum and posted some spontaineous responses to things that had pissed me off. HOW I post is up to me and my mood.


Get a grip - You're unravelling. Don't just decide I'm another Clare Sudbury and can be your subject in a charater assissignation.

Is that OK for you???????

Sorry, nothing. Are there any English Lit courses going locally where you could get a diploma of your own?

[Jon Corby]

Is that OK for you???????

Yes, I think I get the idea. So you were flitting about between two threads I was posting in, writing random nonsensical insulting or goading posts to my perfectly rational responses. But how and what you post is up to you and your mood, but apparently I assume this doesn't apply to other people who should always be considerate of you. Am I close?

[Matt Morrison]

I had such high hopes when this thread started, but it's actually fucking boring now. Can someone else other than DOD Sue or Corby say something offensive please?

[Michael Wallace]

I had such high hopes when this thread started, but it's actually fucking boring now. Can someone else other than DOD Sue or Corby say something offensive please?

Fuck off.

[David Williams]

charater assissignation

Neologism of the week. Covers just about anything!

[Andy Wilson]

I thought I was ok but... no...

[Ryan Taylor]

I had such high hopes when this thread started, but it's actually fucking boring now. Can someone else other than DOD Sue or Corby say something offensive please?

I think the whole thing is a complete joke and should just be put to bed and deleted. Arseholes.

[Matt Morrison]

I hate everyone a little bit more / like everyone a little bit less than I did before, apart from Andy who could go out and kill a few children this afternoon and probably still be the nicest guy here.

[Andy Wilson]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVppuv9Pcqk

[Matt Morrison]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVppuv9Pcqk

(you so are.)

[Lesley Hines]

Stuff

More stuff

Having been a member of both forums I've refrained from posting a serious response until I'd done some proper reading and decided for myself where all this started. I'm aware that Charlie has had well-publicised spats with Sue and Derek, for which there had been a (limited) amount of fault on both sides. (I say limited as Richard Brittain defined the starting point to be where Charlie said that no-one cares what Sue thinks, which was a pretty generous response to having agreed that Jeff Stelling is a smug c*** (sorry, don't like that word) on a Countdown forum - it went downhill from there. As it happens that was a while ago and other stuff's gone on since. I don't know if that was the actual start but meh.)

Now I've read them, there have been all sorts of things posted on Offtopic I don't I agree with. I'm not going to be puerile enough to refer to it darkly as 'The Other Place', which is how this forum is referred to. However, I don't want to be associated with a forum populated by people who complain about links from personal sites, but link personal sites when it suits them, quote across forums but complain when the same's done to them, threaten (sorry Derek, I realise it was on request you wrote this) banning members who do so, editing user names and so on. Similarly, I realise that the original intention was to prevent having a forum whose posts were comprised of some of the nonsense on the internet, but demanding proper English shouldn't be necessary. Particularly not from posters who regularly invoke Skitt's Law.

Anways, the upshot is I'm not going to be posting there any more. I have absolutely no beef with Derek, but I've been looking and I can't be arsed to spend the next few days writing criticisms of some of the stuff I've seen.

Sue, your response has staggered me. You could have debated some of Jon's points or put them into your own context more rationally, but instead you've been sarcastic, dysphemistic and abusive in large emboldened letters. I can't be doing with it.

It seems de rigeur on the other forum to start a poll about what to include in your exit post from here (I mean ffs - wtf?!). Generally exit posts from this forum seem to be distilled self-pity so I shan't be bothering to write one. Anyone please feel free to copy it across.

I've been really disappointed by all this. The good news is Charlie's come out of this looking really good

[Kieran Child]

The second paragraph there seems a bit much like tarring a group of people with the same brush. I'm a moderator on that forum (I think) but haven't once complained about any behaviour on here. This seems like a tiff between people more than between forums.
Oh, and Jimmy showed me this thread. I haven't been being weird looking at every thread since I left waiting to reply to something.

[Ben Hunter]

The good news is Charlie's come out of this looking really good

He did

[Derek Hazell]

Just one question . . . How many posts slagging off my forum does it take to make up for those few posts about Charlie that you found which started all this?

Upto over 100 so far.

I dread to think how many if it is based on either a pro rata percentage in member numbers or post counts.

But, with so many clever number bods here, I am sure somebody will do the maths.

[Lesley Hines]

Derek and Kieran, my most sincere apologies I hadn't intended the post to read like that as I've now returned to it and read it again, and it's far stronger than I intended. Derek, I'll ring you to discuss it. A large part of my problem is that I, too, have felt tarred with the same brush (and very well put Kieran), where I actually had no reason to.

I do apologise, sincerely, and will sort my perspective out where it doesn't bore the pants off everyone else.

Edit: not in that picture Ben

[Jon Corby]

Just one question . . . How many posts slagging off my forum does it take to make up for those few posts about Charlie that you found which started all this?

Upto over 100 so far.

I dread to think how many if it is based on either a pro rata percentage in member numbers or post counts.

But, with so many clever number bods here, I am sure somebody will do the maths.

It's not 100 posts slagging your forum though, is it Derek? There's my big first one, pointing out the hypocrisy, a few agreeing, maybe a few not - I can't remember, then largely reasoned debate about the issue.

Charlie is pretty much the sole reason for the existence of your forum, so any defence along the lines of "Charlie who?" does ring a little hollow. If you want to play the numbers game though, what % of Charlie's posts here are attacks on Sue? Actually, where are they? So far we've had Richard linking to him saying "Nobody cares what Sue thinks" (which as Lesley and I have pointed out, under the circumstances was actually pretty reserved) and then we've had Sue trying to assert, er... something here, which I've also utterly owned her on.

Seriously, where is it?

[Marc Meakin]

Just one question . . . How many posts slagging off my forum does it take to make up for those few posts about Charlie that you found which started all this?

Upto over 100 so far.

I dread to think how many if it is based on either a pro rata percentage in member numbers or post counts.

But, with so many clever number bods here, I am sure somebody will do the maths.

Welcome back Derek.
Glad you've been given permission to speak.

[Gavin Chipper]

Welcome back Derek.
Glad you've been given permission to speak.

Maybe Derek and Charlie were sitting back watching the rest of us fight it out in this thread and decided that by staying out they were clearly the only two sane ones and decided to be mates again.

Not forgetting the other several hundred members who haven't posted in this thread

[Brian Moore]

Not forgetting the other several hundred members who haven't posted in this thread

No claims to sanity, but I've found the thread interesting. I tend to think of c4c as a school playground where there's a perpetual lively game of football going on between a core group ... if you're going to mix it with the tough boys, be prepared to get your knees grazed on the tarmac. Oh, and there will be the odd scrap, but that's the time for me to go off and do my trumpet practice.

[Jon Corby]

If you want to play the numbers game though, what % of Charlie's posts here are attacks on Sue? Actually, where are they? So far we've had Richard linking to him saying "Nobody cares what Sue thinks" (which as Lesley and I have pointed out, under the circumstances was actually pretty reserved) and then we've had Sue trying to assert, er... something here, which I've also utterly owned her on.

Seriously, where is it?

Nothing?

Okay.

[David O'Donnell]

Retrospectively liked and bumped so others can do the same (or at the very least, re-open a big ol' can o' worms).

[Jon Corby]

Haha, like it. (Although you'll notice I haven't formally.)

It'll also help Derek/Sue locate the thread, so they can post all their evidence that I requested a few posts up.

[Marc Meakin]

There is one thing in Derek's favour, his forum isn't polluted by Dmitry.

[Jon Corby]

There is one thing in Derek's favour, his forum isn't polluted by Dmitry.

Au contraire, Dmitry would probably have his own subforum on there by now.

On the internet Florists Help You Save Time
For any individual searching to post the best gift, it is constantly great to send flowers online. At all times one of the most common gifts, a awesome bouquet of one's preferred blooms will please everybody, from common holiday flowers to gifts given for no rationale but giving itself. Know about flower care.

Most individuals will buy flowers as the ideal Mother's Day gift, as tradition dictates. Even should you can't come residence to see your Mom within the day, international flowers delivery is a great aid, and moms will constantly acquire exceptional care of flowers sent over a distance.

Yet another motive to check out florists' websites will be to uncover the ideal wedding flower bouquet. You'll be able to tailor it to your preferences, no matter whether you like roses or - for that touch of dwelling - your national flowers. View flowers photos

Continually ensure that that you simply acquire from a web site that has a gallery packed with flower pictures. This way you could be sure that you are buying from another person with know-how. For case in point, folks with the USA can see that the vendor knows their state flowers.

[Ian Volante]

I'd forgotten about all this, quite brightened my lunchtime!

Shame Mr Green disappeared without bring his tongs and blowtorch round to visit. Or maybe he's visiting people as I type...