Site behaviour

Don't know about Barton's, but my gobshite meter's a bit more lively this morning

I wandered off from TFF for a few days after my spat with Aussie and have now returned and read what has been said.

I think I've got three points to make (enter Monty Python 1,2,3,4 joke here).

Firstly I wasn't so much implying that this forum condones child abuse per se, however I was particularly disappointed in that during the (roughly) 48 hours from Aussie first telling me to "Get a life and stop trying to take the moral high ground" to me questioning whether this was "the sort of forum that condones child abuse", the only response to his joke appeared to be one of support from martyfeldmanseyes. I might be doing Mr Eyes an injustice and he could have been referring to another post of Aussie's on that thread, but the chronological order implied to me that he was on Aussie's side of my argument. I couldn't believe that nobody else had responded to the joke or to my view, so I tried to kick-start some reaction that might show that there are posters on here who also felt the "joke" was out of order.

2. It was (as Mr Beeste pointed out) the verb "to shaft" and its unpalatable implication in the context of the joke that I felt crossed all lines of decency. Replace it to form "take advantage of miners" and the joke (I believe) reverts to the right side without losing any of its effectiveness. Or maybe it doesn't.

As I might have laid on a bit too thickly, the real suffering of victims of sexual abuse shouldn't be forgotten when working out what jokes are acceptable and which aren't. IMHO, any jokes about Sir James Saville OBE, KCSG (for the moment anyway) are fine, but when jokes ridicule the victims then it's out of order. I heard the "British sense of humour" defence yesterday at work from one bloke. Really, have we lost all perspective of what is right and wrong? Yes, we have a cruel sense of humour and I recall when a friend of mine, who was in the army, had his leg amputated after a bike accident and was visited in hospital by all his mates, each one brought along a single shoe or boot. Yes we can laugh at adversity but its plain wrong to laugh at someone else's real suffering isn't it? Hasn't anyone got any April Jones jokes? No, because that simply isn't funny, even to us Brits.

However (3.) as Voltaire has been wrongly attributed with saying: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.". And that was really what my "condoning" accusation was all about. One thing about Dave The Gull is that he splits opinion. I think he is a healthy requirement of this forum as long as there are enough people willing to respectively argue for and against his views (however retarded they may be - only joking DTG! ) If there are pros and cons you get quality debate which is a good thing. With regard to my "complaint" to Aussie about his joke, there appeared to be none.

4. (told you!) As an ex-employee of the Beeb (1981 to 1999) I was well aware of the rumours concerning Jimmy (as well as other famous names, some of them still on your screens now). Times were different then, which doesn't make it right. I was told of BBC-executives who had rooms block-booked at what is now the Hilton Kensington for "extra-curricular activities", I know of well-known presenters who literally had to get on their knees to get a job (and they weren't begging, or necessarily female). One of my colleagues refused to get into a lift ever again with a high-profile name. She wouldn't tell me exactly why although she gave me the background and when I asked why she didn't complain she asked me if I really thought anyone would believe her word over his.

I've told many a sick joke in my time, but I don't think I've ever laughed at the victim which is what I felt was happening here.

5. The thing that also (illogically) got my reaction was being labelled a "liberal". As I rather condescendingly wrote in my reaction to Aussie, what exactly is wrong with being a liberal? As a society we can surely only survive and prosper if we are liberals. The most successful capitalists are so because they have a liberal approach to the money markets. The most successful politicians are so because they have a liberal (as opposed to Liberal) approach to power and running a country (either that or they are dictators). Etc, etc.

The opposite of liberal is fascist (in my opinion anyway). Is there anyone on here (including DTG) who would rather be a fascist than a liberal? Maybe there is, but I don't think so.

Anyway, about playing two up front...

Many thanks Rags for taking the time to full explain how and why you felt the way you did. I will try and explain things from my point of view and why I took a back seat so to speak and did not get involved with what was going on.

I will start with a confession that is probably going to end up making me look the thick git on the TFF.

Aussie made his post on what was a political type thread and I only read what he had put quickly. I genuinely did not know he was referring to Jimmy Salville and thought it was Seville he had written and just thought it must be someone to do with politics. It was not until you made your post I made the connection and worked out the so called joke.

Two years ago Rob took over running and moderating the TFF for me, back then I was not fit to do the job and was doing a very poor job of it full stop. I do not need to go into the reasons why that was the case as everyone knows on here.

Rob is doing a fantastic job and he is far better educated than I am and so I leave everything to him as far as the posts are concerned and their suitability for this forum. I was unaware he was away at the weekend and just thought he had read the post and felt there was no need for him to take any action.

I have from day one only really wanted to be a poster on the TFF, I had thought I could run the forum and be a poster as well, that proved not to be the case. The only time I will ever do any moderation on here is if one, Rob is away or two, what has been posted can't wait to be delft with until he does log in next.

I believe fully in self moderation anyway and for it too work we all must think about anything we post and the implications and outcomes it might have. We all know what is acceptable theses days and what subjects are best avoided.

As long as we always stick to arguing the points made and not getting insulting or personal, then we should all be able to enjoy good sensible debate.

No injustice (and no worries), Rags, I thought it was a good joke. But that in no way implies that I condone what Jimmy Savile did. And I am pretty certain that Aussie doesn't condone it either. We just have a different sense of humour. I expect I wouldn't like all of your jokes either! Anyway, I think this is all done and dusted now.

The use of "liberal" as a pejorative term seems to be another unwanted import from the USA, where politicians, talk show hosts, actors, singers, football players, cab drivers etc seem to be divided into liberals and conservatives. In the world of Fox News, Anne Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, it appears that anyone less right wing than oneself is a liberal, and is, thereby, tainted with unAmericanism and possibly a closet Muslim terrorist.

This morning, our two friends the Mail and the Express both led with xenophobic (or, in American terms, conservative) stories designed to incite fear of invasion. One had the EU forcing the UK to provide benefits for "migrants" while the other concentrated on the same EU bullying the NHS into treating "foreigners". It is taken for granted that the readership shares the editorial view that people from other countries are less worthy of basic human compassion simply because they were not born in the UK and haven't grown up absorbing the traditional British conservatism. Some of them even have darker complexions. Shock! Horror!

This is from the Guardian's recent obituary for Herbert Lom:

In 1939, on the eve of the German invasion of Czechoslovakia, he arrived in Britain with his Jewish girlfriend, Didi, but she was sent back at Dover because she did not have the correct papers. Her subsequent death in a concentration camp haunted him all his life.

In Mail/Expressworld this is how people like Didi should be treated. Jewish? From Czechoslovakia? An economic migrant, to be sure. Don't allow her any income or medical treatment, put her back on the boat and if she ends up dying in a concentration camp it's nothing to do with us.

Damning someone with a single word is the tactic of the bully and the fool. It just means you don't have to bother getting into a reasoned discussion, which is handy when you are actually just an ignorant gobshite. (Note the irony, there, folks). If it's "liberal" to believe that everyone, regardless of colour, religion or sexuality should be entitled to shelter from the rain, enough food to keep them alive and access to life-saving medical treatment then, frankly, I believe that most of us should hold our hands up and say "Liberal, c'est moi!"

Then please use the voting system for the best post of the month.

It is a post I fully agree with, but we all know not everyone in this country would agree with the sentiments in the post.

Now that post By Alpinejoe is one of the best I have read on the TFF. we are all caring in this country and as stated the problem is the unfairness we see. Sort that out and I'm sure things would be so much better in the UK.