On 12/5/2015 10:40 AM, Michael Black wrote:
On Sat, 5 Dec 2015, Phil Kyle wrote:

On 05/12/15 12:16, Jimbo in the Borders ... wrote:

I admit it ....I wasn't beat up ...


I suggest ignoring Gareth for the rest of Dec. Not crowing about
shunning, or talking around him, just plain ignoring his posts.


YOu could just reply on topic, and then let the conversation go that
way, instead of it always turning to the usual ruckus.

Most threads he starts can be interpreted as on topic, and an excuse to
post something on topic. If others joined in, these places would be
better, but instead the usual crowd comes out and wants to "shun" him.

I've never looked in the UK newsgroup, all I see is when what happens
there falls out to the rec.radio.amateur.* hierarchy. Maybe there is a
real grievance, maybe not, but out here, I see people more interested in
attackhing him than talking about amateur radio.

Unfortunately there are some who have legitimate gripes with Gareth.
Those who he has sought to harm. They feel compelled to share their
trouble in no small part to warn others how dangerous he can be. They
sometimes post regardless of any bans or shuns.

Then there are others who just can't resist piling on because it is fun.
All in all this group has a very marginal signal to noise ratio.
Sometimes the group is ok, but then a brouhaha will break out and the
group is possessed by demons for a week or two.

Then there is the ongoing discussion of how to deal with him. It also
detracts from the small, but useful technical content of the group. So
many people have opinions they wish to share about how to deal with the
noise level, meanwhile adding to it just as my post has done.

--

Rick

"rickman" wrote in message
...

Unfortunately there are some who have legitimate gripes with Gareth.

Untrue.
Those who he has sought to harm.

I have never sought to harm anybody. I have, however, used the Internet
to assert the right of reply when that same Internet has been used to
blacken my name.

They feel compelled to share their trouble in no small part to warn
others how dangerous he can be.

I am not dangerous. I am a peace-loving pacifist. Are you making this up as
you go along?

Then there are others who just can't resist piling on because it is fun.

We agree on one thing

Then there is the ongoing discussion of how to deal with him.

No-one who is decent and proper and endeavouring to promote these
NGs as technical fora needs to be "dealt with".

Perahps it is a discredit to you that you have sided with the gratuitously
abusive children?

On Sat, 05 Dec 2015 16:16:55 +0000, gareth wrote:

"rickman" wrote in message
...

Unfortunately there are some who have legitimate gripes with Gareth.

Untrue.
Those who he has sought to harm.

I have never sought to harm anybody. I have, however, used the Internet
to assert the right of reply when that same Internet has been used to
blacken my name.

It's a real travesty of justice that the judge didn't agree with you,
Gareth.

"This email was sent with the sole intent of getting Mr Reay removed from
his position because you and you alone deemed him to be unsuitable as a
teacher. In that sense this was offensive to Mr Reay. "

He even went as far as suggesting that you're not of "right mind"

"This is childish, humorous banter that no one in their right mind would
take seriously. "

How are the preparations for the appeal coming along, Gareth? You haven't
mentioned it in quite some time.