ForumGarden

Ol' Jj been working his magic for a long time!!



(See First Reply)

I don't like the way that woman behind them Is giving them the evil eye.

And someone's stuck post It notes all over the place.

oscar;1383995 wrote: I don't like the way that woman behind them Is giving them the evil eye.

And someone's stuck post It notes all over the place.


Its not a woman ... its a guy!

That little boy looks like he needs to wee.

SnoozeAgain;1384001 wrote: That little boy looks like he needs to wee.


I was excited ... okay?

jones jones;1384003 wrote: I was excited ... okay?


Knew it wouldn't be too long before you brought the tone down

Bruv;1384004 wrote: Knew it wouldn't be too long before you brought the tone down


Not you again? Don't you have anything better to do CB? You are becoming tedious in the extreme with your constant attempts at trying to be "Little Jj." The mould was broken after me man! Go away ... puleeeze!!

You were so cute..... I would have shared a sticky bun with you.

jones jones;1384005 wrote: Not you again? Don't you have anything better to do CB? You are becoming tedious in the extreme with your constant attempts at trying to be "Little Jj." The mould was broken after me man! Go away ... puleeeze!!


I do try to limit my input to your manifold threads........but as is my way of surfing the forum.....hitting New Posts on entry.........I find it impossible not to reply when it is alluded that a preteen male (supposed to be yourself) is sitting crossed legged to hide his "excitement"

My one liner was supposed to be of a humourous nature, I obviously touched a raw nerve oh chosen one.

I must say I find your threads 'amusing' ....... your ego disturbing.

oscar;1384007 wrote: You were so cute..... I would have shared a sticky bun with you.


I have lived many lives ... you have as well so I guess we shared a sticky bun or a Chelsea bun or two in the past!:wah:

Bruv;1384008 wrote: I do try to limit my input to your manifold threads........but as is my way of surfing the forum.....hitting New Posts on entry.........I find it impossible not to reply when it is alluded that a preteen male (supposed to be yourself) is sitting crossed legged to hide his "excitement"

My one liner was supposed to be of a humourous nature, I obviously touched a raw nerve oh chosen one.

I must say I find your threads 'amusing' ....... your ego disturbing.


(See my Pee Em on it's way to you shortly.)

jones jones;1384010 wrote: (See my Pee Em on it's way to you shortly.)
I read it and to be honest was astounded by the spite and venom and ............. I don't 'do' Pee Em conversations, especially about things that are written on a public forum. I have been using forums for many years, and this is the first time anyone has taken such an over the top exception to my meandering input.

I don't know the correct forum etiquette, but I am assuming the Private Message sent to me is mine to share with who I would like to share it with, if I am wrong I shall find out soon enough.

So for anyone that is interested here is the message, to make of what you will.

Bruv ... I know you mean well and I know that much of what you post is with "tongue in cheek." You have mentioned this many times before.

We all wear our "hats" here on FG and we like to portray ourselves in a certain manner. Some members go for the like "very grown up and no childish stuff for me" image. Some go for the "in your face" posting while others like the "I'll point out all your faults & past misdemeanors" thingee.

That is their democratic right and they are fully entitled to their opinion and their way of expressing themselves. If we enjoy the way a member posts, then we respond to them in a like manner. On the other hand, if we are annoyed by their attitude or offended in any way by their input, then we have a choice. We can, like some members do, confront these annoying posts head on and have our say, or we can, like I prefer to do, ignore them completely.

Personally, I find your "one liners" rather bland & your statement that "I find it impossible not to reply when it is alluded that a preteen male (supposed to be yourself) is sitting crossed legged to hide his "excitement" a little sanctimonious, to say the least.

Does the thought of a preteen being excited offend you?

You so remind me of a little terrier snapping at my heels all the time. I cannot decide if it is because you are sometimes genuinely offended me me/my posts, or if it is an attempt to get my attention because you like me and want so to be my friend. If it is the latter then I would welcome you as a buddy because I think you are basically a nice guy.

However, if this is not the case then I strongly urge you to rather ignore my posts. I do not wish to become involved in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. Be warned, for if you decide to take me on you should think long and hard about what the consequences might be for your ego.

Mine may disturb you ... but yours might well end up in tatters.

You take care now and have an awesome day.

Bruv;1384023 wrote: I read it and to be honest was astounded by the spite and venom and ............. I don't 'do' Pee Em conversations, especially about things that are written on a public forum. I have been using forums for many years, and this is the first time anyone has taken such an over the top exception to my meandering input.

I don't know the correct forum etiquette, but I am assuming the Private Message sent to me is mine to share with who I would like to share it with, if I am wrong I shall find out soon enough.

So for anyone that is interested here is the message, to make of what you will.


Bruv ... I know you mean well and I know that much of what you post is with "tongue in cheek." You have mentioned this many times before.

We all wear our "hats" here on FG and we like to portray ourselves in a certain manner. Some members go for the like "very grown up and no childish stuff for me" image. Some go for the "in your face" posting while others like the "I'll point out all your faults & past misdemeanors" thingee.

That is their democratic right and they are fully entitled to their opinion and their way of expressing themselves. If we enjoy the way a member posts, then we respond to them in a like manner. On the other hand, if we are annoyed by their attitude or offended in any way by their input, then we have a choice. We can, like some members do, confront these annoying posts head on and have our say, or we can, like I prefer to do, ignore them completely.

Personally, I find your "one liners" rather bland & your statement that "I find it impossible not to reply when it is alluded that a preteen male (supposed to be yourself) is sitting crossed legged to hide his "excitement" a little sanctimonious, to say the least.

Does the thought of a preteen being excited offend you?

You so remind me of a little terrier snapping at my heels all the time. I cannot decide if it is because you are sometimes genuinely offended me me/my posts, or if it is an attempt to get my attention because you like me and want so to be my friend. If it is the latter then I would welcome you as a buddy because I think you are basically a nice guy.

However, if this is not the case then I strongly urge you to rather ignore my posts. I do not wish to become involved in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. Be warned, for if you decide to take me on you should think long and hard about what the consequences might be for your ego.

Mine may disturb you ... but yours might well end up in tatters.

You take care now and have an awesome day.


Wow!! are you quaking in your boots Bruv.

Bruv;1384023 wrote: I read it and to be honest was astounded by the spite and venom and ............. I don't 'do' Pee Em conversations, especially about things that are written on a public forum. I have been using forums for many years, and this is the first time anyone has taken such an over the top exception to my meandering input.

I don't know the correct forum etiquette, but I am assuming the Private Message sent to me is mine to share with who I would like to share it with, if I am wrong I shall find out soon enough.

So for anyone that is interested here is the message, to make of what you will.


I'm wondering why this was pmmed to you and not posted on the thread

Betty Boop;1384025 wrote: Wow!! are you quaking in your boots Bruv.


No need to add to It Betty

theia;1384026 wrote: I'm wondering why this was pmmed to you and not posted on the thread


I wouldn't know.

oscar;1384027 wrote: No need to add to It Betty


What do you mean, Oscar?

oscar;1384027 wrote: No need to add to It Betty


Yes miss, sorry miss



Sorry, but that message contains veiled threats, probably the reason it was posted by pm rather than the thread. True colours and all that...

I've had a PM where a past beloved and admired member said that if he ever met me, he'd take great delight in strangling me to death. So JJ's PM didn't really freeze my heart in horror.

Betty Boop;1384030 wrote: Yes miss, sorry miss



Sorry, but that message contains veiled threats, probably the reason it was posted by pm rather than the thread. True colours and all that... Then It;s up to Bruv to report the PM should he choose. It's up to you to report the post and content of the PM should you choose.

oscar;1384033 wrote: Then It;s up to Bruv to report the PM should he choose. It's up to you to report the post and content of the PM should you choose.


Bruv chose not to, he took it public. I chose not to also because I believe disgusting PM's such as this should be public.

Maybe I'm missing something but all he said was that if Bruv continued to annoy him, he'd challenge him to a battle of wits and shred his ego by winning. I don't see how that's disgusting.

SnoozeAgain;1384035 wrote: Maybe I'm missing something but all he said was that if Bruv continued to annoy him, he'd challenge him to a battle of wits and shred his ego by winning. I don't see how that's disgusting.


I just can't understand why he needed to say it to Bruv in a pm

Maybe he was trying not to pollute his thread.

SnoozeAgain;1384035 wrote: Maybe I'm missing something but all he said was that if Bruv continued to annoy him, he'd challenge him to a battle of wits and shred his ego by winning. I don't see how that's disgusting.


Then, why didn't he just continue the chat with bruv in the thread, as Theia pointed out? It's a threat because he didn't say it on the boards but in a PM. It's typical behaviour designed to make people go away that aren't basking in his light and adoring him. What, exactly is the point of all jj's threads if the general membership are not permitted to say something that he doesnt like in his threads without risking an unpleasant pm.

SnoozeAgain;1384037 wrote: Maybe he was trying not to pollute his thread.


The thread can be split off if jj wishes.

Betty Boop;1384038 wrote: Then, why didn't he just continue the chat with bruv in the thread, as Theia pointed out? It's a threat because he didn't say it on the boards but in a PM. It's typical behaviour designed to make people go away that aren't basking in his light and adoring him. What, exactly is the point of all jj's threads if the general membership are not permitted to say something that he doesnt like in his threads without risking an unpleasant pm.


I dunno but he seems to get offended easily.

I read it and to be honest was astounded by the spite and venom and ............. I don't 'do' Pee Em conversations, especially about things that are written on a public forum. I have been using forums for many years, and this is the first time anyone has taken such an over the top exception to my meandering input.

I don't know the correct forum etiquette, but I am assuming the Private Message sent to me is mine to share with who I would like to share it with, if I am wrong I shall find out soon enough.

So for anyone that is interested here is the message, to make of what you will.

Citizen Bruv; You have exercised your democratic right here by making a Private Message public. Personally I have received hundreds of private messages I did not particulary like, but I always respected the word "private, " which in my book is defined as: "secluded from the sight, presence, or intrusion of others." Be that as it may.

I have nothing else to say to you except, thank you for the insight you have provided me into your persona.

You take care now and have an awesome day.

Miss Boop: Your input has both surprised, disappointed, but most of all saddened me.

You to take care and have an awesome day.

jones jones;1384045 wrote:

Citizen Bruv; You have exercised your democratic right here by making a Private Message public. Personally I have received hundreds of private messages I did not particulary like, but I always respected the word "private, " which in my book is defined as: "secluded from the sight, presence, or intrusion of others." Be that as it may.

I have nothing else to say to you except, thank you for the insight you have provided me into your persona.

You take care now and have an awesome day.


I have also had Private Messages from persons that I would never ever disclose on an open forum, your Pee Em was not in the same category.

I looked up 'Persona' to be clear what it meant......Wikipedia gives this....

A persona, in the word's everyday usage, is a social role or a character played by an actor. The word is derived from Latin, where it originally referred to a theatrical mask. The Latin word probably derived from the Etruscan word "phersu", with the same meaning, and that from the Greek πρόσωπον (prosōpon). Its meaning in the latter Roman period changed to indicate a "character" of a theatrical performance

When I was younger I read a piece that said "Man shows different faces to, his mother, his wife and to his work mates" You may know where I read that and give it's origin.

I have tried to show the same face to everybody throughout my life, I have worked at shedding any affectation or falsehood in my dealings with people that surround me. The persona you see on this forum is the same one you might see should we meet me on the street..........I shall not be altering my outlook at this late stage in my life.

I don't think it is me that has persona 'Issues'



Thank you for your good wishes, my day so far has been awesome.

SnoozeAgain;1384035 wrote: Maybe I'm missing something but all he said was that if Bruv continued to annoy him, he'd challenge him to a battle of wits and shred his ego by winning. I don't see how that's disgusting.


You obviously have not been around some of the half wits I have.

YZGI;1384074 wrote: You obviously have not been around some of the half wits I have.


Oh I bet I have, or at least their brethren. I was paraphrasing, I wouldn't have actually chosen that wording.

Betty Boop;1384038 wrote: Then, why didn't he just continue the chat with bruv in the thread, as Theia pointed out? It's a threat because he didn't say it on the boards but in a PM. It's typical behaviour designed to make people go away that aren't basking in his light and adoring him. What, exactly is the point of all jj's threads if the general membership are not permitted to say something that he doesnt like in his threads without risking an unpleasant pm.


So....... no new Interesting threads from JJ today. How many new posts have been posted today? None.

It's all very well attacking JJ until page one dies a death the moment he stops posting.

I haven't got Involved with this because Bruv Is also one of my favourite members here and I respect him.

JJ Is an asset to this forum as today has proved and I was dissapointed when logging on to find he'd not posted anything new.

Betty, It was only this week that you wrote on another thread about how moderators are meant to be Impartial. Writing " It's typical behaviour designed to make people go away that aren't basking in his light and adoring him " about JJ Is hardly Impartial Is It ?

As I understand It, JJ private messaged Bruv so any unpleasantness was kept out of public threads. That was actually the gentlemanly thing to do.

Coming In and Insulting JJ Is hardly going to help...... It's certainly not Impartial.

Let's just hope JJ posts tomorrow.

oscar;1384116 wrote: So....... no new Interesting threads from JJ today. How many new posts have been posted today? None.

It's all very well attacking JJ until page one dies a death the moment he stops posting.

I haven't got Involved with this because Bruv Is also one of my favourite members here and I respect him.

JJ Is an asset to this forum as today has proved and I was dissapointed when logging on to find he'd not posted anything new.

Betty, It was only this week that you wrote on another thread about how moderators are meant to be Impartial. Writing " It's typical behaviour designed to make people go away that aren't basking in his light and adoring him " about JJ Is hardly Impartial Is It ?

As I understand It, JJ private messaged Bruv so any unpleasantness was kept out of public threads. That was actually the gentlemanly thing to do.

Coming In and Insulting JJ Is hardly going to help...... It's certainly not Impartial.

Let's just hope JJ posts tomorrow.


No, it's not impartial Oscar, that's because I've been on the receiving end of JJ. JJ may continue to post, no problem here, what he can't do is dictate who can participate in his threads then behind the scenes play domination games.

Betty Boop;1384122 wrote: No, it's not impartial Oscar, that's because I've been on the receiving end of JJ. JJ may continue to post, no problem here, what he can't do is dictate who can participate in his threads then behind the scenes play domination games. Then If you feel that way, It should surely be dealt with In the back room by moderators, not come In and openly attack JJ.

oscar;1384127 wrote: Then If you feel that way, It should surely be dealt with In the back room by moderators, not come In and openly attack JJ.


I'd be interested in your opinion oscar. Given that the site no longer sanctions members with bans as a result of their behaviour, what do you mean by "dealt with In the back room by moderators"?

I would genuinely like to hear from anyone that thinks my comments anywhere on this forum would give rise to the offence I seem to have caused JJ.

I am open to any criticism about the way I have dealt with this.

I have campaigned against this sort of bickering nonsense, round and round in circles type thread, and now I am involved in one.

I could apologise..................but for what ?

Bruv;1384129 wrote: I am open to any criticism about the way I have dealt with this.I've spent years trying to persuade people to publish offensive PMs, I'm delighted you responded to it in the way you did. I commend the process to everyone.

spot;1384128 wrote: I'd be interested in your opinion oscar. Given that the site no longer sanctions members with bans as a result of their behaviour, what do you mean by "dealt with In the back room by moderators"? Coat Tailing ?

Work It out Spot... If BB objected to the PM sent to Bruv, she could have reported It.

oscar;1384131 wrote: Coat Tailing ?Reported posts aren't private to moderators oscar, they're viewed by all subscribing members.

What does "coat tailing" mean?



Given that the site no longer sanctions members with bans as a result of their behaviour, what do you mean by "dealt with In the back room by moderators"? In what way does reporting a post have any effect when no sanction exists?

spot;1384132 wrote: Reported posts aren't private to moderators oscar, they're viewed by all subscribing members.

What does "coat tailing" mean?



Given that the site no longer sanctions members with bans as a result of their behaviour, what do you mean by "dealt with In the back room by moderators"? In what way does reporting a post have any effect when no sanction exists? My terminology Is merely that.... a descriptive use of subscribed members out of view of non subscribed members.

Now... If I believed you had entered this thread at this late stage for any other reason that to troll and pot stir, I may entertain you further. Because I don't, I shall leave you here on your own.

oscar;1384133 wrote: My terminology Is merely that.... a descriptive use of subscribed members out of view of non subscribed members.

Now... If I believed you had entered this thread at this late stage for any other reason that to troll and pot stir, I may entertain you further. Because I don't, I shall leave you here on your own.
Maximal embarrassment is about the only language JJ understands, if bans are no longer an option. Maximal embarrassment works, too.

What does "coat tailing" mean?

oscar;1384127 wrote: Then If you feel that way, It should surely be dealt with In the back room by moderators, not come In and openly attack JJ.


Doesn't work though does it, whatever moderators do it's wrong. All appalling behaviour should be out in the open. Otherwise we end up with gangs ganging up on others with no idea of the real truth.

Betty Boop;1384135 wrote: Doesn't work though does it, whatever moderators do it's wrong. All appalling behaviour should be out in the open. Otherwise we end up with gangs ganging up on others with no idea of the real truth. I am not bashing Moderators BB, I know It's a tough call sometimes. I feel a lot of fuss has been made about the PM JJ sent. I agree with Snooze that I do not see any real veiled threat there. I just felt that whilst JJ Pm'd Bruv to keep unpleasentness out of the thread, you came In with the Insults which appear as though you're taking sides.

This could have been resolved amicably between Bruv and JJ. There was no need for anyone to Intervene unless the message was reported.

spot;1384130 wrote: I've spent years trying to persuade people to publish offensive PMs, I'm delighted you responded to it in the way you did. I commend the process to everyone.


I got a three day ban for doing it... I guess I was ahead of my time.

SnoozeAgain;1384140 wrote: I got a three day ban for doing it... I guess I was ahead of my time.


We could strike you a Pioneer's Medal. You deserve one.

Hey spot, off topic but remember Frank from 24HourForums? He said he suspected that I'm mentally ill. I thought the comment was pretty funny considering the source. What do you think?

SnoozeAgain;1384142 wrote: Hey spot, off topic but remember Frank from 24HourForums? He said he suspected that I'm mentally ill. I thought the comment was pretty funny considering the source. What do you think? Spanky Frankie... He's at Mock now... He left 24 because Spot joined.

Let me try and sum it up.......

JJ posted a picture of himself when he was a child.......apparently.

There was some banter about it.......then somebody said it looked like he was in need of a pee.

JJ said that he was excited.

I said..........as a throw away line.......he was lowering the tone........a smart answer might have been......silence.....or 'Yes Bruv LOL' or similar.

Then exception was taken for every other thing I had ever said.........I then received a PUBLIC announcement of a PRIVATE message......that I found 'threatening' or at the very least sinister.

I then published the previously announced Private message.

JJ was absent at role call today.

If I have left anything out.......let me know.





The most peculiar thing is.......although I obviously find JJ to be somewhat irritating........I hold no malice against him......my comments are as frivolous as his posts......at no time have I put the proverbial boot in......not that I would.