Free Flight, Free Speech

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic. ... &start=240

In fact, I have seen PMs where Jabberwocky admitted to other users in private that he was publicly disagreeing, and debating, with Thorsten or me despite knowing exactly that we were right, because he simply enjoyed the debate, i.e. for the sake of having the argument, and fully well knowing that he was wasting our time, feeling that he was "protecting" others while "dealing" with us.

I think you could say that Thorsten and I are rather seasoned debaters around here, but that thought never occurred to us - and it changed the way we perceived him, and the way we dealt with him.

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of this tactic by Jabberwocky..

Look at that first sentance...

I have seen PMs where Jabberwocky admitted to other users in private

When any of you is accused of posting a private email on this forum, remember this post as an example where those 'seasoned debaters' on FG's forum are looking at your private messages.

Now it might be that Jabberwocky was betrayed by a person he privately posted too... but it could also be an example of abuse of board privalages by either the admin or moderator trawling through a person's private communication once they've been banned.

Either way to actually admit to reading someone elses private communications and then use it as a weapon against them within a discussion/debate/argument is dispicable.

Be aware, there are some seriously nasty pieces of work out there

Simon

bomber wrote:Look at that first sentance...

I have seen PMs where Jabberwocky admitted to other users in private

When any of you is accused of posting a private email on this forum, remember this post as an example where those 'seasoned debaters' on FG's forum are looking at your private messages.

Now it might be that Jabberwocky was betrayed by a person he privately posted too... but it could also be an example of abuse of board privalages by either the admin or moderator trawling through a person's private communication once they've been banned.

Either way to actually admit to reading someone elses private communications and then use it as a weapon against them within a discussion/debate/argument is dispicable.

Be aware, there are some seriously nasty pieces of work out there

Simon

Hi Bomber,
That's lamentably, what they mean by this:

http://www.flightgear.org/flightgear-policy-document/

The FlightGear project operates as a meritocracy on the principles of politeness, respect, trust and humility.

Oh, in my work i see it so often that little brats do not (want to) know their code of honour as admin, and sift through management documents. Generally they have no good career anymore after being caught. I always advice people to encrypt documents themselves, if they are absolutely not meant to be seen by these little criminals, who smudge the whole profession.

So what are the chances it happened here? I deem them very high. Can it be proven? Probably. If Jwocky has sent something like this, and he can remember to whom, then he can determine the likelihood of that person forwarding it to Hooray or one of his friends. Also i find that now Hooray has laden suspicion of high probability on him by publishing out of the PM's, he has an obligation to produce his alibi that he did not get it via a criminal road. For that he can produce the original forwarding to him or one of his friends.

Kind regards, Vincent

Just goes to show what tyrants are on the official forum. Discusting

Well, I would actually like to see those emails. What I wrote once to another user was "I should let it go, but it was so fun to show off that idiot!"

If that's all you wrote..... that's some hell of a lot of embellishment

You see, people know

- I never forget
- I never flinch

So, at the moment, I am a little tamer than usual because I am busy
Food for thought: What could happen if I have more time?

Who knows.

But it is a scary thought of what you could do with a year's worth of spare time on your hands jwocky.

Jwocky, i do not care about embellishments. The issue is: Can you exclusively identify a PM that could have been used for this embellishment, and remember to whom you sent it? If the likelihood of that person to have forwarded it is 0, then they hang.

Kind regards, Vincent

Well, it was long ago and the person isn't there for some time anymore. So ... I don't think, they really refer to that one unless someone scavenged the PM folders of absent user by abusing some kind of administration right. That would go far beyond what a normal moderator can do.