Metropol

marksi wrote:The still of Wallace and Gromit currently under active discussion in the BBC ONE thread is not from the ident. It's from one of the Christmas animations.

The Christmas discussion has now been shifted to a thread of its own...
http://www.tvforum.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28793

But do they still think that it's an ident? They'll be disappointed as usual and the ones which are most stuck with Christmas=Dickensian grandiose train of thought will whine about it the loudest and complain their Christmas is ruined... again.

As if the Coca-Cola trucks isn't enough for them, when will 1991 return for them?

Now aside from what exactly Asa would do, explain to me why you believe that hiding behind a false name, a false avatar, a false email and a proxy and then using a third party site to break a court ruling counts as "freedom of speech".

I find your comments offensive to the extreme.
How have you based any of those comments!

1) I have never posted my name on this board, if your talking about my pseudonym you hide behind one as well, "Hymagumba" - hipocrite.
2) How can you claim my avatar is false? I took the photo yesterday, FYE. Probably just envy that one.
3) Because you can trust people on the internet, not a fake e-mail address just a disposable one. Just as well, since Sput was threatening to post it on the forum.
4) Because of hackers, if you bother to read my earlier posts!
5) Because there are more important things than the law? In there, I wouldn't count your chickens before they hatch.

I am not going drawing to one of your arguments, completely illogical. :roll:
I have been a sad victim of intimidation and abuse from members of this site, and remember i don't HAVE to stay here- my returning was only at gavin's kind request as he thought it to have a good idea.

ShowbizGuru wrote:1) I have never posted my name on this board, if your talking about my pseudonym you hide behind one as well, "Hymagumba" - hipocrite.

My name is well known within this board, as are the names of the majority of old school members.

2) How can you claim my avatar is false? I took the photo yesterday, FYE. Probably just envy that one.

I suspect it is fake due to your previous comments on your privacy "I don't do things that have a reasonable risk of my privacy or security being damaged." for example. So if this is the case, why go to all that bother to hide, and then put your face on the internet, especially what with you having broken the law previously on this site.

In addition to this, presuming your avatar was in fact yourself, I would hazzard a guess at you being 26 at the oldest, so I wonder where your comments such as "my old pal michael winner" and loads of other suggestions of you being much older came from on the other site.

3) Because you can trust people on the internet, not a fake e-mail address just a disposable one. Just as well, since Sput was threatening to post it on the forum.

You'll find that he asked how you could like it IF he did so, thus showing his disagreement with your stance in the BNP thread. I seriously doubt that he would have done so not least because it would have ruined his argument.

4) Because of hackers, if you bother to read my earlier posts!

Right

5) Because there are more important things than the law? In there, I wouldn't count your chickens before they hatch.

That fails to answer anything.

Shall we continue?

ShowbizGuru wrote:I have been a sad victim of intimidation and abuse from members of this site, and remember i don't HAVE to stay here- my returning was only at gavin's kind request as he thought it to have a good idea.

Gavin allowed you to return because generally he doesn't ban anyone without reason, he confirmed it was you so he allowed you on. However, the intimidation and abuse I'd say are only brought on by your actions so far here and on TVF so whilst sad it's not exactly a surprise either. You do not have to stay and can go if you like, if you don't like the atmosphere regarding you then you can leave.

actually, let's just check something shall we.

According to this you joined on 10/11/08, whereas the guru on tvf joined in 2004. You were banned on your first day as Gav suspected you were JM, but as showbizguru PMd gav on tvf he unblocked you.

Expect showbizguru didn't PM gav did he? showbizguru. PMd gav, and that member joined on the 10th of November too. Funny that, especially as that user has a different email provider, different IP range and indeed has never posted esp as the existing guru wasn't banned.

toodaloo.

Whilst I like to be as welcoming (and trusting) as possible, its difficult to conclude anything other than underhand behaviour in light of this revelation from my learned colleague.

Showbizguru, or whatever your name isn't, you are banned.

So, this showbizguru PM'd Gav and not this one?

Odd string of events. What of the real showbizguru (with a capital S), I reckon he'd be free to join if the thought took him, right?

Nini wrote:I reckon he'd be free to join if the thought took him, right?

Of course.

How long will it be I wonder until Martinface starts crowing...

cdd wrote:How long will it be I wonder until Martinface starts crowing...

Can't imagine that it'd be too long. He's been reasonably quiet, as of late.