JJ wrote:
You only get banned from the forum if you get abusive, I am sure Paul would do th e same to me if I called him names, accused him of lying, infact being just rude. No need for it.
Go on then JJ, why did I get a ban? Go and have a look at the thread in question...
http://www.cumbriasafetycameras.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=877&st=15
As far as I can see, all I did was wade in and offer a clearer interpretation on the semantics of what had been said. Steve made a statement purporting to be factual that was proven to be untrue, and I merely pointed this out. What does it matter what nomenclature I used. I described it as "a lie" which fitted perfectly with the dictionary definition I later posted, I'd still say it was the
mot juste!
Are you saying that I would have escaped censure if I had used a more politically correct alternative to "lie", such as "untruth", "falsehood", "deceit", or even Churchill's wonderfully opaque "Terminological Inexactitude"?
No, what it looks like from here is that once again events proved Steve to be wrong. And as usual, instead of simply holding his hand up and apologising for his original false statement, he has to try and save face. In this case it led to a series of unreasonable demands for retractions of perfectly truthful statements. Finally he lashes out by banning three members merely for "getting at him".
If this is typical of his balanced approach, then I have to say I find his tales of how he used to have his "finger on the button" somewhat alarming!