![Snicker :snicker:](./images/smilies/icon_snicker.gif)
What in the bloody hell is going on in here
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
Moderator: Burnaby49
Nothing to see here, move along. All will be deleted.Bill Lumbergh wrote:![]()
What in the bloody hell is going on in here
In reply to this and other comments:Wake Up! Productions wrote:I too have had a small run-in with Burnaby over this thread, and I too think that he can be a tad heavy handed at times. You bring up some very good points, none of which are going to magically bring your original post back to life. The point is ... state you grievances in a single post and then move on.nebuer wrote:Was it the intent of Rooke to frustrate discussion, though? Especially when he could have so clearly protected against such an event. Is this something that you've alerted the court to? (I think they should know in any event; it could potentially be an oversight).Burnaby49 wrote:
Agreed. However I chose "as a moderator on an internet forum" to try and adhere to the intent of the court order regardless of whether or not I have a legal obligation to do so or whether or not the order is easily circumvented. I know Boisjoli's background and I don't consider it of direct relevance to his current antics. There may be some causality but not enough that I see a need to consider his past here. His present is quite sufficient.
Golly! I go out with my wife for lunch and groceries and come home to a flame war which includes Wesley, our senior moderator! First a comment on the above quote. The background is that Steve put up an avatar that I spotted and found offensive. So I questioned the other moderators on how we should handle it. I wanted it gone but, as usual, we put it to the vote. The result was unanimous agreement that it not be allowed. So deleting your avatar was not a rogue unilateral decision made by a dictatorial wserra. All Wes did was politely ask you to remove it yourself. When you fussed about that Wes chose not to get into a pointless argument with you about it and so he deleted it.Wake Up! Productions wrote:I suppose this is why you "Boisjolied" my avatar? Because (in YOUR opinion ALONE) it was in bad taste?wserra wrote:No one is censored for ideas short of things like racism or pedophilia. The only other bounds are those of good (or at least non-offensive) taste.
Wake Up! Productions wrote:Nothing to see here, move along. All will be deleted.Bill Lumbergh wrote:![]()
What in the bloody hell is going on in here
So, you admit that it was a REQUEST, not a DEMAND !!! I am more than happy to comply with any REQUEST that a moderator has, provided that I am given an appropriate REASON for the REQUEST.Burnaby49 wrote:All Wes did was politely ask you to remove it yourself. When you fussed about that Wes chose not to get into a pointless argument with you about it and so he deleted it.
More simple that that. "You" are chosen because "you" are yes men! "You" don't mind somebody being above "you" as long as some one is below "you". Classical slave talk. Publish this slave boy. All copied and pasted elsewhere over the net. Well done.Burnaby49 wrote:We moderators have no interpersonal skills. That's why we are chosen.
In all honesty, this was the first time that I have ever Googled his (supposedly copyrighted) name, and I did not expect this. It doesn't surprise me, I just didn't expect it.It warns that a security threat assessment of Allen Nelson Boisjoli, "has rated him as having the capability to commit an act of serious violence against members of the Alberta Public Sector.
Yes, it's an old bulletin from the days when the powers that be were catching on to the fact that a few of freeman fold might not be the peace loving, do no harm boys they were pretending to be.Wake Up! Productions wrote:I'm certain that this is very old news to folks on here, but I just stumbled on this CBC article from 2012:
Security bulletin issued for Alberta Freeman http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ ... -1.1227511
In all honesty, this was the first time that I have ever Googled his (supposedly copyrighted) name, and I did not expect this. It doesn't surprise me, I just didn't expect it.It warns that a security threat assessment of Allen Nelson Boisjoli, "has rated him as having the capability to commit an act of serious violence against members of the Alberta Public Sector.
Thank you for the recap. You have to understand that at that time I was cheering on the wrong team so to speak. I find myself having to review the past 4 years of my life looking from the opposite side of the two-way mirror.arayder wrote:Yes, it's an old bulletin from the days when the powers that be were catching on to the fact that a few of freeman fold might not be the peace loving, do no harm boys they were pretending to be.
Meads v. Meads was a few months away from publication.
Menard was suggesting that the C3PO was not above shooting it out with the cops.
Keith Thompson had just had a number of firearms seized by the cops prior to his removal from the house he'd lost to the bank.
Daren Wayne McCormick had just been sentenced to three years in a federal prison after threatening to draw his replica .44 and shoot it out wild west style with a couple of Nova Scotia cops.
Fortunately Boisjoli turned out to be all pen and no pistol.
Oh! Really.Wake Up! Productions wrote:Dean Clifford is going to prison Friday January 8, 2016 !!!
Wrong topic for that line of discussion.pigpot wrote:Oh! Really.Wake Up! Productions wrote:Dean Clifford is going to prison Friday January 8, 2016 !!!
It's always the same thing with Allen.Fussygus wrote:. . .Allen. . .is letting his emotions get the better of him and offending the conscious of the very people that affect the outcome of his future. He should draw from this and try and consider what is based on truth and logic versus emotion.
If I were him I'd trace my steps and see where my offense started, make amends and then see what happens.
"The angry man defeats himself in battle as well as in life".Fussygus wrote: Clearly his responses are emotionally charged which is severely damaging his ability to both communicate and observe what is happening. He will never "win" if he continues to his emotions dictate over logic.
Fuzzy
Not necessarily. The illusion of something bad happening stimulates the same regions of the brain that deal with the fight/flight responses.Fussygus wrote:Obviously whatever happened to him to push him down this road was not good, and clearly it had something to do with people in authority.