Scandalous, how about this post....

[Mouseflame]

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=19564253

"I've posted some - but they tend to get resolutely boycotted - that's what happens when you flick ink pellets at the milk monitors....

Your own ent was appreciated - I hope you don't get your knuckles rapped for it!

Perhaps this life will be longer than the others.

Who can say? - doubtless there will soon be the pattering of tiny feet as they run breathlessly to the Headmaster's study to lodge yet another accusation......"Please Sir - it's that rough boy again....."

Regards, anyway. "

You seem to run into trouble quite frequently here on the forum judging from this post. I´ve read your reply to my previous post, but think it´s better to post a new one to give you some room to reply.

In my opinion you´re a trouble maker it seems, do you think it´s strange that I think that that you might have slipped some comments to the moderator....

On the other hand, you may be right and be an upfront and honest guy that speaks into ones face. I have my doubts however and I think that´s my good right.

Mousehill

 

[Scandalous]

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=19564253

"I've posted some - but they tend to get resolutely boycotted -
that's what happens when you flick ink pellets at the milk
monitors....

Your own ent was appreciated - I hope you don't get your knuckles
rapped for it!

Perhaps this life will be longer than the others.

Who can say? - doubtless there will soon be the pattering of tiny
feet as they run breathlessly to the Headmaster's study to lodge
yet another accusation......"Please Sir - it's that rough boy
again....."

Regards, anyway. "

You seem to run into trouble quite frequently here on the forum
judging from this post. I´ve read your reply to my previous post,
but think it´s better to post a new one to give you some room to
reply.

In my opinion you´re a trouble maker it seems, do you think it´s
strange that I think that that you might have slipped some comments
to the moderator....

On the other hand, you may be right and be an upfront and honest
guy that speaks into ones face. I have my doubts however and I
think that´s my good right.

Mousehill

Nice of you to address me to my face!

Let's get this rubbish out of the way. I think that you were trying to scam a laptop. I'm entitled to my view, and I posted my view perfectly openly.

I wouldhave thought that the post you quoted gave you my opinion of the tale-carriers who delight in reporting other posters. However, since you seem to have missed the message, let me say that I have NEVER reported ANYONE for ANYTHING here, or elsewhere.

I generally have enough trouble staying Kosher here, myself, without whining and creeping off to complaina bout other people. I never saw your reply to my second post - but I hope it was suitably robust, and assure you that if I had read it i would have provided you with an even more robust answer, which would have been posted openly, for all to see - NOT sent to Uncle Phil. I don't need moderators to look after me.

Whether you believe me, or not, is franly immaterial to me, but if you want to find out who stabbed you, I suggest you apply your efforts elswhere.

If I have anything to say to you, or anyone else, I'll say it clearly and openly - alwyas have, always will.

Miight I also suggest that you get your supporters to pressure Phil into revealing the source of the complaint - then I can graciously accept your apology, and we can get back to what passes for normaility in here?

 

[nzshooter]

you accuse someone of fraud and you expect an apology for something that no-one said !! You are a joke.

Si.

 

[Jim King]

Well George, it seems that I may have misjudged you, as I posted an unfavorable comment in another thread based on the assertion that you were the tattletale. If that is not the case I hereby apologize - if it's true, I stand by my remark.
--
Jim King - Retired Colormonger - Suburban Detroit, Michigan, USA; GMT -4h (EDT)



* * * * *
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

• Sir Winston Churchill

* * * * *
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.

• Albert Einstein

 

[janneman02]

Nice of you to address me to my face!

Allow me to jump into this discussion.

Let's get this rubbish out of the way. I think that you were
trying to scam a laptop. I'm entitled to my view, and I posted my
view perfectly openly.

My dear Mr. (???, not even sure about that) Scandalous.
I would like to correct you on the use of the word "scam".

I thik you lack of the beautiful Dutch language may have influenced your opinion, so therefore I consider it my duty to explain a bit.

I have done so in another thread, but I fear it may be drowned in all other replies so here I go again:

I posted two comments to your thread. As far I am concerned you
were acting fraudulently in trying to win a valuable prize by
rigging votes.

I would imagine that DPreview were quite concered about being party
to a criminal act.

Fraud??? Criminal act????

I distinctly remember Mousehill replying on that and let me post the words of the invitation to enter the contest:
"Doe mee

Zet je mooiste, grappigste of ontroerendste zomerfoto online, nodig al je vrienden uit om te stemmen en win. Uit de 25 fotos met de meeste stemmen kiest de jury uiteindelijk de 10 wninnaars"
In English (No Babelfisj)

"Join in, post your most beautifull, funniest or most moving picture online, invite all your friends to vote and win. A jury will pick ten winners out of the 25 pictures with the most votes".

So, about Fraud and Criminal act:
First of all, you are specifially ASKED to tell you friends about the contest.
Secondly, a jury will eventualy decide on who the winner will be....

I think this second thing is a safeguard against Fraud, they can always choose to let good taste prevail over quantity of votes

This might be your playground - but site owners are responsible
for content and have to carry the can if legal proceeding ensued.

I don't suppose you'd be rushing to pay Askey's court costs, would
you?

No need for that after my translation....

By the way, if you are so in favor of justice, you may want to agree on the injustice of a ban, especially without giving a warning, a reason, nor a possibility to reply on alleged "wrong"activities...
So do us a favour and write to Phil....

[unquote]

--
janneman
http://www.pbase.com/jl2

 

[Don Allison]

Guys, Guys, Guys, Gals, Gals, Gals...This lad joined the forum three weeks ago. Please let him flame out. He'a bit censorious and obviously has a block of sale on his shoulder. The important thing in this issue is to have Mike rejoin the forum and continue to make the contributions we know him for.
--



'Nothing could-be-finah-than-to-be-in-Carolina-in-the-morninnnnnn...'

 

[Enrico L]

Scam to get a Laptop....???????????????

I think Mike asked for votes to get in the top 25
the a professional jury would judge from those and awards the prices....

I do not think this is the same....

And Yes I could read the site and that was what it is all about get as many friends as you can to vote for you.

Mike had more then friends here it seems!!!

--
Enrico

http://www.flickr.com/photos/enricol/

 

[LuzArt]

I think you'll find Scandulous is an old time forum member. A newer moniker required being banned himself, one or three times.

Ben
--

 

[Scandalous]

Well George, it seems that I may have misjudged you, as I posted an
unfavorable comment in another thread based on the assertion that
you were the tattletale. If that is not the case I hereby
apologize - if it's true, I stand by my remark.

That's OK, Jim - I don't bear grudges, and it was understandably easy to think I was the one to blame.

a bit too easy, if you think about it - if I wanted to indulge in sneaky behavour (which I don't, didn't, and wouldn't) I would hardly have let it be known that I condemned Mousehill's actions by posting in the thread!

All this banning and unbanning is tiresome ( and I know about these things! ) as far as I'm concerned the forums would benefit from being a bit more robust - and that is unlikely to happen if everyone is wondering whether the next time thy go to log on they find themselves chucked out.

So, for the last time, and for the record, I DID NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT MOUSEHILL OR HIS BLASTED COMPETITION!, other than by the two posts I made in the thread.

 

[Mouseflame]

Scandalous,

I´m very inclined to believe your statement here and as I generally have good faith in people I´ll go with it. I appreciate guys who stand up for themselves and are outspoken.

I´m not here on the forum to get into arguments with people, when you take the time to read my posts back you´ll see that I generally avoid discussions as I tend to have enough of them at work.

Although I do hope that the future won´t prove me to be wrong here, I do appologise for thinking that you were responsible for sending a notification to Phil.

I did sent a mail to Phil a couple of hours ago, but did not ask for names, neither will I do so now.

Regards,
Mike Mousehill

 

[JBug]

Scandalous, I would say that the accusations made against you are understandable because your posts are generally negative and unnecessarily confrontational. This is the environment you've created for yourself. Mousehill on the other hand is a very positive and helpful person; all of the recent posts supporting him show this.

This incident reminds me of an old saying:

Don't foul your own (water) well. In other words, don't poison yourself. Scandalous, your unpleasant demeanor gives others reason to suspect you in situations like this.
--
Jun
Mousehill Supporter
http://pbase.com/junpark

 

[Scandalous]

I think you'll find Scandulous is an old time forum member. A newer
moniker required being banned himself, one or three times.

Yes, well, in these uncertain times, I'm taking the Fifth on that one.......except to say that someone who may (let's stress the 'may') have known the bitterness of forum rejection on a couple of previous occasions is unlikel to visit that penalty on someone else!

If such a person was a sneak, he (or she) would probably have applied that talent to avoid getting banned themselves!!

this all all hypothetical, you understand.......

What I can say with absolute certainty is that there are some posters here who seem to delight in getting others banned, but I ain't one of 'em.

 

[mvb123]

Let's not jump to conclusions about who posted a complaint, there is always the risk of accusing someone who didn't do it and IMHO that's worse than not accusing anybody.. My thought is that someone from another forum did it, but I'm not accusing anybody ;-). I wouldn't give him/her the pleasure of having started bad feelings between some pentax users.
--
Menno

 

[Scandalous]

Scandalous, I would say that the accusations made against you are
understandable because your posts are generally negative and
unnecessarily confrontational. This is the environment you've
created for yourself. Mousehill on the other hand is a very
positive and helpful person; all of the recent posts supporting him
show this.

This incident reminds me of an old saying:
Don't foul your own (water) well. In other words, don't poison
yourself. Scandalous, your unpleasant demeanor gives others reason
to suspect you in situations like this.

Well, I'll promise to try and not lose any sleep over it, if you'll do the same. Deal?

 

[Caat]

I've just come from another forum run by a software company (which shall remain nameless!) and a particular thread that got very nasty (I nearly complained about the language but decided against it....so far).

Anyway I come back here (a nice calm place) and find all this has blown up! But nice to see people here can talk sensibly and calmly about things!

I am confused that Mousehill was banned.

But I was also confused as to why this forum runs as it does anyway. Its completely unmoderated except when it comes to the extreme of banning people (no moderation but banning seems ill-balanced), and seems to run a fairly unusual forum software - but neither of these things seemed to ever have been a problem (except the lack of edit option! [problem for me occasionally])

I guess what I mean to say is that these forums in general could be a little more transparent, in both 'how' they are run and the format.

But I hope Mousehill is given a full explanation of why he has been banned.

--
http://www.homepages.ucl.ac.uk/~ucsacco/

 

[LuzArt]

Good post Jun, nice to see you on here, albeit under crummy circumstances!

I have to say it didn't take long for Scandulous to be involved in accusations and negative posts again did it?

Whether he infact did instigate the motions for Mike's expulsion or not i couldn't say. None of us actually have knowledge of that and it's not really relevant.

But what is clear is the reputations of forum members - the support for Mousehill has been overwhelming, though i guess not surprising. He's constantly posting his work and discussing his methods and ways with all.

Where's the support for Scandulous? As Jun pointed out, his reputation has stuck through one moniker after another, through no-one's fault but his own.

Who cares who dobbed Mike in or not? At the end of the day, i'd rather be a repsected forum member than not.

Ben
--

 

[Scandalous]

Scandalous,

I´m very inclined to believe your statement here and as I generally
have good faith in people I´ll go with it. I appreciate guys who
stand up for themselves and are outspoken.
I´m not here on the forum to get into arguments with people, when
you take the time to read my posts back you´ll see that I generally
avoid discussions as I tend to have enough of them at work.

Although I do hope that the future won´t prove me to be wrong here,
I do appologise for thinking that you were responsible for sending
a notification to Phil.

I did sent a mail to Phil a couple of hours ago, but did not ask
for names, neither will I do so now.

OK, Mike - I appreciate someone who is big enough to admit they made a mistake (even if that apology is a bit qualified!....)

As I, myself, would have admitted (had the notorious thread continued) after Jan pointed out that friend's votes were encouraged by the competitiion organisers (not sure that they had mass voting in mind, though)

However, that's irrelevant now - you can be quite certain I had absolutely nothing to do with any complaint, and am never in favour of anyone getting banned - whether it's me, you, RH, Lance, or any of the other casualties that have stumbled on the DPreview highway.

Doubtless you will soon be restored to favour (and, if not, I have heard that it's possible to circumvent these things....) I will add my two penn'orth to Mr Askey's mail box for what it's worth, but I'm sure you don't need my support.

Regards.

 

[Scandalous]

Good post Jun, nice to see you on here, albeit under crummy
circumstances!

I have to say it didn't take long for Scandulous to be involved in
accusations and negative posts again did it?

Whether he infact did instigate the motions for Mike's expulsion or
not i couldn't say. None of us actually have knowledge of that and
it's not really relevant.

But what is clear is the reputations of forum members - the support
for Mousehill has been overwhelming, though i guess not surprising.
He's constantly posting his work and discussing his methods and
ways with all.

Where's the support for Scandulous? As Jun pointed out, his
reputation has stuck through one moniker after another, through
no-one's fault but his own.

Who cares who dobbed Mike in or not? At the end of the day, i'd
rather be a repsected forum member than not.

Allow me to say that the day I need or want your respect will be day I decide to cut my wrists and bow out of this life!

You haven't even got the decency to admit that your slimy inuendo was directed at the wrong person!! - pathetic! Why not have the guts to come right out and state that I was to blame? - why squirm like a weasel and say, 'I really couldn't say'!

You'll have to excuse me now, I feel like vomiting!

 

[LuzArt]

Allow me to say that the day I need or want your respect will be
day I decide to cut my wrists and bow out of this life!

Gees, that cuts deep.

You haven't even got the decency to admit that your slimy inuendo
was directed at the wrong person!! - pathetic! Why not have the
guts to come right out and state that I was to blame? - why squirm
like a weasel and say, 'I really couldn't say'!

I couldn't say for sure is what i was saying but yes, i do think you would have done it. I wouldn't put it past you. I've complained about you to Phil previously as i have today about all this, like others have i'm sure.

Squirming eh?

You'll have to excuse me now, I feel like vomiting!

How original.

Ben

--

 

[JBug]

Hey, Ben! I know I tend to hide every now and then but I try to help out my friends. And speaking of friends, I'm going to have some friends over this weekend for the (US) Labor Day holiday weekend because I really enjoy the company of other people. I guess there are some who don't want to be around other people but that's their problem, not mine.

Great to hear from an Aussie friend!
--
Jun
http://pbase.com/junpark