Ophiuchus' Visit to OzChess & Banning - Page 3 - OzChess

**Bill Gletsos** · 12-30-2007, 09:38 PM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

OK, that is the way you see it.

No thats how my lawyer sees it.

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

So be it. However, that does not give you a good enough reason to be personally abusive to the other posters here. Sure, you CAN be abusive, but we ask that you are not. The choice is yours to make: be nice or be awful.

Bill, you do not HAVE TO act butch here - just discuss matters with civility.

Yes, I have see how civilly you have referred to Kevin and Denis.
As such you are the last person to tell anyone how they should post.

**Iconoclast** · 12-30-2007, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos

No thats how my lawyer sees it.

With that bullying, your reputation declines in the eyes of anyone to whom your reputation matters.

I remind you that at CC, a threat of legal action is a bannable offense. It would be an ethical dilemma for you to do here what you cannot do on the board where you moderate.

In any case, you are being given a fair go here - and that is all that can be given, a fair go.

**Bill Gletsos** · 12-30-2007, 10:33 PM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

With that bullying, your reputation declines in the eyes of anyone to whom your reputation matters.

As usual you are deluding yourself.

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

I remind you that at CC, a threat of legal action is a bannable offense. It would be an ethical dilemma for you to do here what you cannot do on the board where you moderate.

In any case, you are being given a fair go here - and that is all that can be given, a fair go.

The problem with AO and you is that not only are you both this sites owners but also the ones who have a history of defaming others.

**Iconoclast** · 12-30-2007, 10:34 PM

Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos

Yes, I have see how civilly you have referred to Kevin and Denis.
As such you are the last person to tell anyone how they should post.

I have already stated what will happen should they choose to become active posters here.

As for being me being civil to them when they are not here, I cannot be being uncivil because they not here. One can only be civil with those with who you have a discourse - and we do not have one. I am merely giving them the abuse that they deliver from CC to me and others. I am not being civil or uncivil to them. They cannot expect common courtesy when they are not here to receive common courtesies - as you are.

**Bill Gletsos** · 12-30-2007, 10:37 PM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

I have already stated what will happen should they choose to become active posters here.

As for being me being civil to them when they are not here, I cannot be being uncivil because they not here. One can only be civil with those with who you have a discourse - and we do not have one. I am merely giving them the abuse that they deliver from CC to me and others. I am not being civil or uncivil to them. They cannot expect common courtesy when they are not here to receive common courtesies - as you are.

You were abusive to them even when you could post on chesschat.
Your behaviour now is no different except your facade of decency.

**Iconoclast** · 12-30-2007, 10:42 PM

Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos

The problem with AO and you is that not only are you both this sites owners but also the ones who have a history of defaming others.

I am not a site owner. I contribute funds to run it.

Nevertheless, what EXACTLY is the problem? Is it that someone with a here-say history of upsetting some people should not be on BBs.

**Iconoclast** · 12-30-2007, 10:51 PM

Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos

You were abusive to them even when you could post on chesschat.
Your behaviour now is no different except your facade of decency.

No, my behaviour here is one of my normal courtesy to others in this community. It is different to that back at CC.

Again, Bill, which is the facade? Me at CC or me at OZC?

**Bill Gletsos** · 12-30-2007, 10:53 PM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

I am not a site owner. I contribute funds to run it.

Thank you for the clarification.

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

Nevertheless, what EXACTLY is the problem? Is it that someone with a here-say history of upsetting some people should not be on BBs.

It is not a matter of upsetting people.
The issue is that you and AO have a history of making defamatory posts.
As such to expect you both to moderate defamatory posts when you yourselves make them is expecting too much.
It is that simple.

**Iconoclast** · 12-30-2007, 11:02 PM

Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos

The issue is that you and AO have a history of making defamatory posts.
As such to expect you both to moderate defamatory posts when you yourselves make them is expecting too much.

Do you make defamatory posts?

**MOZ** · 12-30-2007, 11:54 PM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

Do you make defamatory posts?

It may be time to consider the good advice you gave earlier, post 212. >

No, nobody is going to ban you <Bill>, but you might find that people will not be willing to seek clarifications or advice from you since your answers tend to contain barbs.

**Bill Gletsos** · 12-30-2007, 11:56 PM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

Do you make defamatory posts?

No, I do not.

**Iconoclast** · 12-31-2007, 08:04 AM

Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos

No, I do not.

Really? Then you would have no apprehension in defending the word "porkies" as it was used by you at CC, to a jury of ordinary decent people.

**Iconoclast** · 12-31-2007, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by MOZ

It may be time to consider the good advice you gave earlier, post 212. >

Yes, you are right. Thou shall not escalate a discussion to a flame war. I will be mind full of that.

**Bill Gletsos** · 12-31-2007, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

Really? Then you would have no apprehension in defending the word "porkies" as it was used by you at CC, to a jury of ordinary decent people.

It is good to see that you are as clueless about the law as you are about chess.

**Bill Gletsos** · 12-31-2007, 11:03 AM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

No, my behaviour here is one of my normal courtesy to others in this community. It is different to that back at CC.

Again, Bill, which is the facade? Me at CC or me at OZC?

Your behaviour on bulletin boards going back prior to 2003 was that of the same abusive, vile and vulgar individual. Your abuse of others is even evident over of the closetgrandmaster site.

You can keep up your facade of decency here, but you really are not fooling anyone. It is in your posts regarding Kevin and Denis here that your usual abusive behaviour once again spews forth.

12-30-2007, 09:38 PM	#31 (permalink)
Bill Gletsos Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 653	Originally Posted by Iconoclast OK, that is the way you see it. No thats how my lawyer sees it. Originally Posted by Iconoclast So be it. However, that does not give you a good enough reason to be personally abusive to the other posters here. Sure, you CAN be abusive, but we ask that you are not. The choice is yours to make: be nice or be awful. Bill, you do not HAVE TO act butch here - just discuss matters with civility. Yes, I have see how civilly you have referred to Kevin and Denis. As such you are the last person to tell anyone how they should post.

12-30-2007, 10:21 PM	#32 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 2,302	Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos No thats how my lawyer sees it. With that bullying, your reputation declines in the eyes of anyone to whom your reputation matters. I remind you that at CC, a threat of legal action is a bannable offense. It would be an ethical dilemma for you to do here what you cannot do on the board where you moderate. In any case, you are being given a fair go here - and that is all that can be given, a fair go. __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

12-30-2007, 10:33 PM	#33 (permalink)
Bill Gletsos Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 653	Originally Posted by Iconoclast With that bullying, your reputation declines in the eyes of anyone to whom your reputation matters. As usual you are deluding yourself. Originally Posted by Iconoclast I remind you that at CC, a threat of legal action is a bannable offense. It would be an ethical dilemma for you to do here what you cannot do on the board where you moderate. In any case, you are being given a fair go here - and that is all that can be given, a fair go. The problem with AO and you is that not only are you both this sites owners but also the ones who have a history of defaming others.

12-30-2007, 10:34 PM	#34 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 2,302	Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos Yes, I have see how civilly you have referred to Kevin and Denis. As such you are the last person to tell anyone how they should post. I have already stated what will happen should they choose to become active posters here. As for being me being civil to them when they are not here, I cannot be being uncivil because they not here. One can only be civil with those with who you have a discourse - and we do not have one. I am merely giving them the abuse that they deliver from CC to me and others. I am not being civil or uncivil to them. They cannot expect common courtesy when they are not here to receive common courtesies - as you are. __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

12-30-2007, 10:37 PM	#35 (permalink)
Bill Gletsos Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 653	Originally Posted by Iconoclast I have already stated what will happen should they choose to become active posters here. As for being me being civil to them when they are not here, I cannot be being uncivil because they not here. One can only be civil with those with who you have a discourse - and we do not have one. I am merely giving them the abuse that they deliver from CC to me and others. I am not being civil or uncivil to them. They cannot expect common courtesy when they are not here to receive common courtesies - as you are. You were abusive to them even when you could post on chesschat. Your behaviour now is no different except your facade of decency.

12-30-2007, 10:42 PM	#36 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 2,302	Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos The problem with AO and you is that not only are you both this sites owners but also the ones who have a history of defaming others. I am not a site owner. I contribute funds to run it. Nevertheless, what EXACTLY is the problem? Is it that someone with a here-say history of upsetting some people should not be on BBs. __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

12-30-2007, 10:51 PM	#37 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 2,302	Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos You were abusive to them even when you could post on chesschat. Your behaviour now is no different except your facade of decency. No, my behaviour here is one of my normal courtesy to others in this community. It is different to that back at CC. Again, Bill, which is the facade? Me at CC or me at OZC? __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

12-30-2007, 10:53 PM	#38 (permalink)
Bill Gletsos Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 653	Originally Posted by Iconoclast I am not a site owner. I contribute funds to run it. Thank you for the clarification. Originally Posted by Iconoclast Nevertheless, what EXACTLY is the problem? Is it that someone with a here-say history of upsetting some people should not be on BBs. It is not a matter of upsetting people. The issue is that you and AO have a history of making defamatory posts. As such to expect you both to moderate defamatory posts when you yourselves make them is expecting too much. It is that simple.

12-30-2007, 11:02 PM	#39 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 2,302	Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos The issue is that you and AO have a history of making defamatory posts. As such to expect you both to moderate defamatory posts when you yourselves make them is expecting too much. Do you make defamatory posts? __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

12-30-2007, 11:54 PM	#40 (permalink)
MOZ Volunteer Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Ozchess is the marginalised cyber-spot where cc-Mods choose to engage with cc-banned posters. Posts: 3,541	Originally Posted by Iconoclast Do you make defamatory posts? It may be time to consider the good advice you gave earlier, post 212. > No, nobody is going to ban you <Bill>, but you might find that people will not be willing to seek clarifications or advice from you since your answers tend to contain barbs. __________________ FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

12-30-2007, 11:56 PM	#41 (permalink)
Bill Gletsos Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 653	Originally Posted by Iconoclast Do you make defamatory posts? No, I do not.

12-31-2007, 08:04 AM	#42 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 2,302	Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos No, I do not. Really? Then you would have no apprehension in defending the word "porkies" as it was used by you at CC, to a jury of ordinary decent people. __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

12-31-2007, 08:08 AM	#43 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 2,302	Originally Posted by MOZ It may be time to consider the good advice you gave earlier, post 212. > Yes, you are right. Thou shall not escalate a discussion to a flame war. I will be mind full of that. __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

12-31-2007, 10:56 AM	#44 (permalink)
Bill Gletsos Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 653	Originally Posted by Iconoclast Really? Then you would have no apprehension in defending the word "porkies" as it was used by you at CC, to a jury of ordinary decent people. It is good to see that you are as clueless about the law as you are about chess.

12-31-2007, 11:03 AM	#45 (permalink)
Bill Gletsos Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 653	Originally Posted by Iconoclast No, my behaviour here is one of my normal courtesy to others in this community. It is different to that back at CC. Again, Bill, which is the facade? Me at CC or me at OZC? Your behaviour on bulletin boards going back prior to 2003 was that of the same abusive, vile and vulgar individual. Your abuse of others is even evident over of the closetgrandmaster site. You can keep up your facade of decency here, but you really are not fooling anyone. It is in your posts regarding Kevin and Denis here that your usual abusive behaviour once again spews forth.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread: