Ok Clive but that might not be easy, shall I copy and paste the argument so far and flag it, as for the Moderator?
Incidentally, don't apologise for being a trekky, there's plenty around....
Forum Names
Page 3 - Passionate about caravans & motorhome? Join our community to share that passion with a global audience!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Incidentally, don't apologise for being a trekky, there's plenty around....
That is what I was invited to do. Cannot fault the Moderator.Thanks Lol - Sorry but I am a trekkie (really sad isn't it) and slopped off to watch the penultimate episode of Star Trek Enterprise.
Your point about the Moderator is a good one and from what I now understand the frustration on their part at what has happened of late.
The very real fear is that if this forum becomes an expensive joke for the publishers in that it is taken over by a small group of extremists rather than being used by caravanners for caravanners then they will pull the plug.
I certainly do not want that to happen and I am sure neither does the editorial team. The infamous article on sink drainers showed how valuable the forum is both to us as the consumers and PC as the provider.
But it only works if the users of the forum are representative.
As I said they are as frustrated with the stupidity as much as the rest of us.
That is what I was invited to do. Cannot fault the Moderator.Point taken - its a bit like the old West Country joke about asking directions and being told "best not to start from here" If you think its funny to be accused of what I have then I look forward to hearing how you and your family deal with it.
It was just getting back to "normal" when the belligerents opened up again despite the best efforts of the Moderator to control things.
And before anybody derides my right to having my say having been accused over the last few months of:-
a) Being stupid
b) Sucking up to another forum user
c) Being a bully on the road
d) Being an environmental terrorist
c) Being a paedophile
by this individual, supported by others, I have lost patience with them. Not even the Moderator banning them stoped their aggressive bullying.
Unfortunately for them if they knew me better and my history they would have thought twice about doing what they did. I am a laid back individual until someone "pokes me" without reason.
Ask yourselve the question - how would you and your family react to you or one of your family being accussed of being a paedophile.
As I said they are as frustrated with the stupidity as much as the rest of us.
Obviously keep hitting the wrong submit key tonite!
Clive I have read your postings with much interest, as a retired person who has worked in the legal profession (not as a barrister or solicitor or anything fancy I might add) I would be grateful if you would clarify something for me if you wouldn't mind. In your postings you said you knew the identity of the workplace of an individual, how did you come by this information? The reason I ask is because there are laws in place which protect the identity of an individual, these being the data protection act and The freedom of information act which are most stringent, so that private and personal information cannot be given to anybody who asks for it from an institution who holds information about you, such as a bank or in this case Pc magazine. To get the information you would need a court order showing "just and reasonable cause" This would take many weeks, take it from me the courts work very slowly! if pc magazine have given you this information without a court order then a law has been contravened, and the authorities should be notified of this, if however as I suspect, you do not have this information then it could be seen that you are harassing individuals and this can have serious consequences for you, I would advise you to only publish fact, if you should publish anything at all.
If anyone reads this I would be grateful if you wouldn't mind popping over to towing safely and answering my question. Thanks!
Clive please don't answer my question in towing safely as I have seen how you berate people with your opinions and I would like people to know that others can safely answer my question without your boorish attitude.
If anyone reads this I would be grateful if you wouldn't mind popping over to towing safely and answering my question. Thanks!
Clive please don't answer my question in towing safely as I have seen how you berate people with your opinions and I would like people to know that others can safely answer my question without your boorish attitude.
Deborah - I run my own business and am registerred with the Information Commissioner Wycliffe House Water Lane Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF as per the regulations governing the Data Protection Act 1998.
I work with this act every day and believe you are mistaken in that for me to run fowl of it in this case, somebody would need to complain.
If a complaint is logged then all I have to do is to provide the data we have on file to show just cause as to the actions we have taken.
As for the timescale - you were correct but presumably things move a little faster now. See Mathews Post 30th July 2005 11:52 am.
Finaly I would not dream of answering a question not directly aimed at me. I am far too much of a gentleman to do so.
I will put you last paragraph down as a one off aberation in that it seems somewhat out of context given the sensible nature of your first. I have never called anybody names on this Forum or criticised their opinions. Yet here you are, someone I do not know stating that I "berate" people and that I have a "boorish attitude".
Yawn!!
I work with this act every day and believe you are mistaken in that for me to run fowl of it in this case, somebody would need to complain.
If a complaint is logged then all I have to do is to provide the data we have on file to show just cause as to the actions we have taken.
As for the timescale - you were correct but presumably things move a little faster now. See Mathews Post 30th July 2005 11:52 am.
Finaly I would not dream of answering a question not directly aimed at me. I am far too much of a gentleman to do so.
I will put you last paragraph down as a one off aberation in that it seems somewhat out of context given the sensible nature of your first. I have never called anybody names on this Forum or criticised their opinions. Yet here you are, someone I do not know stating that I "berate" people and that I have a "boorish attitude".
Yawn!!
Clive you are bound to come under attack like this purely by the way that you deliver your sermons and keep quoting your "professional associations" and knowledge of the law, in which case you really should have known better than to publish a sick joke about sex with a 12 year old which I as a father of a young daughter I found particularly abhorrent.
May I refer you to the previous postings on this.
As for my postings being sermon like
Bless you my child
As for my postings being sermon like
Bless you my child
Clive I have read your postings and I agree with the others on this forum, you do berate people, in fact you seem to argue with anyone that doesn't agree with you :- Big Roy, Lutz, Mick etc etc etc I find your attitude condescending and dare i say it rather arrogant and pompous.
If as you say you do work with vulnerable people why on earth did you write a joke about underage sex with adults? No wonder others have embarrassed you about it, You should have known better especially a person in your line of work. Tut Tut.
As far as I can see you alone have exasperated the situation by bringing even more attention and embarrassment to yourself, but you are so arrogant you cannot see it. You should go back and read your postings on this site, it is you who is the bully, you should be apologising to those named above.
If as you say you do work with vulnerable people why on earth did you write a joke about underage sex with adults? No wonder others have embarrassed you about it, You should have known better especially a person in your line of work. Tut Tut.
As far as I can see you alone have exasperated the situation by bringing even more attention and embarrassment to yourself, but you are so arrogant you cannot see it. You should go back and read your postings on this site, it is you who is the bully, you should be apologising to those named above.
You can trust the females to show up the males for being a silly bunch of bickering fools! Why is it that females are so sensible and men so stupid?
Christine - I dealt with all of this ages ago. It is not me that keeps raking it. For reasons best known to you, Big Roy and Deborah - you just will not let it go.
The joke was not about what has been inferred - exactly the opposite and the moderator has confirmed it. The reference to underage sex in the joke was to make it clear how unacceptable it was!!
What I find interesting is that as soon as someone comes on to say that he or she agrees with what I have said - a "new" name pops up trying to rake it all up again.
Tiresome - very tiresome
If the way I use the English Language offends you then tough.
As for being embarrassed - I never said I was but you are trying to infer in your posting that I am.
The joke was not about what has been inferred - exactly the opposite and the moderator has confirmed it. The reference to underage sex in the joke was to make it clear how unacceptable it was!!
What I find interesting is that as soon as someone comes on to say that he or she agrees with what I have said - a "new" name pops up trying to rake it all up again.
Tiresome - very tiresome
If the way I use the English Language offends you then tough.
As for being embarrassed - I never said I was but you are trying to infer in your posting that I am.
Great - the War of the Sexes!!You can trust the females to show up the males for being a silly bunch of bickering fools! Why is it that females are so sensible and men so stupid?
You go first!
Incidently would you like to explain why you think I have been augumnetative with Lutz and Mick?Clive I have read your postings and I agree with the others on this forum, you do berate people, in fact you seem to argue with anyone that doesn't agree with you :- Big Roy, Lutz, Mick etc etc etc I find your attitude condescending and dare i say it rather arrogant and pompous.
If as you say you do work with vulnerable people why on earth did you write a joke about underage sex with adults? No wonder others have embarrassed you about it, You should have known better especially a person in your line of work. Tut Tut.
As far as I can see you alone have exasperated the situation by bringing even more attention and embarrassment to yourself, but you are so arrogant you cannot see it. You should go back and read your postings on this site, it is you who is the bully, you should be apologising to those named above.
Nothing could be further from the truth based upon my contact with both of them?
Come on - you will have to do better than that if your what you utter here is to have any validity.
Clive in answer to your response I think your response itself shows just what type of a man your are. and I quote "Tiresome - very tiresome
If the way I use the English Language offends you then tough." yes it does offend me.
The lutz mick reference was in your inability to answer sally's question on the bmw and yet again your attitude shone through.
And as for embarrassment you jolly well ought to be.
If the way I use the English Language offends you then tough." yes it does offend me.
The lutz mick reference was in your inability to answer sally's question on the bmw and yet again your attitude shone through.
And as for embarrassment you jolly well ought to be.
Clive
As I said in my other post, the legal issue is up to you. Can't you just take whatever action you have decided upon and stop airing your dirty laundry in public?
Unfortunately, as much as I have valued your contributions in past postings you seem to have dominated the forum and I feel you have given out far too much personal information about your life. Move on now and act with dignity.
Lisa.
As I said in my other post, the legal issue is up to you. Can't you just take whatever action you have decided upon and stop airing your dirty laundry in public?
Unfortunately, as much as I have valued your contributions in past postings you seem to have dominated the forum and I feel you have given out far too much personal information about your life. Move on now and act with dignity.
Lisa.
well said Christine, Clive we await some Latin quotations with baited breathClive in answer to your response I think your response itself shows just what type of a man your are. and I quote "Tiresome - very tiresome
If the way I use the English Language offends you then tough." yes it does offend me.
The lutz mick reference was in your inability to answer sally's question on the bmw and yet again your attitude shone through.
And as for embarrassment you jolly well ought to be.
Christine - I never answerred Sallys question because Lutz had already done so. In my professional opinion I think Lutz is potentially vulnerable by being helpful on this Forum but not adding a disclaimer - I for one most certainly value his opinion and from his responce to me he reciprocates.
Let me show you a mature conversation - this is on Towcars :-
CliveV
2 Aug 2005 12:06 PM Great car - always loved the P6 - just come back from droping a car off for a minor repair and there in the workshop was an original Ford Capri - the one that was derived from the saloon with an "Ford Anglia" type rear window. Beautifully restored - a real pleasure to look at. A British car that looked good with rear "fins".
I am having a senior moment here as I cannot remember what the name of the saloon version was? Ford made a lot of them but not many of the coupe version that was the first Capri.
The 3.5L engine will pull most things and spares are cheap and plentiful. Have a look at Rimmer Bros website www.rimmerbros.co.uk - I have found these guys very helpful tho' I notice they mention the SD1 a lot but not the P6.
Worth a try tho'.
Lutz
2 Aug 2005 12:28 PM Clive, you are referring to the Consul Classic, originally called the Consul 315, later only by that name for export. And the Capri was also correctly called the Consul Capri.
CliveV
2 Aug 2005 12:46 PM Many thanks Lutz - For some reason my head kept comming up with the Corsair but I new that was not it.
This Consul Capri is a beaut. Its red and cream and actually does not look "restorred" it has been done so well.
My son (19) had never seen one before and said it looked like an aircraft cockpit canopy. Good description I thought.
So according to you I have done something to Lutz - well if I have - then he has a funny way of being upset!
Finally I am not embarrassed because I have done nothing to be embarrassed about. Other Forum contributors have said this as well as the Moderator.
Not sure what your agenda is here - but you clearly have one.
Let me show you a mature conversation - this is on Towcars :-
CliveV
2 Aug 2005 12:06 PM Great car - always loved the P6 - just come back from droping a car off for a minor repair and there in the workshop was an original Ford Capri - the one that was derived from the saloon with an "Ford Anglia" type rear window. Beautifully restored - a real pleasure to look at. A British car that looked good with rear "fins".
I am having a senior moment here as I cannot remember what the name of the saloon version was? Ford made a lot of them but not many of the coupe version that was the first Capri.
The 3.5L engine will pull most things and spares are cheap and plentiful. Have a look at Rimmer Bros website www.rimmerbros.co.uk - I have found these guys very helpful tho' I notice they mention the SD1 a lot but not the P6.
Worth a try tho'.
Lutz
2 Aug 2005 12:28 PM Clive, you are referring to the Consul Classic, originally called the Consul 315, later only by that name for export. And the Capri was also correctly called the Consul Capri.
CliveV
2 Aug 2005 12:46 PM Many thanks Lutz - For some reason my head kept comming up with the Corsair but I new that was not it.
This Consul Capri is a beaut. Its red and cream and actually does not look "restorred" it has been done so well.
My son (19) had never seen one before and said it looked like an aircraft cockpit canopy. Good description I thought.
So according to you I have done something to Lutz - well if I have - then he has a funny way of being upset!
Finally I am not embarrassed because I have done nothing to be embarrassed about. Other Forum contributors have said this as well as the Moderator.
Not sure what your agenda is here - but you clearly have one.
Christine, I do agree with you. CliveV's postings have become increasingly tedious, arrogant, pompous, intemperate and self-centred. Everybody else seems to be out of step, maybe he should change his name to Clive Vs The World...Clive in answer to your response I think your response itself shows just what type of a man your are. and I quote "Tiresome - very tiresome
If the way I use the English Language offends you then tough." yes it does offend me.
The lutz mick reference was in your inability to answer sally's question on the bmw and yet again your attitude shone through.
And as for embarrassment you jolly well ought to be.
Clive
How do you manage to fit in your work when you spend so much time dragging up these quotes etc?
lh
How do you manage to fit in your work when you spend so much time dragging up these quotes etc?
lh
I was beginning to think I was the only one who thought that Clive was, shall we say kindly, 'overstepping the mark' but it is very apparent that I am not. Perhaps Clive it would be jolly nice of you to treat others with respect and not disdain. ThankyouChristine, I do agree with you. CliveV's postings have become increasingly tedious, arrogant, pompous, intemperate and self-centred. Everybody else seems to be out of step, maybe he should change his name to Clive Vs The World...
Hi all
Just come back from a weeks residential course and thought today that I would catch up on the old forum. Well what a to-do. Here's my opinion for what it is worth. I did not see the joke but from what I can gather from previous and now current threads
it seems to stem from the 4x4 conflab which in my opinion should have been halted before it started. Clearly some one was looking for an excuse to have a go at Clive and he innocently provided it with a harmless joke. The type of joke that is okay when you tell it but provides good ammunition when the need arises. You had my sympathies early on Clive but the more this subject has progressed the less I find myself backing you. I run a business that an awful lot of people enjoy immensely and a few hate to such an extent I often come to verbal blows with them. I tend to ignore them. This always has the effect of incensing them more because there is nothing they can do to stop me doing my job. This has worked for years, I stay calm and collective they boil over and make themselves look stupid. I seriously think, like others, you should let this go, the original perpetrators have all but gone but by your actions you are making enemies of people that probably sympathised with you early on.
PS
When the chit-chat section came on I said to my wife this will end in tears. My opinion-get it removed because some of the people on this forum are not mature enough to use it.
PPS
Moderators seldom work for the publication they moderate. They are self employed and likely moderate several forums (I know this as I have a friend who does it for a living)
Just come back from a weeks residential course and thought today that I would catch up on the old forum. Well what a to-do. Here's my opinion for what it is worth. I did not see the joke but from what I can gather from previous and now current threads
it seems to stem from the 4x4 conflab which in my opinion should have been halted before it started. Clearly some one was looking for an excuse to have a go at Clive and he innocently provided it with a harmless joke. The type of joke that is okay when you tell it but provides good ammunition when the need arises. You had my sympathies early on Clive but the more this subject has progressed the less I find myself backing you. I run a business that an awful lot of people enjoy immensely and a few hate to such an extent I often come to verbal blows with them. I tend to ignore them. This always has the effect of incensing them more because there is nothing they can do to stop me doing my job. This has worked for years, I stay calm and collective they boil over and make themselves look stupid. I seriously think, like others, you should let this go, the original perpetrators have all but gone but by your actions you are making enemies of people that probably sympathised with you early on.
PS
When the chit-chat section came on I said to my wife this will end in tears. My opinion-get it removed because some of the people on this forum are not mature enough to use it.
PPS
Moderators seldom work for the publication they moderate. They are self employed and likely moderate several forums (I know this as I have a friend who does it for a living)
TechnologyClive
How do you manage to fit in your work when you spend so much time dragging up these quotes etc?
lh
Hi Martyn
I appreciate your comments and would like to have let it lie by now.
Problem is when people make up the facts (my suppossed disagreement with Lutz is an absolute classic) it is so easy to counter that I have fallen into the trap of doing so.
I think your advice is sound (as is Lisa's) - Besides I have my suspicions about the true identity of a couple of the latest protagonists.
I appreciate your comments and would like to have let it lie by now.
Problem is when people make up the facts (my suppossed disagreement with Lutz is an absolute classic) it is so easy to counter that I have fallen into the trap of doing so.
I think your advice is sound (as is Lisa's) - Besides I have my suspicions about the true identity of a couple of the latest protagonists.
Clive, not sure why you say "supposed disagreement" - there was clearly some disagreement and discussion on the subject "bmw" on the Towcars forum...
Really!Clive, not sure why you say "supposed disagreement" - there was clearly some disagreement and discussion on the subject "bmw" on the Towcars forum...
yawn
Hi Clive just got in from a mornings shopping and have just read your reply.Deborah - I run my own business and am registerred with the Information Commissioner Wycliffe House Water Lane Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF as per the regulations governing the Data Protection Act 1998.
I work with this act every day and believe you are mistaken in that for me to run fowl of it in this case, somebody would need to complain.
If a complaint is logged then all I have to do is to provide the data we have on file to show just cause as to the actions we have taken.
As for the timescale - you were correct but presumably things move a little faster now. See Mathews Post 30th July 2005 11:52 am.
Finaly I would not dream of answering a question not directly aimed at me. I am far too much of a gentleman to do so.
I will put you last paragraph down as a one off aberation in that it seems somewhat out of context given the sensible nature of your first. I have never called anybody names on this Forum or criticised their opinions. Yet here you are, someone I do not know stating that I "berate" people and that I have a "boorish attitude".
Yawn!!
On your first point, I was not accusing you of running fowl of the law merely that pc magazine should not have given you any information without a court order as pc magazine would be them running fowl of the law and not you. Can you imagine if I rang up your bank and asked for account details and they gave it to me without question.
On your second point, I am afraid you are quite wrong, it is not simply enough to show data to get access to institutional records, the law is very strong on protecting the individual in this country. Imagine if I went to court with a letter saying you gave me complete access to your bank account and able to do what i wish with the contents. Do you think the court would grant access on that basis.
Your third point. I do not know Matthew from you, just who is he and what qualifies him?
On your fourth and final point. I have read quite a few of your postings and to be frank I find you very opinionated to the point where you always have to be right, I therefore wanted others to feel safe in answering my question without fear of intimidation from you. Intimidation I find very boorish.
I hope I haven't upset you with my reply to your fourth point.
Practical Caravan is part of Future plc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site.
© Future Publishing Limited Quay House, The Ambury, Bath BA1 1UA. All rights reserved. England and Wales company registration number 2008885.
Facebook
Twitter