Why a moderator should be allowed to abuse one of the "patrons"

[firegoat7]

Looks like the Control freak is having another mental breakdown.

[this post was moved from withdrawals thread. see posts 22 and 23 if you wish to understand why this thread was split and where the title comes from -- it is a joke at firegoat's expense - mod]

[firegoat7]

Only a control freak would split this thread, others might understand the connections- recognising that it never strayed. Maybe your act of splitting this one is an unconscious act ,or, even worse, maybe you are conscious of the act. Either way your emotional anti-social rhetoric is your problem not mine.

[Kevin Bonham]

Firegoat, firstly you are an idiot - you would be well aware from the past that we often split those parts of threads that develop into completely off-topic personal flamewars. Part of the reason for this is to stop jokers like you from wrecking otherwise perfectly good debates, but the main reason is that the personal stuff is of limited, if any, interest.

Secondly, not only is anything you say about psychology the unqualified babble of a worthless self-appointed shrink and failed wannabe troll, but you also seem to be playing with fire in this area. Whereas your accusations of "mental breakdowns" etc in my direction are of course total rubbish, I heard some very illuminating things about your state of mind from some other figures in Victorian chess recently. I assume I have your permission to publish these, since you seem so keen to discuss my mental balance?

As for emotional and "anti-social", check the mirror, Che.

[firegoat7]

Bring it on Bonham! I'm not frightend by you bullying.

It is all totally connected. The same person who wants no refunds to potential players for tournaments they don't play in is the same person who splits threads because -he decides that they are drifting off the path.

The same (Controlfreak) person namely you.

I notice you never do anything (in your capacity as a moderator) when your buddy Gletsos completely wrecks any interesting debate other people engage in, you never split his posts, instead you only split posts in which you want to ride roughshot over people, like DR,AC,MS,BD, myself or any other hapless person who gets on your wrong side.

If you can't see that all you do when you split a thread, all you ever do, is engage in a verbal diatribe of abuse against anyone who disagrees with you, then your more deluded then I thought.

[firegoat7]

Firegoat, firstly you are an idiot...this is to stop jokers like you
Secondly, anything you say .. babble of a worthless self-appointed shrink and failed wannabe troll... I heard some very illuminating things about your state of mind from some other figures in Victorian chess recently.

I present some evidence to the jury of your a-social rhetoric and controlling behaviour. Maybe 'others' could offer some quotes of their own.

Cheers FG7

[Bill Gletsos]

I notice you never do anything (in your capacity as a moderator) when your buddy Gletsos completely wrecks any interesting debate other people engage in, you never split his posts

Actually you have that wrong.
Kevin has split a number of my posts from the Chess section over into the Non Chess section. e.g Matt vs Bill round 974, Rubbish split from Planned Rating Changes, split from Underrated Juniors, Matt Sweeney - banned?.

[firegoat7]

yeah but the difference with those threads Bill, is that he warns locks and has to step in as a moderator because they are genuinely out of control. I mean for Gods sake, he deleted my last post on this thread at the other side and didn't even have the decency to notify myself or anyone. Some sort of freedom of discussion eh?

Why did this thread have to be split Bill? was it out of control?
The only reason I can see is that, it some how gives the Controlfreak some sort of authority to personally denounce people. He does it because he wants to abuse people.

Cheers FG7

[Bill Gletsos]

yeah but the difference with those threads Bill, is that he warns locks and has to step in as a moderator because they are genuinely out of control. I mean for Gods sake, he deleted my last post on this thread at the other side and didn't even have the decency to notify myself or anyone. Some sort of freedom of discussion eh?

Since I cannot see the deleted post I cannot offer an opinion on whether it should have been deleted or not.

Why did this thread have to be split Bill? was it out of control?
The only reason I can see is that, it some how gives the Controlfreak some sort of authority to personally denounce people. He does it because he wants to abuse people.

To be honest I dont see anything in this thread that has to do with the thread topic from which it was split namely "Refunds for withdrawals before event starts".

Also the other moderators have split threads when the posts had nothing to do with the topic. Its not just KB that does it.

[Kevin Bonham]

I present some evidence to the jury of your a-social rhetoric and controlling behaviour.

I'm sure I could find plenty of courtroom precedents where more neutral men and women than I (ie judges) had said just as harsh things about those offenders who deserved it - which you clearly do and have pretty much throughout your unnprovokedly aggressive and largely worthless career on these BBs.

If I was really the control freak you make me out to be I would have had you banned ages ago.

[firegoat7]

So Bonhams behaviour is reasonable for you Bill.
let me guess what will happen know. I will be involved in some pointless flamewar with you, where you will never admit any error by yourself or your mate (birds of a feather flock together). This will go on for about ten or twenty posts , so that any issue with Bonham gets deflected.

Later on Bonham will chip in again with a tirade of hate against some other person and you will continue to call it justified because "hey , everyone else is a fool"

Cheers FG7

[firegoat7]

Oh but you do ban me by deleting posts you don't like, don't you.

and hear we go again with the "Im right, Im the law B.S" Its a public bulletin board for public discussion, put it in perspective, its not a courthouse.

[Kevin Bonham]

It is all totally connected. The same person who wants no refunds to potential players for tournaments they don't play in is the same person who splits threads because -he decides that they are drifting off the path.

The irony you seem too idiotic to notice is that the material that was split for going off track was largely mine.

I cannot believe you are picking a fight over something this ridiculous and frothing on as if it is a real political issue.

Actually given what I learnt about you recently, I can.

I mean for Gods sake, he deleted my last post on this thread at the other side and didn't even have the decency to notify myself or anyone. Some sort of freedom of discussion eh?

No bozo, I didn't delete it - I moved it to this thread (#4). And whoever's sake I did it for, it certainly wasn't God's. Of course, I could have just deleted it, since it duplicated your post over here, but I didn't.

I notice you never do anything (in your capacity as a moderator) when your buddy Gletsos completely wrecks any interesting debate other people engage in, you never split his posts, instead you only split posts in which you want to ride roughshot over people, like DR,AC,MS,BD, myself or any other hapless person who gets on your wrong side.

Once again firegoose backs a loser. Birds of a feather flock together? As Bill has pointed out I have split off heaps of Bill-vs-Matt and Bill-vs-Dave slanging matches that have lost relevance to the thread they were on.

If you can't see that all you do when you split a thread, all you ever do, is engage in a verbal diatribe of abuse against anyone who disagrees with you, then your more deluded then I thought.

I'm not sure whether the above is empirically true or not.

I'm quite happy to say that if someone made a reasonable case against a threadsplit and framed it in a reasonable manner I would respond to it in like fashion. You have done neither and are motivated solely by the hatred (and I know how personally you are stupid enough to take it) you developed for someone you have never met based on an exposure of your own inadequacies.

[Kevin Bonham]

and hear we go again with the "Im right, Im the law B.S" Its a public bulletin board for public discussion, put it in perspective, its not a courthouse.

Then perhaps you should put it in perspective and stop attempting to apply standards of imagined proprietry more appropriate to a communist monkey court than to any subsection of the real world (including a courtroom).

I'm open to being proved wrong. I've admitted to mistakes here heaps of times, including when I was too slow to split threads. You just never, ever seem to be up to it.

And to say that deleting posts is equivalent to "banning" just shows what a melodramatic idiot you are, as does inferring that I delete posts just because I "don't like them". Your posts making groundless accusations about my state of mind are still there, are they not?

[firegoat7]

You and I both know what you have done with the post.

I have made the claim that you split the threads because you want to abuse people, and somehow in your mind , you think that that splitting the threads gives you a chance to vent your feelings in an even more abusive pattern then you normally do.

Furthermore, Bill seems to think that you have no case to answer and this behaviour is completely justified.

Moreover, you never once censored Bill for his abuse of people with the wording cretin and moron,- this is probably because you enjoy being derogatory to people in the same sort of vein.

Cheers Fg7

[Kevin Bonham]

The only reason I can see is that, it some how gives the Controlfreak some sort of authority to personally denounce people. He does it because he wants to abuse people.

Actually I abused BD (and any look at the original thread will clearly show he was the one who started the mudthrowing, as he has so many times before) first and then afterwards thought "actually, this is really rather irrelevant, I'd better split this junk so that those who wish to get on with the original debate rather than all this rubbish can do so".