Reasons why Bamber cycled to & from WHF.

[David1819]

Remember the days if a poster called another poster a 'liar', the moderators would be instantly all over them.

Now it happens daily

That's because people got fed up with liars getting away with lying. If someone is lying then they should be exposed, not protected.

[Adam]

Indeed I do, Adam, and it's funny that it crossed my mind the first time he used the accusation against Steve -he's used it several times since- and I believe he's addressed RJ as being such, although I'm not sure about that. I've certainly had it thrown at me. Nothing appears to have been done to correct it. Perhaps the rules have changed.

Hopefully NGB will confirm now if the rules have been changed.

It is very distasteful posters calling each other liars & other rude names.

[David1819]

Hopefully NGB will confirm now if the rules have been changed.

It is very distasteful posters calling each other liars & other rude names.

Its distasteful accusing someone of lying when they are not lying. But there is nothing wrong in pointing out someone is lying when they actually are lying.

[Adam]

Its distasteful accusing someone of lying when they are not lying. But there is nothing wrong in pointing out someone is lying when they actually are lying.

Hopefully NGB will clarify now if there has been a rule change.

[guest7363]

I’m sorry I don’t agree, Calling someone a liar is direct provocation, because it frames everything that they say as deliberately false. Mistakes can happen, who remembers everything.  How about using “THAT’S NOT TRUE”.  Anyway it’s not my forum and if the rules have changed it’s not for the better.

[Adam]

I’m sorry I don’t agree, Calling someone a liar is direct provocation, because it frames everything that they say as deliberately false. Mistakes can happen, who remembers everything.  How about using “THAT’S NOT TRUE”.  Anyway it’s not my forum and if the rules have changed it’s not for the better.

That is correct.

I ask for a source if someone makes a new factual claim. If I do not get one, then I dismiss it from the issue.

[guest7363]

That is correct.

I ask for a source if someone makes a new factual claim. If I do not get one, then I dismiss it from the issue.

I think your politeness is something for others to take note Adam, you never take offence and just get on with it 👍

[Adam]

I think your politeness is something for others to take note Adam, you never take offence and just get on with it 👍

Try to. Wasn't always like that, but was young when joining.

[David1819]

I’m sorry I don’t agree, Calling someone a liar is direct provocation, because it frames everything that they say as deliberately false. Mistakes can happen, who remembers everything.  How about using “THAT’S NOT TRUE”.  Anyway it’s not my forum and if the rules have changed it’s not for the better.

Well yes there are better ways of putting it. And you should only say it if you know the person is lying.

[guest29835]

I’m sorry I don’t agree, Calling someone a liar is direct provocation, because it frames everything that they say as deliberately false. Mistakes can happen, who remembers everything.  How about using “THAT’S NOT TRUE”.  Anyway it’s not my forum and if the rules have changed it’s not for the better.

As usual, you only look at half the situation.  I repeat, again, what I've said about you before.  Trying to discuss this case with you is like discussing the merits of a house with an estate agent who is on commission, with the seller listening.

Your problem is that you only consider the side of the story that suits you.

In this instance, you forget who started the accusations of dishonesty.  If you look up the thread, you will see it started with Jane telling me that my username implies that I am a Queen's Counsel, which is crazy nonsense as Jane herself must know.

So, Jane started it. 

The difference is that Jane's accusation of me was false - demonstrably so - whereas my accusation of Jane evidently has a solid basis to it.

[guest29835]

If Jane and Fake Justice were in charge of criminal trials, here's how it would work:

We'd here from the prosecution.

Then whenever defence counsel rose to speak, the jury would be asked to don ear muffs and blindfolds. 

The prosecution witnesses would lie like there's no tomorrow.  No need to take an oath of truth either.  We assume the accused is guilty anyway, the trial is just a formality, so lying's fine.

The accused would be judged on tendentious evaluations of his character and other various trifling odds and ends, rather than the evidence and facts.  Did he smirk at the funeral?  What did he have for breakfast?  Was he wearing a smart suit?  Did he have the auctioneers round on the fourth or fifth day after the incident?

The judge and the jury foreman would be on commission - it's standard in the property industry you know.  The longer the sentence, the higher the commission paid.

[guest7363]

If Jane and Fake Justice were in charge of criminal trials, here's how it would work:

We'd here from the prosecution.

Then whenever defence counsel rose to speak, the jury would be asked to don ear muffs and blindfolds. 

The prosecution witnesses would lie like there's no tomorrow.  No need to take an oath of truth either.  We assume the accused is guilty anyway, the trial is just a formality, so lying's fine.

The accused would be judged on tendentious evaluations of his character and other various trifling odds and ends, rather than the evidence and facts.  Did he smirk at the funeral?  What did he have for breakfast?  Was he wearing a smart suit?  Did he have the auctioneers round on the fourth or fifth day after the incident?

The judge and the jury foreman would be on commission - it's standard in the property industry you know.  The longer the sentence, the higher the commission paid.

No your describing yourself BOGUS,  😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[guest29835]

No your describing yourself BOGUS,  😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

You have quickly climbed down off your high horse.  You must have found it uncomfortable.

That didn't take long.

I do always get a sickening feeling coming on when hypocrites start espousing high principles.

[guest7363]

You have quickly climbed down off your high horse.  You must have found it uncomfortable.

That didn't take long.

I do always get a sickening feeling coming on when hypocrites start espousing high principles.

An Eye for an Eye, don’t throw stones if you do not want them back Bogus man 😂😂😂😂

[guest29835]

An Eye for an Eye, don’t throw stones if you do not want them back Bogus man 😂😂😂😂

I don't mind.  I can do this either way.  My point is simply that you should not go round pretending that you take offence at people being called out for lying while at the same time making false accusations to the same effect against me.  What have I lied about, specifically?