Ever been threatened with violence on PF by another poster?

I lie. There was another guy that sent me a ridiculous PM saying that I didn't understand his personal issues after I told him that he needed a PESEL to get a Polish driving licence. That was weird.

But that was it. I really have no recollection of the situation that Ironside talks about :(

Good for you delph, you should work for GW with such a selective memory, wasn't that - darius something something, no matter,


he was that guy who found out your real name and Harry real name but he never admitted accosting anybody. He was toying with Harry, that I remember clearly.

I think I must hold the record for the most threats on PF. I'm 100% the poster Ironside mentioned was a Canadian ex member called Z-Dariuz

This chap? ?action=userinfo&user=7769

I don't remember the situation, but I was probably banned at the time ;)

People threaten you for moderating, Vincent? How pathetic!

yep it's hard to believe isn't? ;) That was the chap, there must be some long term members who remember him as well.

I think that was his name, and there was no threat at all ever. If I recall, a poster had offered to meet his daughter with friends for a drink if she wanted. Z-Dariusz sounds a bit odd.

Bad that people would threaten you or anyone else. There are some weird people in this world.

He was very educated and a well read man that I can remember. As for threats, it's all in a days work;)

It's crazy! I might not agree with your moderation methods at times, but to threaten you over them, come on :D

I vaguely remember him, but looking back on past threads, it seemed I interacted with him quite a bit on here.

I seem to remember someone threatening to put my posts on football hooligan forums. That was funny :D

I have filed a restraining order against a person that reads and/or writes on PF. Some people are basketcases.

He was incessantly trolling Jon - and my dog was offended by it:) End of story. I generally don't bang on at the same victim ... though I may have been cruel about his money counting - so I suppose the insults were even.

Bygones, and all that.

That the deal-breaker, isn't it. If anyone upset my cat, I'd nail their tongue to the floor.


They're sometimes the worst. Probably worried his daughter was tarting round Europe. As I remember the 'threat' was just a nice offer, not even a suggestion of a date.

If I was trolling I would have been banned for it just like you was few days ago banned for trolling.


Interesting trolling strategy you have :-)))


How could that possibly offend me?

It was more than a nice offer, having seen some of z_dariusz's forum alerts. Someone else might remember the indecent and post it here, of perhaps z_dariuz might return one day to give his side of the story.

Really Vincent? You want to again post about things which haven't been posted here? Why don't you tell us about the posts to which those alerts related? But perhaps before you do that you might want to make sure that all moderators are on the same page with their malicious and entirely false claims.

The very simple fact, as is well known, is that if I had in any way threatened anybody, you would have jumped at the chance to permanently ban my account. Perhaps you'd care to explain why that didn't happen? Might it be that I never threatened anybody and that when somebody said that what I had written could be interpreted as a threat I immediately apologised and took care to point out that I meant no threat whatsoever?


Would that happen to be a situation in which law enforcement at multiple national and international levels were involved and took action? If it was, can you tell us what action PF took?

Yes. In Poland and in USA. They coordinate and got to the bottom of the issue effectively and quickly.


Exactly what I asked them to do. I can't say more in public.

To be honest, we all wonder why that didn't happen. So, Vincent, please explain!

Once again you know that those posts would have been binned (it was over 4 years ago), and thus deleted.. Thank you for the link to that post from Barney, who at the time was a member (long term) and not a moderator, and remembered the incident as well, As they say "there's no smoke without fire"

"


Moderating was a bit more relaxed in those days, but rest assured you won't get away with your dirty tactics these days. I will leave it up to members to judge for themselves if you were/are capable of 'allegedly' threatening another members daughter who was in Poland at the time, hopefully z_dariuz will return one day and put the record straight.

Actually there are still multiple discussions in the archives for anybody who wants to read them. More than a little support for my version of events. Would you care to guess how much support for your version of events? Or perhaps you'd care to post a few of the messages you claim to have read?


Do they really? So what fire might 'they' say can be shown by Barney's repeated insistence that a man who ordered the murder of children in targeted bombing of shopping malls, video arcades and burger bars was not a terrorist? And the fire shown by Barney's repeated insistence that the British army planted car-bombs in Eire? If you want to hold up Barney as a person whose word can be relied on to be correct, perhaps you can explain why he was right when making those claims?


Really? So how would you explain bans handed out for things such as reporting a moderator, via report, not in open thread, for abusively suspending a member? Is that what the word 'relaxed' means to you?

You hit the nail on the head, Vincent. If moderating wasn't, as you call it, 'a bit more relaxed' at that time, the PF wouldn't have seen any gangs, brit bullies or dirty tactics being played by them over and over again. I don't praise the PF that often, but this time I must admit that dirty tactics have at last been successfully reduced to the simple "Can any of the mods advise if it is on-topic enough to be replied to?" line or to calling someone "Moe" in a helpless attempt to go back to the good all times when the "go as you please" attitude was the front-line policy of the PF.

Fair enough then, you answer the questions that Vincent might just somehow overlook: how would you explain bans handed out for things such as reporting a moderator, via report, not in open thread, for abusively suspending a member? Is that what the word 'relaxed' means to you?


You were the one who decided to change names. As the search engine shows us: you were calling me 'Harold' years before [phrase=moe] first called you 'Moe'. But now you whine about names being changed, poor you: you can give it but you can't take it back at you.

Interestingly, back in the days when you and Vincent claim the moderating was more relaxed, it was forbidden to address people by a name other than than their chosen username. I supported that rule and would support it being brought back. But following lots of posters such as your good self breaking that rule, it no longer exists, and now you cry about being called 'Moe'.

Still, I suppose at least you aren't threatening violence against anybody who calls you 'Moe'.

Which is your name, Harry is a short for from Harold

No, it is his guerrilla name like Che-Guevara's real name was Ernesto Guevara.

So Harry is like Che for Ernesto ")

posted in random I-S

a) No it isn't.
b) Diminutives (such as 'Moe) are OK under the current rules; long forms are not. Or are you now OK with the full version of your name (the Great God of Fire) being used?

"Can any of the mods advise if the above post is on-topic enough to be replied to?"

You don't need to ask that, johnny: I have been assured by a mod that any posts which one sees in off-topic (or bin) can be replied to, provided that the reply is in a civil manner and does not contain abuse.

Thank you Harry, that was very kind of you.
I think you should be a moderator with all your experience over the years here.

Harry would go on banning spree like some crazy serial killer :-)))

NO ! REALLY !
I just can hardly understand that for a second. How barbaric of him.
Where do you suggest the line should be drawn delph?


Anyone that promotes violence towards another member should be banned immediately don't you agree ? Yes ?





Does that vaguely constitute promoting physical violence toward another member by any chance ?
There just doesn't seem to be much humor in your vicious threats like there was when I used the humorous figure of speech to set someone on fire if they didn't quit stalking me is there now.

Another blatant Do as I say, not as I do for delph.
What do you think Harold and Doug, possible litigation against the PF for allowing racketeering and hate speech.

I didn't see any humour in your nasty threat whatsoever, and none was intended either. It certainly didn't sound like a joke to me.

I will accept that what you said was just a figure of speech if you can supply ANY link that supports your claim, because believe me, Google brings up nothing whatsoever. To 'set someone on fire' brings up only the obvious meaning and nothing else.

Stalking you? It was you that tried to engineer contact between us remember?
Now if you want me to GO AWAY as you put it, then please stop mentioning me.
How you have the nerve to post in this thread is beyond me.

I have recently been told that Blowhard is a diminutive form for Harold. Can anybody confirm this?


This is simply not true. Putting "set somobody on fire" into Google immediately returns: (fig.) to excite someone; to make someone passionate as for example in:

Her oratory set everyone on fire. Ted's presentation didn't exactly set me on fire, but it was a good summary of the project. (idioms.thefreedictionary.com/set+on+fire)


Johnny did not mention you in his last post at all. He only mentioned the phrase he once used calling his phrase a humorous figure of speech. You almost immediately responded to that without your name having been mentioned in the post. So yes, he sets you on fire in the sense that he really does excite you. Just as Delph has gay sex on the mind, you simply tend to have Johnny Reb on the mind.