Nuxx:MPG.27906f9a2459528d98984b@news.zen.co.uk

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!npeer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!news2.euro.net!feeder.news-service.com!tudelft.nl!txtfeed1.tudelft.nl!dedekind.zen.co.uk!zen.net.uk!hamilton.zen.co.uk!reader02.news.zen.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: OT: FAO Tom "Blunt" Crispin Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 00:33:49 -0000 Lines: 34 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.9.14 Organization: Zen Internet NNTP-Posting-Host: 1de4349e.news.zen.co.uk X-Trace: DXC=HQ7dWC6H04IL2Ih^^87?RGYjZGX^207PK`<MJMoM3PFM8UPL;5Cn`7ABH4535cfTO@=h[3X2DI\`MZTN<n6Dm`AJ X-Complaints-To: abuse@zen.co.uk Bytes: 2978 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.moderation:35891

Firstly, Tom, well done on continuing to demonstrate fairness, a quality distinctly lacking among the vast majority of the "cyclist originals", who seem to think that (for example) abuse should only be treated as abuse if it is towards someone who they agree with and/or like. Of the "originals" it's really only you, Ian Smith, Rob Morley and maybe one or two others who seem to be able to see these things objectively. (It's no coincidence that you've all extensively criticised URCM's parochial "moderation" style.)

However, before condemning others for what they've done (as you have done recently), I can't help thinking that you should put right one or two of the things you've done which you shouldn't have. Here I'm thinking specifically of the Lou Knee saga. We all know what happened by now: Chapman posted as Lou Knee not wanting to be found out, he was easily discovered despite being a "thought leader" in IT, then rather than coming clean, he went bleating to you privately and (somehow) persuaded you to cover for him and make out that it was all one big conspiracy and some "account" (what type of "account" was that then, and why was it needed when anyone could post as Lou Knee anyway?) was distributed by anonymous email.

We all know that explanation is utter bullshit and I think it's time you admitted it. If you're going to be whiter than white then you need to set a good example. That's aside from the fact that you should be setting a good example to the kids you teach anyway: would you want them to go along with Chapman's deceit? Why should you make people trust you less by lying for him just because he's not man enough to ever concede a point in any way, shape or form, however bang to rights he is? Has he done you any favours in return?

Please, tell all and then I promise on my life that I will stop raising the subject. I'm sure Judith will as well. If you (and others) are bored of the whole issue then here's your chance to put it to bed. Thanks in advance.