I’ve disagreed with TJ plenty of times and though he’s forceful with his opinion, somehow we both coped.

Sure,

The trouble is it usually filled the thread with pages of tangential guff, which was the problem for anyone not interested in TJ’s ‘forcefully’ placed point of view (or its counterpoint from other posters)

blimey – were some of TJ’s posts deleted or was that as good/bad as it got ? 🙄

Instead of this slightly **** cycle ( 😉 ) of argument/vitriol/closure/newthread/repeat/ban I think there should be a new sub-forum created called dignitas or the 3rd circle or something, where tired old threads can be sent to die/suffer interminably. Leave them open but move to the subforum on the understanding that entry there is for consenting individuals who request access and that it’ll be left unmoderated, even after complaints.

every now & then there could be a highlights notice on the main forum with postcounts and selected top insults from within

At 11:45pm? I call shenanigans. You were watching the review of the 2011-2012 Premier League season.

😆

Proper chuckling out loud here right now!

V funny

So I’m guessing his argumentativeness has had a ban…

Given that he’s known for his opinions, and sticking to them, is this ban justified do you reckon? Far be it for me to say, but even after elfin’s ban the forum was still a pretty liberal place where opinions were bandied about regularly and arguments ensued, but generally people kissed and made up. I’ve noticed recently though, there’s VERY much a big brother feel around here, and anything that might be slightly controversial gets stamped out immediately… I’ve even had 2 warnings via email in the last week, never in the last 10 years (even expressing LOTS of opinions myself, and talking objectively about women on occasion) have I had a single email before! 😕

I first met him in 2005, shortly after he joined the forum, I think. Whenever I’ve met him in real life it’s been easy enough for us to avoid the subjects that wound him up on here.

In some ways it’s probably good for him that he can no longer rise to the bait on here. On the other hand, he was making more progress with the Pentlands trailbuilding efforts than anyone before him managed and he’ll no longer be able to plug dates on here for that. 🙁

There is nothing more off putting to potential new users of a forum than long serving, seemingly constantly posting, users incessantly proffering forceful points of view and being argumentative. As this place is run to promote a magazine and encourage new users it seems fair enough that they pull the plug on those that make the place look unwelcoming. In my opinion he couldn’t help himself falling into that category. He’s not alone mind.

He did have his blind spots and often took up positions based on emotion and was completely unable to move from that position even in the face of overwhelming reason and logic or see any merit in an opposing argument something which THM, amongst others, exposed ruthlessly. For that reason I gave up discussing anything with him but otherwise found him generally harmless.

There is nothing more off putting to new users of a forum than long serving, seemingly constantly posting, users incessantly proffering forceful points of view and being argumentative.

How do you know that ?

Can’t say I’m surprised, but also disappointed. I acknowledge and agree with most of the comments about the negative impact TJ sometimes had on the forum, but I’d suggest that on balance he had far more of a positive impact than a lot of people still on here. I say that as somebody who often totally disagreed with his viewpoint and I have been involved in several arguments with him on here, but I’d like to think that none of those ever descended into the sort of thing likely to result in a ban (my only ban from here was for something completely different). I will certainly miss his support on the topics where it felt like it was me and him against the world! The thing is though, it takes two to tango, and some on here seemed to revel in baiting TJ. I’ve certainly also defended him in the past when there was the sort of anti-TJ bullying just because he was TJ.

Still looking forward to meeting TJ in real life sometime.

As for the political threads on here, personally I tend to just ignore them nowadays – hence I hadn’t even seen the offending thread. Sometimes look at the first few posts, but they’re usually just so predictable that it’s not even really entertaining just going on them to bait the usual suspects. I realised it wasn’t good for my blood pressure to get involved (and that whatever I wrote on here wouldn’t make the slightest difference to changing the world). I did try to persuade TJ not to get involved in such stuff, but efforts seem to have been wasted.

There is nothing more off putting to potential new users of a forum than long serving, seemingly constantly posting, users incessantly proffering forceful points of view and being argumentative. As this place is run to promote a magazine and encourage new users it seems fair enough that they pull the plug on those that make the place look unwelcoming. In my opinion he couldn’t help himself falling into that category. He’s not alone mind.

Agree with that.

also interesting that forum members also seem to switch sides. (generalisation, no one in particular)

Before Ban – want him to clear off
After Ban – Why did you ban? him we all like him.

There is nothing more off putting to potential new users of a forum than long serving, seemingly constantly posting, users incessantly proffering forceful points of view and being argumentative. As this place is run to promote a magazine and encourage new users it seems fair enough that they pull the plug on those that make the place look unwelcoming. In my opinion he couldn’t help himself falling into that category. He’s not alone mind.

This might be true but the forum is well subscribed and has enough content that new users can still find threads here that interest them (and can avoid the more inflammatory threads)

I have been a member of many smaller forums that cover a variety of interests that have been so dominated by their own ‘big hitters’ that only sycophants stand a chance of integrating. It’s not like that here.

How do you know that ?

Because it’s often the thing that stops me bothering with other forums and more pertinently for STW the main thing that comes up when talking with friends who are not members here but you would have thought should be as to there reasons they are not. Not very complimentary about some of you/us would be an understatement.

I will miss the argumentative sods posts even if they did infuriate me at times

Should it not come up with “banned” next to his name???

Does Unison have any sway with STW?

Sorry – bitter-sweet joke. On the whole, I reckon TJ is a positive influence here – the ‘Go To’ man for any tandem, consumer or workplace issues – Hell, people still ‘page’ him, despite it being against the rules whenever one of these subjects comes up.

IIRC he had a telling off earlier in the year and really did seem to be keeping his nose clean recently. I don’t think his recent posts were becoming, “more entrenched”. If anything, the opposite was true – he really has been holding himself in check. I could almost hear him banging his fists / forehead on the table sometimes 🙂

Anyway, I’m firmly in the ‘censorship is bad’ camp, mmKay?

What Aracer said. +1

Before Ban – want him to clear off

No, not at all, more just wish he’d actually take on board that there are two sides to every story, and understand that his views are opinions and not fact. He was a massive PITA in that respect, but I respect him for standing by his beliefs.

After Ban – Why did you ban? him we all like him.

I don’t think any differently of him now. I do think that, given how controversial he has been over the years, to get a ban right now, seemingly out of the blue, when TJ is/was about the most consistent forum member out there in terms of his approach to posts, it represents a shift in the goalposts of what’s acceptable… Anyone remember the “Friday Kylie” threads for example? I’m all for being more inclusive, but suddenly moving the goalposts and punishing one or two individuals and holding them up as examples, is not the way to do things. A more progressive approach, explaining to existing members the new rules and guidelines of what is and isn’t acceptable, and when things need to change by (otherwise expect to be banned) would have been a much better approach I’d say!

But who am I? I’m just a man, with opinions and beliefs that I stick to, sometimes I’ll even end up in an argument and… Oh hang on… Bye bye, I’ll see you all on the other side! (awaits the impending)… 😉

Anyone reading this thread might believe that jesus had returned but went off to walk the earth and left his flock behind.

Anytime i’ve seen a thread with a reasonable, but possibly debate inducing title that got beyond 5 pages it was easy to avoid as it would be full of the usual suspects who had forgot what they were arguing about to the point where it had just become pedantic white noise.

Lets not get all romantic about it, im sure he’s a lovely man but he’s been an argumentative git who was a part in ruining what could have been interesting threads and not just willy waving competitions.

Internet forums were made for arguing, banning someone for being argumentative is like banning someone from a swingers party for being non-monogamous (hope that’s the right word/spelling).

As both DD and the other plastic Irishman O’Flashy alluded to, get him talking about something like rugby and he was on really good form. As also mentioned, there were people who posted on threads, not to comment on the subject, but to try and wind him up. I obviously can’t comment on whether they are a negative an influence on STW as he was perceived to be as that would be commenting on a mods decision.He stepped away last year for a wee while when some of the stuff being put up the second he posted about anything was little short of bullying. Interesting to see some of the worst at that are still with us.

He also had enough of a sense of humour to congratulate me on the (now banned) randompedantry user name I created to “honour” him.

It’s the mark of the man that he gets four pages about him going. Who’s gonna do the eulogy?

He was never guilty of anything that his opponents weren’t also guilty of, unfortunately he did seem to appear in many arguments with many different people. Got to say, for people suggesting he was inflexible on his positions, most of his arguments come across as a lot more coherent and well thought out than those he was always faced with, but he would definitely have been better off just leaving it. No one else is going to accept that they’re wrong on the Internet either, and most of it, in the end just comes down to opinion.

Don’t know him, but he seems like a good guy. At least he was always arguing for what he thought would be best for the majority. Pity he thought that arguing on the Internet would get him anywhere.

It’s the mark of the man that he gets four pages about him going.

If we’re going by that metric, sadly it looks like Fred would get an undeserved victory. Though that said, when Fred went, TJ was heavily posting on the thread complaining about it.

so top tips
Retain a sense of humour
Rise above the obvious trolls
and
When someone tells you that if you carry on doing that they will boot you forever maybe listen to them.

I’ll miss some of it, other bits like the poor bloke asking what helmet to get his kid thread getting turned into another link fest I wont.

Not his eulogy but it brings to mind a story I remember from the Sheffield Star back in the early 90s. A young boy’s pet dog had died and the parents, in an attempt to help him greive asked if he’d like to write something to say at the little ceremony they held when they buried the pup in the garden. The moment came, the body laid to rest and the little boy solemnly announced: “Here lies Fudge. He was a bad dog, I’m glad he’s dead”.

Seeriously though to me he came across as a bully. Much like a few others on here who are the main reason I’ve been a reader since GoFar dialup days but probably have a post count in the teens. Then again like any community there will always be overbearing personalities who have an overinflated sense on their own importance and the validity of their opinion. I just try and avoid them.

As he is no longer able to defend himself here, I think we should also have a lifetime ban for anyone who was taking the piss out of him or otherwise trying to stir things or get a cheap laugh by mentioning him in threads he had not even replied to.

Tory boys see this type of behaviour as normal.

^^^^^ he’s back!!!!

*takes a bow*

Seriously though, I like Teej, just wish he wouldn’t rise to the bait so much.

IDRATS and

hexhamstu – Member
Internet forums were made for arguing, banning someone for being argumentative is like banning someone from a swingers party for being non-monogamous

seems the most pertinent point.

He argued a lot was warned about it and carried on anyway.

Did I miss something?

Internet forums were made for arguing,

Oh no they’re not.

He argued a lot was warned about it and carried on anyway.

Apparently plenty others on here are worse, and they’re still here. I think that’s what seems to be some people’s beef.

i’ll miss him. Despite his style, seemingly black and white views, inability to step away from an argument and his ability to make pretty personal attacks on users suggesting they’re dumb because they disagree with him…. at least he was honest and you knew where you stood.

very helpful poster when you needed help.

none of us are perfect. and if he was warned against arguing and continued to do so anyway then he brought it on himself. its the singletrack forum and the singletrack mods have the final say in the end.

Hardly a surprise to be honest, mark is on the opposite side of the political scale, so probably to happy to ban him.
I am very surprise that people like stoner Z-11, GW who are nasty as possible never get banned. But hey ho each to their own.

Apparently plenty others on here are worse, and they’re still here.

Protected status 😉

TJ is OK, argues a lot, so what?

I’m sure he has a cd collection to catalogue or something.
It’s only the internet, it’s not like getting banned from a good pub or anything like that, I’m sure he’s got plenty of other stuff to do.

🙄

Stoner – nasty ? 😆

If there was any kind of level playing field I reckon don simon would have also gone as he seemed to always be involved with a TJ orbital launch. That’s negative use of the forum isn’t it? Or are the rules selectively enforced?

If mark et al have decided they don’t want TJ using their forum then that’s it. Lets not pretend that they devote the same energies to us all or that the decision is ‘fair’.

Adios TJ

Edit: stoner has (from memory) made a number of dull attempts to poke fun at Juan’s nationality. I suspect this is what he’s talking about.

Had to the fact that stoner is a banker and very right wing. All IMHO indeed.
Don simon run a business in Spain, said business provide money through advertisement, easy to spot why he’s still here.

Stoner’s in property dev or something like that, certainly doesn’t come across as anything other than pleasant to me

never noticed stoner to be nasty, he does well for himself and some people dont like successful people!

never noticed Don simon advertising on the site either? making such accusations seems like negative use of the forum… BAN HIM! 😆

The forum’s lost some diversity. You knew how TJ would respond, it’s deep in his DNA. I like the bloke, but quite often I didn’t read his input.

Will there be others?