# Should people who don't live in Brixton be banned from posting in this forum?



## Domski (Mar 29, 2004)

Or maybe it should read...

Should people who haven't lived in Brixton all their lives be allowed to have an opinion?

or maybe

Are people with 'conservative' viewpoints ruining the Brixton forum?

or even

Should people who earn more than £10,000 a year be allowed to live in Brixton?

I apologise for what may be perceived to be a troll of a post but comments like this are not acceptable




			
				hatboy said:
			
		

> Athos - you live round here? I can't remember whether you've got any stake in Brixton or just come in this forum for something to do.



And rounding off posts with a  smilie doesn't mean that the ridiculous statement that you've just made is OK 

But I suppose it's just a joke so that's just fine. Get over yourself.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2004)

should people who've only found 37 things to say worth preserving since the summer of 2002 be allowed to post on u75?


----------



## Domski (Mar 29, 2004)

Actually PM - I had well over 100 posts expunged in the great post purge a while back - I stopped posting on here for a while though as I got fed up with some of the IMO unconstructive and hollier than thou shite that made me pretty uncomfortable - both as poster and resident...

However, I'm back to posting on here after merely being a reader because some of the stuff frankly fucked me off enough to bother again.


----------



## chegrimandi (Mar 29, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> should people who've only found 37 things to say worth preserving since the summer of 2002 be allowed to post on u75?



oh so big post count = valid comment now.....


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 29, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> should people who've only found 37 things to say worth preserving since the summer of 2002 be allowed to post on u75?


   
ooh owch!
domski-*spell out* your prob with hatboy's post or posts, or whatever. You've gone off a bit half-cocked here


----------



## chegrimandi (Mar 29, 2004)

domski that is just hatboys posting style, its fairly abrasive and to the point and I doubt he will change it for anyone....  


have a feeling this may be quite a 'lively' thread....


----------



## El Jugador (Mar 29, 2004)

*can't find a 'yawn' icon so two 'rolleyes' will have to do*

Should people with personal axes to grind start whole new threads about their perceived victimisation? Or should they simply put their reply on the relevent thread  ?

It's getting very irritating to see people constantly moaning about an affront to their freedom of speech whenever they experience the rough and tumble of an online bulletin board.


----------



## Domski (Mar 29, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> ooh owch!
> domski-*spell out* your prob with hatboy's post or posts, or whatever. You've gone off a bit half-cocked here



It may seem a bit half cocked - but I think the point stands without me having to dredge up every single piece of utter hypocrisy... maybe if I've got a month off I could create volume 1 

I think it was said best when someone thought that in his context as moderator, it was probably worthwhile to hold back on the vituperative, or at the very least to not edit what people say... Grrrrr


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2004)

satan! are you all so thin-skinned that you a) can't read (domski) and b) are unusually fuckwitted (expected more from you, chegrimandi)?

domski: you have 38 posts. the rest were culled (as were about 2,000 of mine) as not worth keeping. thus the "worth preserving" in my post.

i think yr thread's ridiculous. if you have a problem with one moderator, out with it. (posted before had seen domski's post immediately above)

chegrimandi: big post counts are not necessarily a sign of decent posts: see jc2 and the pbmen as an example of that. on the other hand, my posts are of a superior quality, as i'm often told by other urbanites.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 29, 2004)

I think people, especially if they don't live here or haven't been here long, shouldn't come in this forum to deliberately antagonise.

When I arrived my road 15 years ago I didn't start forcing my attitudes and opinions about Brixton on other locals, certainly not critical opinions anyway.

I adapted, fitted-in. Now I feel more confident about my knowledge of the area.  I don't disagree with all your attitudes Domski, but you do deliberately try and wind me up. And you were wrong about the reasons behind the delays at Loughborough. And you've told me you've only just got here. Why don't you listen, get to know people a bit.

Athos and Ernesto had all their questions of me answered honestly, despite their deliberate antagonism also, and Ernesto's  constant wriggling and avoidance of my questions of him.  Ernesto doesn't live here. Athos - he hasn't said. But it makes a difference.

By the way, before any further rudeness my name is **** ******** and I live in ******** ****. What's your name and where do you live?

And yes, I say harsh things, but not generally until people have crossed me. Or sometimes simply because I feel passionate about something. Or sometimes as a joke.

Mike and I talk about my moderating here and if he thinks I go to far he says.  I'm not interested in petty rules. It could be alot worse here you know. And people often tell me they respect my honesty and my determination that the "Brixton Forum" (despite my mixed feelings about urban75 as a whole) will not become a place to grass up weed dealers or moan about minor traffic violations.

Now stop stirring please or piss off.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2004)

maybe people shouldn't come into the brixton forum to deliberately antagonise: but people should be allowed to voice their opinions, however challenging they may be. 

and then be shouted down, if they're talking crap.


----------



## Pie 1 (Mar 29, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> on the other hand, my posts are of a superior quality, as i'm often told by other urbanites.



I sincererly hope your toungue is in your cheek, mate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2004)

Pie 1 said:
			
		

> I sincererly hope your toungue is in your cheek, mate.


  at several urbanite meet-ups, i've been praised for my posts. if no one's said a good word about yr's, it may be because they're cack.


----------



## such and such (Mar 29, 2004)

Well, this is the first time I've posted in here. I'm not even from England    yet read the Brixton forum because I find some of the issues that are posted interesting. As well as this sometimes I see similar issues happening on my side of the world as well. 
Since I'm not from England I'm also not very aware of the regional sterotypes that seem to cause problems. Is that ok


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Mar 29, 2004)

I think that even if you don't live in an area you can still be able to offer up your opinions. I no longer live in Leyton but I still take an interest in what's going on. I suppose it does irk people a bit if you've never been to the area in question then some on a message board and slag it off. People get protective of where they live and I think that's why Hatboy reacts the way he does sometimes, it's only natural. 

My impression of Brixton was good, I wasn't hassled at the tube station. I am not saying it doesn't happen but the day I came over I felt a whole lot safer than I do when I walk around Walthmstow. 

You have to realise that to make criticism of an area without you actually living there or having been there will annoy people.


----------



## tarannau (Mar 29, 2004)

Jeepers, self written testimonials on Urban now. Whatever next eh; self- congratulatory branded straplines, quoted on the hazy memories of entirely sober Urban 75 get togethers. 

Frankly, whatever those kindly folks told ya pickman's, I've formed an opinion of you basely on your words on this thread.

Guess what?



Oh, and I've no problems with anyone posting on the Brixton forum, regardless of where they're from. Whilst it's not always the least animated or opinionated of places, I wouldn't mistake the vigorous debates as some kind of evidence of a monochrome clique 'running' the forum. It's not as though the 'localregulars' fall over each other in agreement with each other...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> Jeepers, self written testimonials on Urban now. Whatever next eh; self- congratulatory branded straplines, quoted on the hazy memories of entirely sober Urban 75 get togethers.
> 
> Frankly, whatever those kindly folks told ya pickman's, I've formed an opinion of you basely on your words on this thread.
> 
> Guess what?


to quote hatboy's tag, who are you again?

and who are you accusing of having a hazy memory of get-togethers? are you saying i'm under the influence at meets? (incidentally, where did i say there was alcohol consumed at all of them?)

if i posted for yr benefit, i fear my posts would be foul, saccharine, bland and frankly dull.


----------



## Domski (Mar 29, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> satan! are you all so thin-skinned that you a) can't read (domski) and b) are unusually fuckwitted (expected more from you, chegrimandi)?
> 
> domski: you have 38 posts. the rest were culled (as were about 2,000 of mine) as not worth keeping. thus the "worth preserving" in my post.
> 
> ...



LOL! You're a modest one aren't you... Doesn't sound like the tongue was in cheek at all... 




			
				hatboy said:
			
		

> I think people, especially if they don't live here or haven't been here long, shouldn't come in this forum to deliberately antagonise.
> 
> When I arrived in my road 15 years ago I didn't start forcing my attitudes and opinions about Brixton on other locals, certainly not critical opinions anyway.
> 
> ...



Hatboy - I understand that this must look like a personal go at you - because, yes, frankly it is... but it's also an attempt at being constructive dressed up in forum speak - i.e. it's fucking offensive, because that's what happens on chat forums. 

Basically, the way I see it, is that Brixton is changing, for better in many ways, and for worse in many others - the make up of the people is changing, and I'm one of them - I'm 27, worked in the city for two years and hated it, got involved in the club scene a bit, came to Brixton a lot and loved it - loved it so much that I decided that I wanted to live here. Not for the club scene, but because it's one of the most interesting places in S.London. I've now settled in Tunstall Road but lived down in LJ for a bit.

The U75 regulars would therefore call me a number of things (not directly, but pretty clearly infer) that I'm:

1. A drug tourist
2. A claphamite or Tallulah or Oliver or some such other shite (I did actually live in Clapham once)
3. Someone who's moved to Brixton because it's edgy and a bit cool

and finally

4. A conservative young professional

All of the above have fucked me right off - I'm open minded and like Brixton for many of the qualities that you talk about, but many of the things I've read on here (from you and others) have made me feel unwelcome. So it's my opinion that YOU (and not me) are the ones that cause division in Brixton. Sorry. You go on about 'them' and 'us' a lot more than you'd care to admit.

Basically Hatboy - I reckon you need to have a careful look at how hypocritical you sound. I admire many of the things you say and your desire to preserve the community as it was. I want to as well - but it can't be done by alienating people like me that live down here now as that is more destructive than I think you'd appreciate.

As for the context of this thread - these are just some sarky perceptions (which I think are pretty accurate) that I've lifted from posts that you've made over the last few days/weeks - there's something pretty unsettling about them in your context as moderator I'm afraid.

Anyway - I'd love to tell you my surname, but that's one thing I'll keep to myself as it's my right.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> The U75 regulars would therefore call me a number of things (not directly, but pretty clearly infer) that I'm:
> 
> 1. A drug tourist
> 2. A claphamite or Tallulah or Oliver or some such other shite (I did actually live in Clapham once)
> ...



I'm an U75 regular and I've never called you any of those things.  We're not some kind of hive mind gestalt entity y'know.  I've only been in Brixton a year, so maybe people could call me some of those things.  They don't though.


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> at several urbanite meet-ups, i've been praised for my posts.


Ah! Deft implementation of rule 4 from the 'How to Win Online Arguments' guide!



> 4. Showboat
> Once the argument is in full swing, publicly thank all those people who have e-mailed you privately with their messages of support. Claim that you are too busy to reply to each of them personally at the moment, but promise to continue fighting on their behalf.
> Full guide here


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 29, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> Jeepers, self written testimonials on Urban now. Whatever next eh; self- congratulatory branded straplines, quoted on the hazy memories of entirely sober Urban 75 get togethers.
> 
> Frankly, whatever those kindly folks told ya pickman's, I've formed an opinion of you basely on your words on this thread.
> 
> ...


I've always found PMs posts useful & interesting, tarannau, even if we come from a very different place politically. as indeed I find yours. but dontcha think you need a bit more than that to judge by?
Domski-don't you think you're being just a little paranoid?


----------



## Domski (Mar 29, 2004)

Blagsta said:
			
		

> I'm an U75 regular and I've never called you any of those things.  We're not some kind of hive mind gestalt entity y'know.  I've only been in Brixton a year, so maybe people could call me some of those things.  They don't though.



I've always considered it fairly lame for people to come back with the argument 'where PRECISELY have I called you those things' - I'm pretty sure you haven't personally labelled me any of those things Blagsta BUT much of the tone of the Brixton forum has centered around the vilification of a bunch of rather pat stereotypes which have been less than inclusive and pretty offensive. Maybe I'm being over-sensitive (and you'll have to take my word for this, I'M NOT), but there's been far too much lazy and exclusive classifying which isn't all that helpful. I'd go so far as to say that many of things that have been said have altered my views very much away from the 'anti-gentrification' argument, which certainly wasn't my stance in the first place.


----------



## Domski (Mar 29, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> Domski-don't you think you're being just a little paranoid?



No - I'm afraid I don't


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> Ah! Deft implementation of rule 4 from the 'How to Win Online Arguments' guide!


eh? no one's emailed me privately saying how top my posts are. they've said it face to face. which rule's that under?


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> eh? no one's emailed me privately saying how top my posts are. they've said it face to face. which rule's that under?


Err, by claiming that people have privately - _off the boards _ - complimented you on your 'superior' posts, you are definitely echoing rule 4.

PS have you located your sense of humour yet?


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> I've always considered it fairly lame for people to come back with the argument 'where PRECISELY have I called you those things' - I'm pretty sure you haven't personally labelled me any of those things Blagsta BUT much of the tone of the Brixton forum has centered around the vilification of a bunch of rather pat stereotypes which have been less than inclusive and pretty offensive. Maybe I'm being over-sensitive (and you'll have to take my word for this, I'M NOT), but there's been far too much lazy and exclusive classifying which isn't all that helpful. I'd go so far as to say that many of things that have been said have altered my views very much away from the 'anti-gentrification' argument, which certainly wasn't my stance in the first place.



Yes, there is sometimes lazy stereotyping from all sides.  But to then infer that this whole forum thinks of you in a certain way is a tad paranoid don't you think?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2004)

...above & beyond the call of duty.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> PS have you located your sense of humour yet?


never lost, but sometimes misplaced.


----------



## Domski (Mar 29, 2004)

Blagsta said:
			
		

> Yes, there is sometimes lazy stereotyping from all sides.  But to then infer that this whole forum thinks of you in a certain way is a tad paranoid don't you think?



Alright then - maybe it's got something to do with the fact that one of the moderators has these views and expresses them in the 'unique' way that he does


----------



## Anna Key (Mar 29, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> The U75 regulars would therefore call me a number of things (not directly, but pretty clearly infer) that I'm:
> 
> 1. A drug tourist
> 2. A claphamite or Tallulah or Oliver or some such other shite (I did actually live in Clapham once)
> ...



I guess I'm a u75 regular and don't recall calling you any of these things. 

But then I said to myself: 

"OK, I haven't called Domski any of these things but maybe I've _thought_ them?"

The answer came back: "No."

"But have I _felt_ them?"

Again the answer came back: "No."

So you've simply failed to register. Sorry! No offence.


----------



## Athos (Mar 29, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Ernesto doesn't live here. Athos - he hasn't said. But it makes a difference.



Please tell me exactly how it makes a difference.  I don't live in Tel Aviv, either: do you resent me posting on Middle East Politics threads?


----------



## Domski (Mar 29, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> I guess I'm a u75 regular and don't recall calling you any of these things.
> 
> But then I said to myself:
> 
> ...



LOL! Thats a bit shite for someone of your intellectual resources Mr Key 

I'd be very surprised if you'd said, thought or felt any one of these things about me in particular, especially as I've managed to chalk up a 'mere' 37 posts 'worth preserving'... hehe.

It's more to do with what I consider to be (for a supposedly inclusive bunch of people) the close-minded and hypocritical way in which some of the posters on the Brixton forum have come across which I firmly believe do no favours to what are often extremely reasonable and well expressed arguments for the preservation of Brixton's culture (and in the case of somewhere like Living, protection against an utter cunt)...

Seeing as this is a reply to you Anna, a classic example has been your extremely helpful posts about local issues utterly ruined by some crap (AND pretty genuinely offensive) comment on the 'Tallulah-isation' of Brixton. Pretty puerile in my book.


----------



## Brainaddict (Mar 29, 2004)

Although I have no desire to get drawn into this argument, I have to say this is by far the most intimidating forum on U75, and a certain kind of nostalgic snobbery is quite common. I've just moved to Brixton and therefore like it for what it is today, rather than what it was like five or ten or twenty years ago. I have to admit that on this forum I fear being looked down upon for having this opinion.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> Alright then - maybe it's got something to do with the fact that one of the moderators has these views and expresses them in the 'unique' way that he does



Thats just Hatboy's way.  Yes, I think he should be a bit more "hands off" in his moderating style, but he passionately cares about Brixton and what happens here.  And thats a good thing IMO.


----------



## miss minnie (Mar 29, 2004)

have to say i've not been keen on the brixton forum for some time.  and i've lived around here for over 20 years.  i always think twice before i post here and i'm giving up posting more than a subdued sentence or two now.

it's a very 'edgy' forum.  hatboy, sorry, you're a lovely guy in real life but you make the debates here such hard work.

all the weird editing, your moods, anger and outbursts, your sarcastic and cynical replies, your intimidation and lack of objectivity ruin it for me.   you keep saying you want more variety in the posters here but i can't help feeling that forum newbies are put off by your style.   brixton is not yours, maybe this forum is.  fine.  i'm not going to argue with you, it's just my opinion - you've told me you value honesty so i hope you appreciate that i'm being honest.


----------



## aurora green (Mar 29, 2004)

Blimey.
 I'm quite scared to post here actually, but its not Hatboy that puts me off. Not at all. 
It's only 'cos I live here and have done for so long, that I dare to, but I still get seem to get flamed if ever I get too confident. Its not as bad as P&P tho.


----------



## kea (Mar 29, 2004)

well i don't live here and never have and so my opinion is irrelevant  i just wanted to say that i enjoy reading this forum in a vicarious way i guess and have done ever since i joined - basically cos i feel that it epitomises the kind of local awareness and debate about local issues that i've felt was lacking in every place i've ever lived in.

anyway, i'm invisible  so as you were ...


----------



## hatboy (Mar 29, 2004)

We all have to examine ourselves and our hearts and minds in life. Obviously including me. For my part I will try and chill out a bit.  

I appreciate what seems like a pretty friendly, laid-back response from Domski. But I have to say Domski, if things I say prompt you to examine yourself and you feel they apply to you that isn't my fault is it? There's lots of new posters I welcome with open arms. You immediately had a go at me about LJ. That wasn't either friendly or fair.

Athos - what difference does it make whether you live here or not? A big difference. If you live here you have an ongoing idea of what Brixton is like. If you don't you don't. That's obvious. If you can't even see that then what insights we can expect from you I don't know!     Like it or not I am better informed than you about what goes on here. I live here. Although I'll say again I reckon I only just about know enough to know how little I know!

And again, I'm not against change, just the unfair, discriminatory changes I've described. I do think Brixton is being sanitised for a new type of consumer. And the "young professional" does often have more conservative ideas than the artist/boho/drop-out types who have washed up here (like me) in the past.  I do think Brixton's "clean-up" is something to do with the demands of the more conservative here and once cheap, if not unwanted property becoming very valuable. 

Some of what's happening here is for good, but there's also alot of people who feel left out. There seems to be less tolerance of noise, less tolerance of weed, less tolerance of difference, more division in wealth - are we all sure Brixton's getting to be a better place?

Really?

I definitely see what another poster said about the Upper St lifestyle around central Brixton for some and then a whole other strata of people for whom the smart apartments and designer bars are entirely irrelevant.

If you're one of the people who dont notice that then open your eyes. 

Please.


----------



## Athos (Mar 29, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Athos... Like it or not I am better informed than you about what goes on here.



You haven't the first clue about me, and you have no idea where I live now, or where I have lived in the past!  Yet, you're so confident that you're better informed than me.  You are so arrogant it's unbelievable.  You seem to think that you and only you knows or cares about Brixton.  You're not even a Londoner for fuck's sake!  You moved into Brixton and now think you're the only person who has a valid opinion on the place, and that, accordingly, you can bully everyone in this forum: editing people's posts, launching personal attacks on people, and threatening to ban them.  Get over yourself, mate.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 29, 2004)

Thought you'd like that. I should have said "if you don't live here". You're right, you haven't said yet.

Does my comment "after fifteen years I've realised I know just enought to know how little I know" strike you as arrogant? You're a bit selective there because you've decided you don't like me. Chill out for fuck's sake. Everybody else is!  LOL 





			
				miss minnie said:
			
		

> all the weird editing, your moods, anger and outbursts, your sarcastic and cynical replies, your intimidation and lack of objectivity ruin it for me. you keep saying you want more variety in the posters here but i can't help feeling that forum newbies are put off by your style.




Er, I think that is just my personality. Ooops!  No offence taken. But no-one with any spunk is put off anyway.


----------



## Dubversion (Mar 29, 2004)

hatboy - i agree with a great deal of the way you feel about the problems brixton has, and the way the community is being squeezed out.

but i've lived in and around brixton for about as long as you, and spent a lot of my life here. and yet you've previously had a go at me because apparently i don't have friends here, don't have much involvement in the area. which patently isn't true.

so it doesn't seem as simple as a location or a longevity or a connection to the area. it has to be someone who's experience of brixton matches YOURS, someone who's brixton social network overlaps to a great extent with you, or their opinion seems to count less.

i drank in the canning for years and years and years, and the atlantic, and the albert obviously. i've been involved in some (not very much) brixton politics and goings-on, i've spent a lot of time in brixton, in the market, in the cafes and bars (including Mingles..    ) but i suspect you STILL don't consider me someone sufficiently embroiled in brixton life to have an opinion...

which rather begs the question who you DO think is qualified to have an opinion. other than yourself, of course..

sorry if that's harsh - i think a great deal of you - but i don't think you're as fair minded as you like to think or hope you are.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 29, 2004)

I was just weirded out by you being called Dubversion and loving reggae but never bumping into you at any reggae places round here.

 

What you say about only relating to people with identical experience or whatever is crap. Plenty of people see some truth in what I say. (But they don't have any interest in, or sometimes regular access to, internet bulletin boards).  And I am trying to be truthful here. Perhaps I'm more subjective than I thought.

Anyway, could you all shut up and get out. We're trying to close now!


----------



## Dubversion (Mar 29, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> I was just weirded out by you being called Dubversion and lving reggae but never bumping into you at any reggae places round here.



why? i go to aba shanti and university of dub - that's the kind of reggae i like. if i was called dancehallboy maybe you'd have a point..




			
				hatboy said:
			
		

> IWhat you say about only relating to people with identical experience or whatever is crap.



but you've made it clear that i don't fit your bill in terms of someone sufficiently 'brixton' to offer much of an opinion. and i'd argue that in my time in and round the place - which as i say, roughly parallels yours in time at least - has involved different focusses and activities. but you seem to think that by not drinking in Harmony or buying my grass (i don't smoke, remember) at *********** or scarcely ever drinking in the old Queens, that i'm not as authentic as you in some way.


----------



## Dubversion (Mar 29, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Plenty of people see some truth in what I say. (



hatboy, you muppet, I SEE some truth in what you say. lots of it.

i just think you operate a kind of brixtoncentric elitism that undermines your arguments sometimes.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 29, 2004)

No I don't think that. You've never really taken up my friendship from the beginning so I don't think about you much.

You've just done what Domski's done - attributed qualities to yourself that I haven't said.

I think it's good for all of us to examine ourselves. If YOU feel you are something you don't want to be or YOU feel guilty about something, then change it, or admit it to yourself. That's what I try to do.

Anyway, see you, etc.  

Shit - that was a response to Dub's first post.

Response to second post - Yeah, that sounds fair. Maybe I do that a bit. But some of the arguments are still solid.


----------



## Dubversion (Mar 29, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> No I don't think that. You've never really taken up my friendship from the beginning so I don't think about you much.



not quite sure i follow that point, hatboy?

i've got lots and lots of mates, 
i see some of them a lot, a lot of them some. 

i think you're a nice bloke and i enjoy running into you. if you feel i've in some way rejected you or undervalued something, that seems a very odd thing to say....


----------



## hatboy (Mar 29, 2004)

"Odd" is alright now and then isn't it?

Or are the odd also due to be "ethnically cleansed" from the neighbourhood.     

(I believe this, but I'm also joking. Hope that's clear).


----------



## Dubversion (Mar 29, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> You've just done what Domski's done - attributed qualities to yourself that I haven't said.
> 
> I.




not true, hatboy. if i kept threads the way ern does i could refer you to the post where you criticised me for not being sufficiently, convincingly involved in brixton, and not having any friends there.

so i'm attributing nothing to myself, merely quoting your fallacious assumptions about me.

honestly - i'm not having a go, i guess i'm trying to use myself as an example to illustrate a wider point about the way you tend to judge people in this forum based on a remit which i think, i'm afraid, is narrower than you admit to yourself...


----------



## hatboy (Mar 29, 2004)

And I'd never buy grass from anything called ****** ********. I can't read what it says! 

Do you speak asterisk?  

I like you better now you've explained things. Anyway, fire drill over. Back to bed ward 3.


----------



## Dubversion (Mar 29, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> "Odd" is alright now and then isn't it?
> 
> Or are the odd also due to be "ethnically cleansed" from the neighbourhood.
> 
> (I believe this, but I'm also joking. Hope that's clear).


i was having a row with a workmate today about the selling off of social housing in brixton. as a ferndale road property owner, he's all for it (and used the 'it will benefit the wider area' argument) and i tried to explain the devastating effect it's having on the local people and the things about the area that make it somewhere great to live. 

hatboy, i AGREE with you, for fucks sake, almost all the time. i just think you are just as guilty of a kind of tunnel vision view of brixton as those you feel seek to gentrify the area according to THEIR own tunnel vision view of brixton. now i might share most of your viewpoint, but it doesn't mean i don't still see the prejudices that inform your take on the situation. i just don't think YOU see them.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 29, 2004)

"honestly - i'm not having a go, i guess i'm trying to use myself as an example to illustrate a wider point about the way you tend to judge people in this forum based on a remit which i think, i'm afraid, is narrower than you admit to yourself..."

I've said I'll think about that. OK?  Peace.


----------



## Dubversion (Mar 29, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Do you speak asterisk?



only in sufficiently mature company


----------



## fanta (Mar 30, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> on the other hand, my posts are of a superior quality, as i'm often told by other urbanites.



Personally, what I love most about them is their refreshing modesty! 

People who don't live in Brixton, have never been or even can't stand the place should be allowed to post here I think - as long as they adhere to the FAQ/rules.

Lets not get all cliquey and elitist.


----------



## Pie 1 (Mar 30, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> at several urbanite meet-ups, i've been praised for my posts. if no one's said a good word about yr's, it may be because they're cack.



I can't quite believe just how up your own arse you are PM.


----------



## fanta (Mar 30, 2004)

I don't want to boast, but I forgot to mention that I get complimented and thanked on a daily basis from various world leaders for my sagacious contributions to world peace and conflict resolution throughout the planet's trouble spots!

They don't have to and I wish they wouldn't - all that attention is a little embarrassing to be honest.

It is no effort and I don't mind, really!

PS - if anyone needs any dragons slayed, damsals rescued or mutinies crushed then fell free to PM me!


----------



## Rollem (Mar 30, 2004)

*pokes non brixton head into discussion*

well, i for one think this forum has had the 'exlucsive' feel to it for some time, and am sure this discussion has been had before (in various forms)

does it stop me posting in here?

does it eck 

i do sometimes feel that its moderating is ott, but to me thats a red rag to a bull. if people suggesting the views of 'outsiders' aren't welcome in here, cant see their own hypocrosy, i cant be bothered to waste my time pointing it out.


----------



## Athos (Mar 30, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Thought you'd like that. I should have said "if you don't live here". You're right, you haven't said yet.
> 
> Does my comment "after fifteen years I've realised I know just enought to know how little I know" strike you as arrogant? You're a bit selective there because you've decided you don't like me. Chill out for fuck's sake. Everybody else is!  LOL
> 
> ...



I've not decided that I don't like you: I don't know you, and, unlike yourself, I tend to reserve judgement until I know a little about someone!    

In fact, the consensus seems to be that you're a decent enough bloke face-to-face, and maybe we'd get on, but I know I'm not alone in finding your behaviour on the boards - more particularly, on this forum - a bit out of order.

You seem to think that your opinions are more valid/should carry more weight, than those of other people, about whom you don't know the first thing.  You make this forum uninviting for many, and upset people by threatening posters with bans when they have done nothing more than you have (i.e. some out of order personal stuff), and editing others people's posts.

Perhaps you should take a look at yourself, especially if you're going to moderate this forum.


----------



## newbie (Mar 30, 2004)

Rollem said:
			
		

> well, i for one think this forum has had the 'exlucsive' feel to it for some time,



Aye, there's truth in that and I'm probably part of it and I'm sorry if anyone feels it.  It's not intentional, on a conscious level fresh views are welcome, but it's hard to know the effect of the unconscious subtext of my own posts.

While hatboy has an obvious difficulty separating out his role as passionate poster from being the impartial, coolheaded mod, I really don't think he is entirely responsible for the level of scathing abuse that make this forum intimidating.


----------



## Pie 1 (Mar 30, 2004)

I've stopped bothering to post in this forum a lot of the time as I also feel it has become to intimidating, cliquey and frankly, just to much hassle.
For one, I'm a very poor typist and have some difficulty expressing myself in written form - I can more than keep up my end verbally. This gets jumped on by some as just wading in.
Another is, it's just become too tiresome.
If you don't get condecended by one of the gang of four, then you get flamed by another for 'not keeping up' or told that you haven't got a clue what your talking about just because happen to disagree. 
And why does every little thing from shopping in Tesco's to a dance night at cafe cairo have to get turned into a political argument about fucking gentrification? Why can't some people accept that  some others just aren't that polittically motivated, but are still are just as valid members of Brixton's community as anyone else and as such might well want to talk about minor traffic violations - It's just as valid IMO.
Hatboy, I've said before that I respect your commitment, but I think you confuse the line between moderater & editor - it is really not your place to try and mould this forum to your ideals.
It's a public bulliten board - people are allowed to discuss what ever they feel affects them, whether it be traffic violations or the selling off of council houses.


----------



## fanta (Mar 30, 2004)

Pie 1 said:
			
		

> If you don't get condecended by one of the gang of four, then you get flamed by another for 'not keeping up' or told that you haven't got a clue what your talking about just because happen to disagree



Who could this fearsome foursome possibly be you're refering to?


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

Pie 1 said:
			
		

> If you don't get condecended by one of the gang of four, then you get flamed by another for 'not keeping up' or told that you haven't got a clue what your talking about just because happen to disagree.


 If you had anything to say other than making snide, sneering digs at what you call the ''gang of four'' then you would get a very different response.  What the fuck do you expect? 

I'm sick of people railing against a  "Brixton clique" that doesn't exist. There is no ''cool and trendy" homogenous entity that looks down on other people. It's a pernicious myth that has done nothing but hijack real debate over issues such as people losing their homes and having no local school to send their kids to.  

It's not a matter of ''you're not in the Brixton clique - fuck off'' but ''If you haven't got anything to add except sneering at other posters, don't bother."

It's also not a matter of conforming to a political agenda. Please don't!! One of our best regular posters is a tory.  It's simply a case of not calling people things like ''The old queen of the Brixton clique" and dismissing them as patronisingly racist trustafarians.   If people can only come out with rubbish like that then no, I don't actually care what they think. Why should I? I'm a busy woman.


----------



## Rollem (Mar 30, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> I'm sick of people railing against a  "Brixton clique" that doesn't exist. There is no ''cool and trendy" homogenous entity that looks down on other people. It's a pernicious myth that has done nothing but hijack real debate over issues such as people losing their homes and having no local school to send their kids to.


who said anything about the clique being "cool and trendy"?  

seriously though intostella, there is a feeling of a 'clique' - intentional or not. maybe you dont see it, but other "outsiders" do, and to totally dismiss it seems a bit daft to me. unless of course you are happy with people feeling excluded from this forum?

maybe it is natural that this feeling exists? obviously those that live in brixton are always going to feel they have a better understanding of the area than those who simply work or socialise there. true or not. but there can be a frosty feeling of "who the fuck are you to comment" from time to time, and it's getting boring


----------



## Athos (Mar 30, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> I'm sick of people railing against a  "Brixton clique" that doesn't exist.



You might not think that, but that's not what other posters are saying is it?


----------



## newbie (Mar 30, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> If you had anything to say other than making snide, sneering digs at what you call the ''gang of four'' then you would get a very different response.



I would imagine that most people reading this recognise what nonsense that is.


----------



## Pie 1 (Mar 30, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> It's simply a case of not calling people things like ''The old queen of the Brixton clique" and dismissing them as patronisingly racist trustafarians.   If people can only come out with rubbish like that then no,



An oversight I'm sure, but you did mean to make it clear to everyone that those comments were nothing to do with me, didn't you?


Ouote: " I don't actually care what they think. Why should I? I'm a busy woman."

Then why do you spend so much time and energy flaming the people that you don't care about.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> I would imagine that most people reading this recognise what nonsense that is.


Proof of the pudding that it has nothing to do with one's Brixton credentials. You, newbie, have lived in Brixton for the past thousand years and that doesn't stop you from talking complete rot a lot of the time.


----------



## pk (Mar 30, 2004)

Well as someone raised in South London I probably have more right to comment on the issues surrounding the changing face of Brixton than most people.

I do believe that the moderator of this forum (or should I say the OWNER of this forum because he sure acts like it) isn't doing his job and Moderating debate, he is positively Stifling debate.

So perhaps we should call him a stifler?

I also think that the things our beloved Hatboy loves about Brixton are the very thing that makes Brixton actually quite shit.
By rejecting change and siding with the Jamaican viewpoint at every turn (oh, they're Jamaican therefore they automatically have a cultural right to do whatever they want with their town) whether right or wrong is a mistake.

Brixton should be celebrated for it's diversity.

Hatboy seems to do everything possible to prevent diversity, in both debate and in life, and his bemoaning of the lack of black culture or Jamaican culture whilst scathing all white culture within Brixton is a fucking joke.

Especially when you bear in mind that Hatboy is WHITE and that he's not even from Brixton!!

Apart from that I actually agree with most of what he says.

I just don't like the "misfit" mentality that someone who does fuck all but moan has more right to live in Brixton than a young professional, nor do I like open drug dealing in the streets, nor do I like the attitude of complacency within certain sections of the Jamaican community as regards the crack trade - which is 99 percent a Jamaican trade - I don't like needles dumped by junkie scum in childrens play areas, and I don't like pubs that play endless boring lovers rock compilations to it's moody patrons. 

Even if I still lived in the area I'd sooner move out and let the Claphamites take Brixton over, than see the type of shit Loughborough Junction has become, a place of great history and significance buried under the weight of petty drug feuds and pub landlords in fear of their lives because of some shithead surplus junkies who benefit nobody but moan the most - and indeed cost Lambeth council the most.

There. I've said my bit.


----------



## Athos (Mar 30, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Proof of the pudding that it has nothing to do with one's Brixton credentials. You, newbie, have lived in Brixton for the past thousand years and that doesn't stop you from talking complete rot a lot of the time.



Nobody said that the basis of the clique is 'Brixton credentials.'  It doesn't make it any the less of a clique, though.


----------



## pk (Mar 30, 2004)

I've been playing in and around Brixton for years and years.

Hatboy - name ONE thing you have done for the community to justify your incessant patronising "I'm more Brixton than you" tone.

Apart from appearing in the movie SW9 I can think of nothing.

Yet I without even living here have instigated roughly 6 events in as many different venues.

And will continue to do so, whether it pleases you or not.

And I will continue to post here on this forum, in spite of your attempts to edit my posts or send me PM's telling me not to post here anymore.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Mar 30, 2004)

Poor Hatboy, leave him alone or I will beat you all up.   

He's a sweetie.


----------



## chegrimandi (Mar 30, 2004)

this thread has turned out just as I expected, its an interesting one some good points made by all concerned, kind of a summary of the ongoing debates for the last 2/3 years whatever. I don't find the Brixton forum very intimidating but I don't go in there much because I don't live there so what's said isn't that relevant to me, and I wouldn't really feel able to contribute anything of any real value as there are a lot of posters with obvious hardcore knowledge of the area. Occasionally i'll peek at the yuppification threads as that can be applid to the whole of London.

If you could all stop squabbling amongst yerselves and recognise that you all have good valid, differing points then you might actually get somewhere, but it would be boring so as you were.......however so-called newbies do have obvious contributions and valid comments to make, just as any other so called more-qualified posters might do......


----------



## tarannau (Mar 30, 2004)

Athos said:
			
		

> Nobody said that the basis of the clique is 'Brixton credentials.'  It doesn't make it any the less of a clique, though.



I'm a little intrigued by this idea of a dominant clique. Am in this exclusive club by the way? Have I paid my membership fee and mastered the special handshake yet...

Whilst I'm a longterm Brixton local and bump into many of the regular posters on here on a frequent basis, I think it's fair to say that I've had numerous 'lively debates' with the self-same folks. And - judging from the some of the choice insults levelled in my direction in the past - I'm not afforded some kind of immunity from passionate comebacks.

By for every Brixton firebrand (you know who you are...  ) willing to leap in with furious invective, there's at least another two more moderate locals that will step in to offer a counterpoint. I don't consider Brixton Hatter, Orang or Hendo as rabid, highly-politicised and inflexible posters for example.  And they're just the first three off the top of my head. You'll generally get a fair go if you're prepared to stand and debate your point - posters here will support those with fair viewpoints, regardless of their local links. But if you want to snipe about unfairness whilst offering little in the way back...

As with any forum here, perhaps with the exception of the super-busy general, the most prolific posters will often provide the most visible viewpoints. It doesn't mean that they reflect the entire range of opinion on the forum. Nor that anyone should be cowed into not commenting and redressing the balance.

It's going to get a little robust around here - hell, it's the chupsty Brixton forum not suburban after all.  But the best way to change the tonality is to get involved, rather than comment  repeatedly on your concerns.


----------



## aurora green (Mar 30, 2004)

Top post tarannau. I totally agree with you.


----------



## miss minnie (Mar 30, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> By for every Brixton firebrand (you know who you are...  ) willing to leap in with furious invective, there's at least another two more moderate locals that will step in to offer a counterpoint.


or as hatboy would have it - 'people on the attack' (who will henceforth promptly be banned) and 'the conservative attitudes' (who are ruining this forum).


----------



## aurora green (Mar 30, 2004)

Really, this attacking Hatboy stuff is becoming so boring now.


----------



## Athos (Mar 30, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> I'm a little intrigued by this idea of a dominant clique. Am in this exclusive club by the way? Have I paid my membership fee and mastered the special handshake yet...
> 
> Whilst I'm a longterm Brixton local and bump into many of the regular posters on here on a frequent basis, I think it's fair to say that I've had numerous 'lively debates' with the self-same folks. And - judging from the some of the choice insults levelled in my direction in the past - I'm not afforded some kind of immunity from passionate comebacks.
> 
> ...


That was a sensible post, tarannau.  No, I don't consider you to be part of any clique.  I agree that there are a lot of very good contributions made by regular contributors to this forum, and that, on the whole, they're a welcoming bunch.  Also, I can see that there are some diverse views here.  However, as many people have explained, there is a feeling that 'outsiders' are unwelcome, which is a result of the undertone in some posters' contributions; there are those, for example, who will simply assert that their opinion is more valid than somone elses, without knowing anything about that other person.  I don't think it helps to have a moderator who seems obsessed with his own status as self-appointed oracle of all things Brixton.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Mar 30, 2004)

Can't see the problem with Hatboy. OK I have only met him once but I speak as I find and he seems really nice.   

Lay off him.


----------



## fanta (Mar 30, 2004)

Stobart Spotter said:
			
		

> Can't see the problem with Hatboy. OK I have only met him once but I speak as I find and he seems really nice.
> 
> Lay off him.



Seconded. I've spotted him around town, never spoke to him, don't always agree with him, but from what I know of him here I like him.


----------



## Anna Key (Mar 30, 2004)

Pie 1 said:
			
		

> If you don't get condescended by one of the gang of four, then you get flamed by another for 'not keeping up' or told that you haven't got a clue what your talking about just because happen to disagree.






			
				Fanta said:
			
		

> Who could this fearsome foursome possibly be you're refering to?


Comrades Mrs M, Bob, Mr BC and Pooka! The revangist devils!   



			
				Pie 1 said:
			
		

> And why does every little thing from shopping in Tesco's to a dance night at cafe cairo have to get turned into a political argument about fucking gentrification?


I was ticked off by Hatboy and Editor (no less) for politicising Tescos - or was it fireworks or nightclub flyers written in text messaging language - I forget. I was told - words to the effect of - to stop polluting such threads with political clap-trap. They did it nicely but the meaning was clear.

I thought about it and decided the criticism was right. People have been criticised on this thread for cliquery, condescension, arrogance, etc., _but the main thing is not to be a crashing bore._ 

That's the cardinal sin of writing on a public bulletin board. In fact in any] sort of writing, from journalism to fiction to political manifestos to technical manuals. And something, incidentally, which Hatboy hasn't been accused of. I've never heard anyone say "Hatboy's a bore."

I'll read anyone who writes well on virtually any subject. That doesn't mean being a spelling and grammar snob - I'll read a dyslexic who's got something to say.

I mean someone who uses language in a way which (a) communicates something new - or something old in a new way - and (b) makes me laugh. 

I'm particularly interested in people with this capacity from the political left. Lefties are notoriously turgid writers - Marx and the appalling Frog literary theorists being classic examples. 

But good leftist writers do exist. I regularly meet people from the political right who grudgingly admire Orwell, Paul Foot, Tony Benn and EP Thompson, specifically for their writing skills.

"I disagree with everything you say but love the way you say it!"

I wish someone would say more about why exactly they feel alienated from this forum. I want people to feel welcome and would like to understand more about why some don't. If I'm at fault I'll think about specific criticisms and change what I post.

But Stella's right of course. Someone producing a crap argument on a serious subject can expect to get twatted. 

Housing is a hot potato in Lambeth. Large numbers of poor and vulnerable people risk losing their homes to property developers for yuppies to colonise, and then to infect Brixton with their dismal Mrs Bucket-style cultural values. 

It's not some spat about which Brixton nightclub to attend. It's deadly serious stuff. There's been one housing-related suicide on my estate in the last 18 months plus two sectionings under the Mental Health Act.

This website is influential -  not just because some key people in the Council read it - which they'd deny LOL! - but because some good activists use these boards to hone their arguments. Nothing wrong with that. People like Pooka and Fanta are more useful than perhaps they realise.

This isn't brown-nosing but I like Hatboy, always have, always will. It's partly personal - he's been consistently warm and friendly to me on a human level. But it's also political. He's been like a rock in his support for some of the political things which wind me up about Brixton.

I have similar feelings about others who post here. But perhaps these sort of personal and political background connections can comes across as cliquey and excluding and alienating to people out of the loop, which is a shame. People should be welcomed and feel welcome.

But if you post a bad argument - if you walk into the kitchen - expect some heat. This is a discussion forum, not a group encounter session at the Maudsley.


----------



## Athos (Mar 30, 2004)

Stobart Spotter said:
			
		

> Can't see the problem with Hatboy. OK I have only met him once but I speak as I find and he seems really nice.
> 
> Lay off him.




He slings abuse around, edits peoples posts, threatens bans against those with whom he disagrees and adopts a arogant and superior tone which goes some way towards making this forum so unwelcoming; that behaviour is, in my opinion, not the way to moderate; that's the problem with Hatboy.  Perhaps he should stick to posting *or* moderating, or moderate a forum about where he'd be less over-bearing.


----------



## miss minnie (Mar 30, 2004)

aurora green said:
			
		

> Really, this attacking Hatboy stuff is becoming so boring now.


 i don't want to see the firebrands banned and i don't want to see the conservatives shunned, but i could quote the places where the moderator voices these opinions and edicts.  it's not an 'attack', he genuinely worries me when he says stuff like this. 

i've a right to express my opinion.  sorry if i bore you aurora.  the moderator also edited two posts of yours and until the editor asked him to give a reason i was wondering what it was that you'd written to cause offence.  things like that should be picked up on, imo.  do you want a moderator that corrects your spelling for you?




			
				Stobart Spotter said:
			
		

> Can't see the problem with Hatboy. OK I have only met him once but I speak as I find and he seems really nice.
> 
> Lay off him.


excuse me?  do you consider moderation above criticism?  if you would care to read carefully you might find that the opinions being expressed are about style of moderation, not personal attacks.  i've already said that i personally like hatboy, but i do have issues with some of his style of moderation and so do others.


----------



## Athos (Mar 30, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> That's the cardinal sin of writing on a public bulletin board. In fact in any] sort of writing, from journalism to fiction to political manifestos to technical manuals. And something, incidentally, which Hatboy hasn't been accused of. I've never heard anyone say "Hatboy's a bore."


this morning, on the S.W.A.G. thread, Wonko the sane posted:

*yawn* hatboy.

Is that the sort of thing you mean?


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

Stobart Spotter said:
			
		

> Can't see the problem with Hatboy. OK I have only met him once but I speak as I find and he seems really nice.
> 
> Lay off him.


Absolutely. Yes, if people are discussing a drugs bust in Landor Road or Pangaea closing or something, it might look cliquey and exclusive -- and indeed boring -- to people who don't know the area. 

But the Brixton forum _is_ different to most forums in that respect in that it relates closely to issues -- and what issues!  -- going on in a particular area. 

While people, of course, understand the arguments involved in gentrification and so on, that doesn't mean they have a close understanding of how that relates to, say, Brixton, and if someone says ''No, it's actually not like that", that doesn't make them cliquey or exclusive.

If I bowled into a forum dedicated to Newcastle, to pluck an example from the air, and started telling people how it was in their area and they told me I was wrong, I wouldn't think they were being an exclusive clique. If I then started coming out with offensive stereotypes about them keeping coal in the bath or something, I would expect them to tell me to fuck off. And the same applies, in my book, to branding Brixton residents who are concerned about housing and so on as naive, racist trustafarians.


----------



## aurora green (Mar 30, 2004)

miss minnie said:
			
		

> ...  sorry if i bore you aurora.  the moderator also edited two posts of yours and until the editor asked him to give a reason i was wondering what it was that you'd written to cause offence.  things like that should be picked up on, imo.  do you want a moderator that corrects your spelling for you?




Its not you boring me, its the general widespread extended attack. I think I get where Hatboy's coming from you see.

To be honest, I feel embarrassed that I make mistakes posting here and dont mind being corrected, tho it does worry me what you just said.
I'm a busy mother of three, who always posts on the run.
I should be doing my housework really, not skiving off here.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

anna key said:
			
		

> There's been one housing-related suicide on my estate in the last 18 months plus two sectionings under the Mental Health Act.


And if I'm a firebrand (ha), this is why. Like AK, these are my friends and neighbours and yes, I am really fucking angry.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 30, 2004)

pk said:
			
		

> Well as someone raised in South London I probably have more right to comment on the issues surrounding the changing face of Brixton than most people.
> 
> I do believe that the moderator of this forum (or should I say the OWNER of this forum because he sure acts like it) isn't doing his job and Moderating debate, he is positively Stifling debate.
> 
> ...



Utterly clueless. Utterly simplistic. A complete mis-understanding of who I am and what I do. This black/white thing - see my previous post about "not just talking to one black bloke called Winston and thinking I know something". 

Just because you think it is odd for a white guy to say plainly and openly "I think it's a shame the u75 parties are so white, it's not what I'm used to" (for instance) doesn't mean others do. You just don't get it do you.  If it's true, it's true. It doesn't matter what colour the person saying it is.

And I know Jamaicans I can't stand too. In reality I speak as I find. But some of the sidelining and sanitising of Jamaican/Jamaican British people and interests in Brixton is real.


----------



## newbie (Mar 30, 2004)

If the response to posting opinions from the outside was ''No, it's actually not like that" I don't suppose anyone would be complaining.  But the response is far more intimidating and far less welcoming than that.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 30, 2004)

PK said:
			
		

> I just don't like the "misfit" mentality that someone who does fuck all but moan has more right to live in Brixton than a young professional, nor do I like open drug dealing in the streets, nor do I like the attitude of complacency within certain sections of the Jamaican community as regards the crack trade - which is 99 percent a Jamaican trade - I don't like needles dumped by junkie scum in childrens play areas, and I don't like pubs that play endless boring lovers rock compilations to it's moody patrons.
> 
> Even if I still lived in the area I'd sooner move out and let the Claphamites take Brixton over, than see the type of shit Loughborough Junction has become, a place of great history and significance buried under the weight of petty drug feuds and pub landlords in fear of their lives because of some shithead surplus junkies who benefit nobody but moan the most - and indeed cost Lambeth council the most.



*What a racist idiot. If this sort of poster and his ill-informed, half-baked arguments are acceptable to Editor/Mike, they certainly are not to me. 

Do I want to be associated with a website that finds this bigotry acceptable?

I'm really not sure I do.*    

PK - so you grew up in London? Well, you must have become a very out-of-touch adult since. Shame on you.

Responding to your ignorant criticisms:

1) I don't just moan. I've stood as a Green Party candidate. We came second. I was active in that Paddick campaign. I spend a fair amount of time attending Brixton Forum meetings and planning meetings. I went to the licensing hearing for Harmony to support them against just this sort of prejudice: see 2)

2) "endless lovers rock compilations to moody patrons" - what an insult! You suggest patrons of whatever pub in Brixton you are talking about are moody. That's just how the most ignorant (white generally) people stereotype the blacker pubs without even going in. You are part of that ignorance.

3) Loughborough Junction - Keep up. The two pubs are about to be renovated. Due to the interference of me and other concerned locals the Green Man will now not just be flats but have a health centre underneath. I helped do that. Is that nothing?

Go away.


----------



## LDR (Mar 30, 2004)

To bring this back on topic.

Should people who do not live in Brixton be banned from posting in this forum? 

No - of course not.  How are visitors going to find the best things about Brixton if they cannot post and ask?


----------



## Rollem (Mar 30, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Absolutely. Yes, if people are discussing a drugs bust in Landor Road or Pangaea closing or something, it might look cliquey and exclusive -- and indeed boring -- to people who don't know the area.


the issue is not about those who dont live in brixton finding discussion of "brixton issues" cliquey, exlcusive or boring. its about whether or not there is a feeling of openess and acceptance of those who dont live there to post their views on such issues (which are not always - if at all - issues exlcusive only to brixton), or ask questions about the area, and at times there isnt.


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 30, 2004)

Athos said:
			
		

> However, as many people have explained, there is a feeling that 'outsiders' are unwelcome, which is a result of the undertone in some posters' contributions; .


but might it not also be the result of excessive sensitivity on the part of the reading poster? just playing devil's brief, loike...


> there are those, for example, who will simply assert that their opinion is more valid than somone elses, without knowing anything about that other person.


err, who? precision would help here, co, I'd regard myself as a _fairly_ well-balanced bloke (beyond the occasional tantrum, which, btw, is never on this forum, and that description matches no poster-UNLESS THEY HAVE ARGUED THE CASE AT LEAST 3/4 WAY THRU' 


> I don't think it helps to have a moderator who seems obsessed with his own status as self-appointed oracle of all things Brixton


Now come on, that's just an _Ad Hominem_, and a daft one at that! The very worst you could say of HB-and I think I know him well enough to comment by now -m is that he's a moody blighter. So? that "self-appointed Oracle" stuff-c'mon, you're fairer than that!
I gotta say - and I'm surprised to find mesel' saying this, 'cos you strike me as a reasonable bloke - that you may be overreacting, and in so doing, drowning a legit mini-gripe you may have


----------



## Athos (Mar 30, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> but might it not also be the result of excessive sensitivity on the part of the reading poster? just playing devil's brief, loike...
> 
> err, who? precision would help here, co, I'd regard myself as a _fairly_ well-balanced bloke (beyond the occasional tantrum, which, btw, is never on this forum, and that description matches no poster-UNLESS THEY HAVE ARGUED THE CASE AT LEAST 3/4 WAY THRU'
> 
> ...




If it was just me who felt that way, Red, I'd question whether I'd been over-sensitive, but there seems to be quite a few people who think the same.

I was talking about Hatboy when I mentioned people who seem to think their opinions are far more important than anyone elses.

It's hard to totally exclude _ad hominem_ stuff when I for one think that Hatboy is a big part of the problem, or perhaps I should say that his style of moderating, and general attitude on this forum, are.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2004)

As far as I'm concerned, *anyone* living, visiting, staying or just interested in Brixton has _every right _ to post here.

Many of the issues aren't unique to Brixton (junkies, yuppification etc) so I welcome considered input from anyone with something to say on the subject - regardless of their geographical location.

And much as those issues are important to me, Brixton isn't one long battle against The Man: it's also a fucking great area to live and play in, with some of the best bars, pubs, gigs and eateries to be found anywhere in the world.

I'm just as happy to hear about them and don't think new posters should be treated to a potted history of the gentrification of Brixton whenever they happen to comment on a new bar opening.

And I am very concerned by the comments made by some posters about how this forum seems uninviting to them. 

I created these forums for people to be able to talk about _all_ aspects of Brixton life: political, social, flippant and serious.


----------



## Athos (Mar 30, 2004)

LD Rudeboy said:
			
		

> How are visitors going to find the best things about Brixton if they cannot post and ask?


For God's sake don't encourage visitors; what if they like Brixton, and decide to stay!


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

Athos said:
			
		

> For God's sake don't encourage visitors; what if they like Brixton, and decide to stay!


A classic case of the sort of pointless trolling that is of no use to anyone. Except those who want to fuck up the forum.


----------



## marshall (Mar 30, 2004)

'A classic case of the sort of pointless trolling that is of no use to anyone. Except those who want to fuck up the forum.'

What?


----------



## isvicthere? (Mar 30, 2004)

Who are the "gang of four"? Can I join and we'll become the fab five?


----------



## miss minnie (Mar 30, 2004)

Athos said:
			
		

> For God's sake don't encourage visitors; what if they like Brixton, and decide to stay!


and here was i thinking that was a joke...


----------



## miss minnie (Mar 30, 2004)

isvicthere? said:
			
		

> Who are the "gang of four"? Can I join and we'll become the fab five?


 look, enough of these snide and sneering comments!


----------



## Athos (Mar 30, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> A classic case of the sort of pointless trolling that is of no use to anyone. Except those who want to fuck up the forum.




As opposed to this ^^^ witty gem, that has helped the debate enormously.  It was just a lighthearted comment, mocking the attitude that of those Brixtonites who seem so adverse to anyone moving into *their* area.  As it happens, they may be the same people who are so adverse to people posting on *their* forum.


----------



## Anna Key (Mar 30, 2004)

Rollem said:
			
		

> the issue is not about those who dont live in brixton finding discussion of "brixton issues" cliquey, exlcusive or boring. its about whether or not there is a feeling of openess and acceptance of those who dont live there to post their views on such issues (which are not always - if at all - issues exlcusive only to brixton), or ask questions about the area, and at times there isnt.


If that's the issue then where's the argument? It's so obvious that anyone can post whatever they want within the law and the posting rules.

Oh but people are writing about their "feelings" "perceptions" and whether they percieve or feel they have achieved "acceptance." 

Well, I entertain positive "feelings" and "accept" and "welcome" anyone who posts something which interests me and/or makes me laugh.

And I don't give a toss which bit of geological space that person physically inhabits unless the argument they produce has geological relevance.

An example of geological relevance would be someone who produced an argument from experience - an empirical argument - without having amassed any experience, e.g. someone who claimed to know something about Brixton based on experience _but didn't have any._

But such person would simply be producing a bad argument. And I don't see why a bad argument can't be attacked. In fact I can think of very good reasons why a bad argument on an important subject should be strenuously atacked.

Is anyone objecting to bad arguments being attacked on this forum, such attacks to occur within the posting rules, the law and the realm of common decency?


----------



## pooka (Mar 30, 2004)

> Originally Posted by Pie 1
> If you don't get condescended by one of the gang of four,





> Originally Posted by Fanta
> Who could this fearsome foursome possibly be you're refering to?





> Originally Posted by Anna Key
> People like Pooka and Fanta are more useful than perhaps they realise



Quelle larf!


----------



## Anna Key (Mar 30, 2004)

Athos said:
			
		

> those Brixtonites who seem so adverse to anyone moving into *their* area.


You've hit the nail on the head.

Mrs M, Pooka, Fanta, Isvicthere? etc all _loathe _outsiders. They _detest_ necessary change and grumble into their unwashed string vests should tea not be on the table at five o’ clock sharp.

They're Tories to a wo/man. But not nice modern types in tune with the market.

Which is what they need. Some nice thrusting young executives buying up Brixton social housing and posting on these boards.

That would buck their ideas up. Drag them into the twentieth century. Teach ‘em there’s no such thing as a free lunch.

Incidentally, have you sampled that excellent new website called Dissensus?

- democratised moderating style

- wide range of posters

- a welcoming non-hierarchical approach to new members

Apparently it’s doing very well. Going from strength to strength. I recommend that nice Dr Jazz’s posts on what’s _really_ going on with Hatboy. 

Apparently, he doesn’t live in Brixton at all! _He’s really a CIA artificial intelligence programme, designed to terraform Mars, which escaped from a Los Alamos laboratory! _

Perhaps us progressive types should de-camp to Dissensus? Leave these unfriendly, clique-ridden, unwelcoming, outdated crew to stew in their juices?

That would teach them.

Oh, and what I could say about Intostella! She’s so rude! And that Auroa Green’s no better than she should be. And the less said about that taranau the better.

Dissensus here we come!


----------



## lang rabbie (Mar 30, 2004)

*Geological space and the Brixton Forum*

*Look at that left of centre concentration in the Lambeth Group - it's a conspiracy I tell you!*

"plasticity index" = willingness to do the moderator's bidding?  







Source


----------



## lang rabbie (Mar 30, 2004)

[BUMP] - previous post not appearing on control panel as latest


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2004)

Here's an idea. Maybe I should start a 'Brixton politics' forum?


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 30, 2004)

Athos said:
			
		

> As opposed to this ^^^ witty gem, that has helped the debate enormously.  It was just a lighthearted comment, mocking the attitude that of those Brixtonites who seem so adverse to anyone moving into *their* area.  As it happens, they may be the same people who are so adverse to people posting on *their* forum.


Actually, the comment irritated me. purely on the grounds of the unwillingness to be either fish, or flesh, and be done with it. WHICH posters, WHICH Brixtonites are so adverse to 'anyone moving into their area'?
equally, with regard to HB's moderating;


> there seems to be quite a few people who think the same.


who?
I'm not 'avin' a go. Aoll I can say is from MY perspective; lived SW2 about 6-10 years ago, moved away, came back to Saarf london (sydebnham) so I feel like an outsider, yet NOT an outsider. And I'm being totally honest when I say I've NEVER felt like I'm getting that sorta shit from U75 Brixtonites. In fact, quite the reverse.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Mar 30, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> Here's an idea. Maybe I should start a 'Brixton politics' forum?



I'd prefer to an Albert Forum! You could do a special report about how much you've drunk, how bad your hangover is etc!


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> Oh, and what I could say about Intostella! She’s so rude!


_Piss up a rope, fuckstick!! _   

How do people decide if something is political enough or non-political enough to go in a Brixton politics forum or an 'ordinary' forum? 

Mike, haven't you seen those TV adverts with the guy who says ''I don't do politics"? That perfectly sums up the situation here. Traffic, public transport, the rec,  schools, bars, shops, the market, finding somewhere to live, councillors buying stock at auction, new nightclubs applying for late licences, noise, drugs,  crime, policing, litter and urine in the  streets, the TGDAG, the future of Brixton oval, the library and its computer restrictions, 14-unit gated communities, refuse collection, finding a doctor,  It's ALL political.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

Stobart Spotter said:
			
		

> I'd prefer to an Albert Forum! You could do a special report about how much you've drunk, how bad your hangover is etc!


Genius. Even better, we could have an Albert Bore forum. 

Perhaps we could even get the _real  _Albert Bore, Leader of Birmingham City Council






to make an inaugural address. Or would that be too political?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2004)

it's a shock to see "brixton uncovered"!


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

This Gang of Four everyone's talking about -- am I Shirley Williams?


----------



## Ms T (Mar 30, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> This Gang of Four everyone's talking about -- am I Shirley Williams?



I had you down as Roy Jenkins.  Anna Key's Shirley Williams.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

Ms T said:
			
		

> I had you down as Roy Jenkins.  Anna Key's Shirley Williams.


Oh, wollocks!

No way -- Anna Key is Dr Death.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2004)

who's the other one who everyone forgets?


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> who's the other one who everyone forgets?


 Bill thingy


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

Rodgers


----------



## Ms T (Mar 30, 2004)

Rogers.  Just practising for the pub quiz on Thursday night.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 30, 2004)

Or was it Roy Rodgers and Bill Jenkins?


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Mike, haven't you seen those TV adverts with the guy who says ''I don't do politics"? ...It's ALL political.


Yes. It's a fabulous advert.

But that doesn't mean every single thread about Brixton has to come coated in a thick political veneer and every post has to have a socio-economic analysis attached.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2004)

but doesn't mean it shouldn't.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> but doesn't mean it shouldn't.


If we wanted these boards to sound like an SWP meeting, a weighty socio-economic analysis attached to every post would be perfect.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> If we wanted these boards to sound like an SWP meeting


      

not even in jest!

what a horrible thought!


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 30, 2004)

I've never felt unwelcome in this forum!


----------



## hatboy (Mar 31, 2004)

After and including Anna Key's post, I've no idea what you're all talking about?

I'm not arrogant Athos, I'm besieged.... 


No I mean't to say, er,  that is my sense of humour.

I talked to some people, you know, with faces, not on the computer, and thay said to stop picking the open wound that is this forum and it will just heal up on its own. 

"It's already an irrelevance, let them get on with it."


----------



## hatboy (Mar 31, 2004)

Or it might go septic.

Over to you... 








for awhile.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Oh, wollocks!
> 
> No way -- Anna Key is Dr Death.




anna key is harrold shipman   

posting from the grave  

shocker!!!


----------



## fanta (Mar 31, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> After and including Anna Key's post, I've no idea what you're all talking about?



Quite. It suddenly went all esoteric in a chummy, friendly office banter kind of a way.

Anyway, it has been a very useful thread I think, even if, or perhaps because, a few feathers have been ruffled!

Lovely Brixton morning by the way all innit!?


----------



## isvicthere? (Mar 31, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> Here's an idea. Maybe I should start a 'Brixton politics' forum?



Not sure, Ed. It might encourage the "wrong sort" of posters.


----------



## Ol Nick (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> This Gang of Four everyone's talking about -- am I Shirley Williams?


You're Jiang Qing. Anna Key is Zhang Chunqiao, Hatboy is Yao Wenyuan, and Red Jezza is Wang Hongwen. fanta is Deng Xiaoping and you will all suffer for your anti-party activities.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

No, Ol Nick, you've got it all wrong.

Anna Key is the Chairman, on u75 as he is in the People's Republic of Rushcroft.  

I am indeed Jiang Qing, Gramsci is Yao Wenyuan, Red Jezza is Wang Hongwen...

...and Hatboy is Widow Twankey.


----------



## isvicthere? (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> ...and Hatboy is Widow Twankey.



Oh no he's not!


----------



## Anna Key (Mar 31, 2004)

Come on you lot. Stop all the jokes. This is a serious thread. We've got to make Domski and Athos feel loved and welcome and respected.

Or they'll moan about feeling excluded. Quite right too! We all have a right to be liked!


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

isvicthere? said:
			
		

> Oh no he's not!


OH YES HE IS! 

(Sorry, Mr Chairman.)


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Are we being _too  _fun and lighthearted?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> Or maybe it should read...
> 
> Should people who haven't lived in Brixton all their lives be allowed to have an opinion?




Shit, I've only lived here since beginning of 1985     My grandad was born in Brixton and lived in Herne Hill most of his life and had a garage in Coldharbour Lane.  Is that good enough


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> No, Ol Nick, you've got it all wrong.
> 
> Anna Key is the Chairman, on u75 as he is in the People's Republic of Rushcroft.
> 
> ...


DAMN! I wanted to be the opera singer on _farewell my concubline_


----------



## hatboy (Mar 31, 2004)

My comments on page four of this are how I'm feeling about this place at the moment.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Mar 31, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> My comments on page four of this are how I'm feeling about this place at the moment.



Now come on Hatboy! Chin up!

Or I will send Kevin over to sort you out!


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> My comments on page four of this are how I'm feeling about this place at the moment.


I think you've got a lot more support than you know.


----------



## Anna Key (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> I think you've got a lot more support than you know.


I think so too. I also think you should be allowed to moderate this forum as you see fit. Look what happened on Dissensus. They tried to impose alternate moderating arrangements and went straight up their own arses.

You're part of the furniture. So people occasionally will try and sit on you. So what? Tell them to piss off.


----------



## Fuzzy (Mar 31, 2004)

this is an interesting thread. i dont live in brixton, never have done, not even been there too often if the truth be none. the times i have been there i ahve enjoyed the place and that is why i read this forum. i dont contribute my direct experiences of brixton because i dont have much to contribute. the things i have contributed though re merrett i hope have been useful to some. if it were a closed shop which at present it isnt then i wouldnt have been welcome. 

i agree with semthign that hatboy said early on in this thread that it takes time to understand the place and why things happen for the way they do. to judge on those when you dont understand the context is imo not too sensible as you will be found out as you envitably are on this place. still i think this part of the boards is lively and gives a helpful and informative view of a wonderful area of london. i hope it continues the way it has and allows me to contribute a little when i can from experiences that i have .


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Mar 31, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> You're part of the furniture.




Pouffe?
 

He probably won't talk to me any more now.
Hatboy, you're ok mate! You do things your way.

If every moderator did things in the same way Urban would be shite.


----------



## Ol Nick (Mar 31, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> I also think you should be allowed to moderate this forum as you see fit.


HB, I'd find your style annoying if (as a moderator) you never responded to criticism, but in fact you normally over-respond to criticism which keeps everything lively. 

As a poster you bring a perspective which is very different to mine and I find that very valuable and interesting. I'd probably post more but I find lots of other people take my point of view and I wouldn't want to help drown out the others.

Also notice how all the bickering dies down whenever there's any sign of a common enemy. People on bulletin boards are always up for a bit of a bicker.  

I've lived in Tooting, Stockwell and Brixton over the last five years. I know lots about them but there are large numbers of known unknowns and unknown unknowns which make hearing other people's perspective very interesting. And important, I think.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Stobart Spotter said:
			
		

> Pouffe?


You've been sleeping in the knife drawer again, haven't you?


----------



## Bob (Mar 31, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> You're part of the furniture. So people occasionally will try and sit on you. So what? Tell them to piss off.


  I'm definitely reusing that one at some stage


----------



## Baub (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> I think you've got a lot more support than you know.



It's very obvious that Hatboy has lots of friends and support on this forum, and no doubt beyond;  This whole thing wasn't intended to be a personal attack on him (IMO), just people disagreeing with things he said - which isn't the norm on here - but I'm sure he can take as good as he gives....


----------



## marshall (Mar 31, 2004)

Hmm...he can sure ladle out the criticism. Shame he can't take it.

<Runs like fuck back to the the Footy forum>


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

I know! I think I'll potter over to the football forum and start an argument over a subject about which I know precisely nothing and then accuse them of being snobs when they point out that I'm talking shite. And maybe I'll stereotype them all as thick hooligans for good measure.

Or maybe not.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

*What an interesting read...*

Although I haven't managed to read all of it, this thread has been largely positively responded to from all sides. Nice one.

Hatboy obviously has loads of good things to add (which has never been in doubt) - but he also shoots from the hip which can IMO make him look very unbalanced in the context of his moderation of this forum. BUT, like a lot of you have said, it'd be considerably duller without him. As AK said - one of the first rules of posting on internet forums is not to be boring.

All I was getting at was the fact that some pretty hypocritical prejudices were getting in the way of perfectly good arguments and ALSO were being used to back up some pretty BAD arguments (Not just from Hatboy). I _tentatively_ think there's been some grudging acknowlegment of this point


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> All I was getting at was the fact that some pretty hypocritical prejudices were getting in the way of perfectly good arguments


Yours, you mean?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> he also shoots from the hip which can IMO make him look very unbalanced in the context of his moderation of this forum.


depends what he's shooting with (recoil) and what his aim's like.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Yours, you mean?



What prejudices please you bitter and twisted old crone? 

As for hatboys aim and recoil... the man could ONLY be classified as 'a loose cannon'...


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> What prejudices please you bitter and twisted old crone?


 I take it that was meant to be ironic.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> the man could ONLY be classified as 'a loose cannon'...


he'd shatter his hip if he were able to fire a loose cannon from the hip.

you should stop mixing yr drinks, and yr metaphors.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> I take it that was meant to be ironic.


  i hope so.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> Or maybe it should read...
> 
> Should people who haven't lived in Brixton all their lives be allowed to have an opinion?
> 
> ...



    I have not read the last 2 pages of this thread.Im not sure who are the "Gang of Four" are posted by Pie 1.I guess its Anna,Intostella,Gramsci and one other(?).

  Oh and by the way Anna I read "frog intellectuals"  

  Their was a point a while back when Hatboy was having a go at us(the Gang of Four) for putting people off.So I find it strange that those with "conservative" viewpoints are doing that to him.

  I think some of the problem is that normally the opinions of someone like me are just excluded from debate in most arenas.IMO those who come here with more "conservative" viewpoints sometimes cant deal with having to debate with those whose opinions dont normally register in wider society.

  I also find it more than irritating the constant moaning that this forum is intimidating.Im not the most aggressive person around and am regarded sometimes as being to soft.Yet I get on here OK.Ive taken flack and it doesnt put me off.As far as Brixtonites go Id define myself as middle of the road.

  I never had any problems when I started posting here.Oh actually I did have a big row but Ive forgotten about it.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> he'd shatter his hip if he were able to fire a loose cannon from the hip.
> 
> you should stop mixing yr drinks, and yr metaphors.



You're right - I'll come back when I've achieved a similar level of affirmation.

IS - And just in case you had your ironometer off, the 'bitter and twisted old crone' comment wasn't serious - if anything it was an example of how not to engage in a serious argument. I'm fully aware of that. However, as we're getting serious now I'd be interested to hear what you think my prejudices are?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> You're right - I'll come back when I've achieved a similar level of affirmation.


i don't know what you mean by this but it sounds arsy.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i don't know what you mean by this but it sounds arsy.



LOL! I reckon it's pretty low down on the 'arsey' scale actually 





			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> should people who've only found 37 things to say worth preserving since the summer of 2002 be allowed to post on u75?






			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> at several urbanite meet-ups, i've been praised for my posts. if no one's said a good word about yr's, it may be because they're cack.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> You're right - I'll come back when I've achieved a similar level of affirmation.
> 
> IS - And just in case you had your ironometer off, the 'bitter and twisted old crone' comment wasn't serious - if anything it was an example of how not to engage in a serious argument. I'm fully aware of that. However, as we're getting serious now I'd be interested to hear what you think my prejudices are?


 Oh my ironometer works perfectly. It's just that you aren't at all funny. 

You _desperately _want to believe that anyone who lives in Brixton and is a bit politicised is part of a snobby, exclusive clique that is totally out of touch with reality. No matter how much evidence to the contrary is put your way, you still cling to that belief like a drunk to a lamppost. That's what I meant by prejudices.  This whole thread  started as a troll anyway -- of _course _ no one should be excluded .

As I said, what if I went into the football forum, did some deliberate shit-stirring, insulted people and then  threw a huge tantrum because my ''opinions'' weren't being taken seriously?

If you read the forum properly you would see that it makes no difference whether people actually  live in Brixton or not. 

And as AK  said, if people produce rubbish arguments then those arguments will be attacked, _whatever _ forum they are in.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> LOL! I reckon it's pretty low down on the 'arsey' scale actually


Yeah, but Picky's part of the clique.


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 31, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> My comments on page four of this are how I'm feeling about this place at the moment.


don't wanna get judgemental here, but you is deffo more sinned against than sinning


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> LOL! I reckon it's pretty low down on the 'arsey' scale actually


what i said had the virtue of being comprehensible.

btw, you had 30 surviving posts before the start of this thread, not 37.

and if yr going to have a go at people for reporting the truth, why don't you ask to be a mod and delete all the posts with factual statements in them?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> I'd be interested to hear what you think my prejudices are?


if you need someone else to tell you where yr going wrong, and how you manage to fit people into one of yr preconceived schemes, causing (unwitting?) offence, you need help. soon.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 31, 2004)

I got a picture of Gang of Four  


http://www.zitantique.com/images/new_images/cr 098.jpg


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Oh my ironometer works perfectly. It's just that you aren't at all funny.
> 
> You _desperately _want to believe that anyone who lives in Brixton and is a bit politicised is part of a snobby, exclusive clique that is totally out of touch with reality. No matter how much evidence to the contrary is put your way, you still cling to that belief like a drunk to a lamppost. That's what I meant by prejudices.  This whole thread  started as a troll anyway -- of _course _ no one should be excluded .
> 
> ...



IS - this thread may have been considered by many to be a 'troll', least surprisingly by you, who shouts 'TROLL' the minute things don't start going your way BUT it was actually a direct (and IMO valid) response to some pretty serious prejudice (as evidenced by Hatboy's post about 'having a stake') against what are a large section of the Brixton community AND people who post in the Brixton forum. I just don't think it was doing the perfectly reasonable arguments about Brixton any favours AND more importantly was (IMO again) alienating people. Is it not better to argue without resorting to such things? Would you rather not have people on your side or would you rather upset them?





			
				IntoStella said:
			
		

> 'You _desperately _want to believe that anyone who lives in Brixton and is a bit politicised is part of a snobby, exclusive clique that is totally out of touch with reality. No matter how much evidence to the contrary is put your way, you still cling to that belief like a drunk to a lamppost. That's what I meant by prejudices.  This whole thread  started as a troll anyway -- of _course _ no one should be excluded .'



I couldn't give a fuck if there is or isn't a clique - I actually used the word 'regulars' as I think the implication is a bit different, it was the rather pathetic adherence of certain posters to a bunch of crap stereotypes that pissed me off.





			
				IntoStella said:
			
		

> 'If you read the forum properly you would see that it makes no difference whether people actually live in Brixton or not'



This is perfectly obvious IS - do you really think I meant the thread title? Like I said before 'these are just some sarky perceptions (which I think are pretty accurate) that I've lifted from posts that [sic] Hatboy made over the last few days/weeks.





			
				IntoStella said:
			
		

> 'And as AK  said, if people produce rubbish arguments then those arguments will be attacked, _whatever _ forum they are in'



Too fucking right - almost as much as good arguments that are ruined by bollocks about 'conservative young professionals', 'talullahs' or 'yuppies'.


----------



## fanta (Mar 31, 2004)

Gramsci said:
			
		

> IMO those who come here with more "conservative" viewpoints sometimes cant deal with having to debate with those whose opinions dont normally register in wider society.



I don't think that hardly anybody here is 'conservative', though I might be wrong? 

If so, who are these conservatives?

Not me. My politics are left wing and I always vote socialist/green. 

Some might try to label or dismiss me as being a 'conservative' perhaps out of frustration or because they're too lazy to debate intelligently. But it is a risible and sloppy tactic.

So, who exactly are these irksome conservatives plaguing the Brixton forum?


----------



## Anna Key (Mar 31, 2004)

Gramsci said:
			
		

> Oh and by the way Anna I read "frog intellectuals"


Whoops!   

[And you're the only person I know who actually understands them.]


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Gramsci said:
			
		

> I got a picture of Gang of Four  http://www.zitantique.com/images/new_images/cr 098.jpg


Me too


----------



## Bob (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Me too



What are they doing with their hands? The only thing I can think of that reminds me of is a blocking movement that happens in some sorts of kung fu.... though i've never seen kung fu done in tweedy jackets...


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Bob said:
			
		

> What are they doing with their hands?


They are pointing to the left, of course.


----------



## LDR (Mar 31, 2004)

fanta said:
			
		

> So, who exactly are these irksome conservatives plaguing the Brixton forum?



I'm interested to know who these posters are too?  

I use to think it was me that this tag was being assigned to and had a debate with Hatboy about it when he started having a go at people, who went to a night in Cafe Cario, for looking too boring if my memory serves me correctly.

However, I was assured by him and others that's I wasn't one of these bland people.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> what i said had the virtue of being comprehensible.
> 
> btw, you had 30 surviving posts before the start of this thread, not 37.
> 
> and if yr going to have a go at people for reporting the truth, why don't you ask to be a mod and delete all the posts with factual statements in them?



30, 37, 5992 - I honestly don't care - I think you'll be hard pushed to find someone else that does. LOL!

I'm not sure I've had a go at anyone who's 'reported the truth' Pickman's and as for 'fitting people into pre-conceived scheme's'... I really don't think I was the one doing that.

The original post was meant to cause some offence (whilst having a genuine point) but the ensuing argument was not, well, at least until now...


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> The original post was meant to cause some offence .


 So it _was_ a troll, whether you personally think it had a point or not.


----------



## Baub (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> All I was getting at was the fact that some pretty hypocritical prejudices were getting in the way of perfectly good arguments and ALSO were being used to back up some pretty BAD arguments (Not just from Hatboy). I _tentatively_ think there's been some grudging acknowlegment of this point



Yes, there has been some grudging (and not so grudging) acknowledgment of this point by some but there are also others who would rather change their names to Tallulah Starbuck than admit they might have been wrong or hypocritical in any way, shape or form...as if admitting you were wrong or acknowledging another point of view in the light of further information is a weakness. 

You *can* still stick to your original principles - multi-task!!


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> as for 'fitting people into pre-conceived scheme's'... I really don't think I was the one doing that.


 Oh what's the point? We are  just going in circles.


----------



## Bob (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> They are pointing to the left, of course.



Or right depending on your perspective!  


Any chance of people here restricting themselves to arguing about the issues? Arguing over whether people from outside Brixton had a right to post/ perspective to offer had a point. Insulting each other is completely pointless.

(((Brixton boards)))


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Baub said:
			
		

> there are also others who would rather change their names to Tallulah Starbuck than admit they might have been wrong or hypocritical in any way, shape or form.


So you're right and they are deluded? Do you see what you've done there? Do you?


----------



## fanta (Mar 31, 2004)

LD Rudeboy said:
			
		

> I'm interested to know who these posters are too?
> 
> I use to think it was me that this tag was being assigned to and had a debate with Hatboy about it when he started having a go at people, who went to a night in Cafe Cario, for looking too boring if my memory serves me correctly.
> 
> However, I was assured by him and others that's I wasn't one of these bland people.



Hmmm.

Who are the conservative posters then?

Who can those who talk about them possibly be refering to?


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Bob said:
			
		

> Arguing over whether people from outside Brixton had a right to post/ perspective to offer had a point.


What point, Bob?  Domski has admitted he didn't mean it seriously and was deliberately trying to cause offence.


----------



## Baub (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> So you're right and they are deluded? Do you see what you've done there? Do you?



No.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> What point, Bob?  Domski has admitted he didn't mean it seriously and was deliberately trying to cause offence.


i wish he'd try harder.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

Baub said:
			
		

> Yes, there has been some grudging (and not so grudging) acknowledgment of this point by some but there are also others who would rather change their names to Tallulah Starbuck than admit they might have been wrong or hypocritical in any way, shape or form...as if admitting you were wrong or acknowledging another point of view in the light of further information is a weakness.
> 
> You *can* still stick to your original principles - multi-task!!



That's fucking funny!  Message boards - No backing down under any circumstances, face to be preserved at all times. Hahahahahaha!

IS - Does anyone but you give a fuck it was a 'troll-like' post, christ, I even apologised in advance for it's potential 'trollishness'  8 Pages later and it's been quite an interesting thread... all in my opinion of course


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i wish he'd try harder.


 Yeah, but he didn't call _you_  a bitter and twisted old crone.   Oh, and an old queen, earlier. You really want to watch out for those sexual insults, Domski. They make you look a right bigot.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Yeah, but he didn't call _you_  a bitter and twisted old crone.   Oh, and an old queen, earlier. You really want to watch out for those sexual insults, Domski. They make you look a right bigot.


a bit of imagination and creativity would stop him looking like the frustrated, dull chauvinistic bigot i suspect he is.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> That's fucking funny!  Message boards - No backing down under any circumstances, face to be preserved at all times. Hahahahahaha!


Do you accept that you are in any way wrong in the way you have stereotyped people? No. Funny man.


----------



## Anna Key (Mar 31, 2004)

The worst offender but I've a nice white Armani and smoke Gaulois _sans filtre_ 


> The instituted trace cannot be thought without thinking the retention of difference within a structure of reference where difference appears as such and thus permits a certain liberty of variations among the full terms. The absence of another here-and-now, of another transcendental present, of another origin of the world appearing as such, presenting itself as irreducible absence within the presence of the trace, is not a metaphysical formula substituted for a scientific concept of writing. This formula, beside the fact that it is the questioning of metaphysics itself, describes the structure implied by the “arbitrariness of the sign,” from the moment that one thinks of its possibility short of the derived opposition between nature and convention, symbol and sign, etc. These oppositions have meaning only after the possibility of the trace. The “unmotivatedness” of the sign requires a synthesis in which the completely other is announced as such without any simplicity, any identity, any resemblance or continuity — within what is not it..


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

AK -- didn't you know that Godwin's law has been extended to cover quoting Derrida?


----------



## Anna Key (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> AK -- didn't you know that Godwin's law has been extended to cover quoting Derrida?


What's the _point_ of Derrida if you can't quote him? Oh and Baudrillard should have his _arse_ deconstructed.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 31, 2004)

Fuzzy said:
			
		

> this is an interesting thread. i dont live in brixton, never have done, not even been there too often if the truth be none. the times i have been there i ahve enjoyed the place and that is why i read this forum. i dont contribute my direct experiences of brixton because i dont have much to contribute. the things i have contributed though re merrett i hope have been useful to some. if it were a closed shop which at present it isnt then i wouldnt have been welcome.
> 
> i agree with semthign that hatboy said early on in this thread that it takes time to understand the place and why things happen for the way they do. to judge on those when you dont understand the context is imo not too sensible as you will be found out as you envitably are on this place. still i think this part of the boards is lively and gives a helpful and informative view of a wonderful area of london. i hope it continues the way it has and allows me to contribute a little when i can from experiences that i have .



  Thanks Fuzzy-you were very helpful on the bike shop planning issue


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> a bit of imagination and creativity would stop him looking like the frustrated, dull chauvinistic bigot i suspect he is.



That really was a post of superior quality Pickman's.  




			
				Intostella said:
			
		

> Yeah, but he didn't call you a bitter and twisted old crone.  Oh, and an old queen, earlier. You really want to watch out for those sexual insults, Domski. They make you look a right bigot.



That sounds a lot like step 3 of the 'standard Intostella defense' - there have been liberal lashings of 1,2 and 4 throughout this delightful conversation...

1. This has been all done before on the boards and I can't be arsed to go over the point again
2. I've lived round here for longer than you so your opinion is invalid
3. Can't you handle the fact that a WOMAN has an opinion, you must be a sexist
4. I'll ignore you now as you're obviously below me OR merely trolling

I can assure you that I'm not in the least bit bigoted.


----------



## Anna Key (Mar 31, 2004)

Gramsci said:
			
		

> Thanks Fuzzy-you were very helpful on the bike shop planning issue


Seconded.


----------



## Baub (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> So you're right and they are deluded? Do you see what you've done there? Do you?



...but I do see what _you've done_ - put words in my mouth.  I have never claimed that I am right and I have never claimed that "they" are deluded.  Where did that come from?

I hate it when people twist my words to fit their arguments.

You don't win just because you won't compromise.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Do you accept that you are in any way wrong in the way you have stereotyped people? No. Funny man.



How clever of you  Do you think that The Editors guide to winning online arguments should be taken down as it steroetypes message-boarders? Frankly, I think it's a much less offensive stereotype than the ones that have been bandied around by the likes of your good self, but I'm quite happy to admit that there might be someone, out there, who maybe once, backed down in a message board argument...


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> 1. This has been all done before on the boards and I can't be arsed to go over the point again
> 2. I've lived round here for longer than you so your opinion is invalid
> 3. Can't you handle the fact that a WOMAN has an opinion, you must be a sexist
> 4. I'll ignore you now as you're obviously below me OR merely trolling


Yes,  but you _are_ a sexist troll. I don't see why I should be prevented from pointing this out. 

I'd like you to show me where I EVER said my opinion was better because I had lived in Brixton longer than anyone else (you'll have a bloody job) and where I said anyone was below me.  Also, if you were _really _ at all bothered about what is happening in Brixton you would read the saved threads on these issues. But you're not interested in Brixton. You're only interested in the sound of your own voice and venting your nasty little frustrations by piling on the sexist insults.

Give up, mate. You look desperate.

And you know what? I AM going to ignore you now because you want only to cause offence and I do have better things to do. If you don't like that you can piss your pants and throw all your toys out of the pram to your heart's content but it makes no difference whatsoever  to me.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 31, 2004)

fanta said:
			
		

> I don't think that hardly anybody here is 'conservative', though I might be wrong?
> 
> If so, who are these conservatives?
> 
> ...



  I put it in quotes as it was in Domskis post.Ive never made an issue of who posts up here.People post in different ways-I just deal with it.I always try to debate intelligently and rarely go for abuse-though I might have a laugh very occasionally.I didnt start this thread.


----------



## Ol Nick (Mar 31, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> What's the _point_ of Derrida if you can't quote him? Oh and Baudrillard should have his _arse_ deconstructed.


I wonder what _they_ would make of this thread?


----------



## Bob (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> What point, Bob?  Domski has admitted he didn't mean it seriously and was deliberately trying to cause offence.



No but Hatboy did imply on the first page that people who hadn't lived here long/ didn't know much of the area shouldn't comment too much... - that was a legitimate point to debate (incidentally one where you and me agree!).


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Bob said:
			
		

> No but Hatboy did imply on the first page that people who hadn't lived here long/ didn't know much of the area shouldn't comment too much... - that was a legitimate point to debate (incidentally one where you and me agree!).


What he actually said was 






			
				Hatboy said:
			
		

> I think people, especially if they don't live here or haven't been here long, shouldn't come in this forum to deliberately antagonise.


 -- which is not the same as saying that people shouldn't post.  There is no question but that domski was deliberately being antagonistic and HB's response was an entirely reasonable one.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> What he actually said was  -- which is not the same as saying that people shouldn't post.  There is no question but that domski was deliberately being antagonistic and HB's response was an entirely reasonable one.



A lot of points that get made on this forum are deliberately antagonistic in case you hadn't noticed 

Hatboy (and others) said the following: Apologies if they're not word for word but I can't be arsed to trawl through all the posts... I'll doubtless be told that they're misquoted, are not what he meant etc.. etc... BUT, this is sure as hell what it sounded like.

1. A rising conservative voice is in danger of ruining these forums
2. If you don't live in Brixton, you don't have a stake in the community, how can you expect to have a valid opinion?
3. Lambeth council in league with developers have a 'plan' to ethnically cleanse Brixton
4. All these new people are just 'bland conservative young professionals' who don't care about Brixton
5. Threatened to temporarily ban someone who was disagreeing with him
6. Edited posts of people who he was arguing with 

Point out where that ISN'T antagonistic to large swathes of people please!

In that context was it fair for me to start this thread?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

yr paranoid, domski. paranoid, chauvinistic, misogynistic and bigoted.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> In that context was it fair for me to start this thread?


no.  .   . . ..


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> In that context was it fair for me to start this thread?




why not send him a pm?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

why not, indeed?


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> yr paranoid, domski. paranoid, chauvinistic, misogynistic and bigoted.



I actually thought this thread had got somewhere and had taken a turn for the positive before yourself and IS decided to have a crack.

It beggars belief that the only thing you've got left in your 'attempt' at arguing is to say that I'm chauvinistic, mysoginistic and biggoted (which incidentally just about mean the same thing which shows some real flare on your part)... hahahaha! I simply cannot believe that someone _actually_ said to your face that the 'quality' of your posts was superior AND that you thought it worthy to tell everyone about it. You must have been sitting all alone looking sad and someone felt sorry for you. I hate to lower the tone, but is there any chance of you just fucking off. I'm probably being a bit hopeful.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

having considered that course of action (sending domski a pm), i've decided against it. there's no reason i can see to listen to more delusional fuckwittery about how some "gang of four" control discussion on the brixton forum. i feel compassion for someone as damaged as domski: but i don't wish to enter into an unrewarding correspondence of dubious purpose.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> (which incidentally just about mean the same thing which shows some real flare on your part)... hahahaha!


Flair. hahaha


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

Stobart Spotter said:
			
		

> why not send him a pm?



Er, because I thought it was worthy of discussion with other people on the Brixton forum in the context of his comments to more than one person, I thought that was what this forum was here for


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> is there any chance of you just fucking off.


Now now. No being cliquey just because it's your thread. These boards are open to everyone, you know.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Flair. hahaha



The straws are well and truly being clutched...

I'm still wondering if anyone has a reasonable answer to the question I asked without resorting to personals... would be nice...


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> Er, because I thought it was worthy of discussion with other people on the Brixton forum in the context of his comments to more than one person, I thought that was what this forum was here for



So, now that your spat with Hatboy has turned into a 9-pager,do you feel better?

 I am not being picky- he edited one of my posts once and pmd him asking what I'd done wrong. I got an answer and moved on.

He's not a bad person, he just has a different style of moderating. I think you're just being a bit paranoid, that's all.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> without resorting to personals


Ha! Aha! Ha! Classic comedy.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Stobart Spotter said:
			
		

> I am not being picky


No, picky's being picky.  Or is he being you now?   




			
				Domski said:
			
		

> The straws are well and truly being clutched...


 Hoho. Your argument drowned on page 1.


----------



## lang rabbie (Mar 31, 2004)

*We should do more and engage less in empty talk - Deng Xiaoping*

I'm afraid I've been distracted by some diversionary Googling of Chinese Communist Party propaganda images to destress after a couple of meetings...

Should we emulate _"The Age of Smiling" - Courtesy and polite behaviour are propagated as elements of 'Socialist Spiritual Civilization'_?





The girl is selling two brands of Chinese cola that were quite popular in the 1980s but were later swept away by Pepsi and Coca Cola.

However, going back several pages and twenty iterations of argument...






I just can't get rid of a vision of IntoStella directing a series of "model operas" on the stage of the Assembly Hall featuring a proletarian heroic model who could teach and serve the broad masses of the people.  Perhaps...

*Anna Key's glorious defeat of the capitalist running dogs of the bar industry*


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> No, picky's being picky.  Or is he being you now?




Shut it, wench! Or I will send the Essex Chavs over!


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

Stobart Spotter said:
			
		

> So, now that your spat with Hatboy has turned into a 9-pager,do you feel better?
> 
> I am not being picky- he edited one of my posts once and pmd him asking what I'd done wrong. I got an answer and moved on.
> 
> He's not a bad person, he just has a different style of moderating. I think you're just being a bit paranoid, that's all.



I'm 100% positive that Hatboy isn't a bad person... that wasn't ever the question... as for this paranoia malarkey, I'm not sure what I'm _supposed_ to be being paranoid about - I just thought that Hatboy was out of order with a few of the things he's said in the context of moderating this forum. That's not a personal insult to him I don't think.

I do however take issue with the pathetic reaction from IS and Pickman's Model who have resorted to calling me a bigot as they've got nothing better to say.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> I actually thought this thread had got somewhere and had taken a turn for the positive before yourself and IS decided to have a crack.
> 
> It beggars belief that the only thing you've got left in your 'attempt' at arguing is to say that I'm chauvinistic, mysoginistic and biggoted (which incidentally just about mean the same thing which shows some real flare on your part)... hahahaha! I simply cannot believe that someone _actually_ said to your face that the 'quality' of your posts was superior AND that you thought it worthy to tell everyone about it. You must have been sitting all alone looking sad and someone felt sorry for you. I hate to lower the tone, but is there any chance of you just fucking off. I'm probably being a bit hopeful.


on the basis of yr posts in this thread, you'd have to look fucking suicidal before anyone said anything positive to you about yr meagre efforts. yr comprehension of english appears as limited as yr wit: chauvinism is different from bigotry, and both are very different from misogyny. 

although i am always pleased to discover that others enjoy my posts, i have never approached anyone to find out what they thought of my posts: any praise i've received has been the (presumably) spontaneous response of people.

as to the calibre of yr opinions expressed on this thread (and other threads in this forum) i fear they are the product of a disordered mind and thus of doubtful validity. i would suggest you engage brain before typing: but as what you type is putrid tripe that would seem inappropriate.

in fine, in the unlikely prospect you can raise yr game, do. if you feel you are already posting at the peak of yr ability, i feel you could profitably reconsider yr position as a poster.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> I just can't get rid of a vision of IntoStella directing a series of "model operas" on the stage of the Assembly Hall featuring a proletarian heroic model who could teach and serve the broad masses of the people.  Perhaps...
> 
> *Anna Key's glorious defeat of the capitalist running dogs of the bar industry*


 Genius! LOL!  But as Chairman Key said earlier, we really must try harder to take Domski _seriously_.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Mar 31, 2004)

Ah fuck it, too many intellectuals here for me. I am off back to Chavland where I belong!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Genius! LOL!  But as Chairman Key said earlier, we really must try harder to take Domski _seriously_.


  taking him somewhere outside the m25 would be a good start.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

Stobart Spotter said:
			
		

> Ah fuck it, too many intellectuals here for me. I am off back to Chavland where I belong!


 .
.  . .. .


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> I do however take issue with the pathetic reaction from IS and Pickman's Model who have resorted to calling me a bigot as they've got nothing better to say.


It's perfectly simple: if you don't want to be called a bigot then don't resort to sexist, misogynistic  personal abuse.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> I do however take issue with the pathetic reaction from IS and Pickman's Model who have resorted to calling me a bigot as they've got nothing better to say.


if you didn't act like one i wouldn't point out you are one.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> It's perfectly simple: if you don't want to be called a bigot then don't resort to sexist, misogynistic  personal abuse.



I'm perfectly happy to apologise to you for whatever bigotted comments I might have made IS - I can assure you I'm not a bigot, a sexist or a misogynist in the slightest if that also helps.

I do think that my supposed bigotry has little relevance to this debate and that it's a bit of a shame this thread flew off at a tangent but that's the nature of message boards I guess.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> I'm perfectly happy to apologise to you for whatever bigotted comments I might have made IS - I can assure you I'm not a bigot, a sexist or a misogynist in the slightest if that also helps.


How can you be sure? I presume, then,  that you are not a racist or a homophobe_ in the slightest _either. Wow! You are a super-right-on, PC guy.





> I do think that my supposed bigotry has little relevance to this debate


On the contrary, I think it is_ central _to this debate. You have accused various people of holding a number of prejudices while characterising them in terms of offensive stereotypes. That in itself strikes me as highly prejudicial behaviour.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Anyway, dommers, I'd love to canoodle with you all night but I really must go home so you'll have to cuddle up to picky instead.  Nighty night!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> you'll have to cuddle up to picky instead.


NNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> A lot of points that get made on this forum are deliberately antagonistic in case you hadn't noticed
> 
> Hatboy (and others) said the following: Apologies if they're not word for word but I can't be arsed to trawl through all the posts... I'll doubtless be told that they're misquoted, are not what he meant etc.. etc... BUT, this is sure as hell what it sounded like.
> 
> ...


oh, ffs!  
in order
1. a flip, overreaction sorta comment
2. he no say that, kemusabi
3. he said they had a plan to sell it out and stitch up their voters. Yup. and for most of the past decade. your point being. 
4. said 'some' incomers are suburbanites who bring blandness. Note; SOME.
it means different to 'all', y'know
5. big charge. WHERE? SPECIFICS, PLEASE!
6. for grammatical pedantry. silly, but hardly WW2
and YOU accuse HB of over-reacting?


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> How can you be sure? I presume, then,  that you are not a racist or a homophobe_ in the slightest _either. Wow! You are a super-right-on, PC guy.On the contrary, I think it is_ central _to this debate. You have accused various people of holding a number of prejudices while characterising them in terms of offensive stereotypes. That in itself strikes me as highly prejudicial behaviour.



You'll have to take my word for it I'm afraid. That's the best I can do.

I can quite understand why you'd think me being prejudiced in an argument about prejudices is quite important so fair enough.

I do however stick by my original point and think there have been some positive things to come out of this despite the way the end of this discussion has gone.

As for being PC. My stance is that it's unacceptable to be sexist, racist or homophobic. There's a big difference in thinking this than being politically correct for the sake of it. End of.


----------



## IntoStella (Mar 31, 2004)

Ah good, I see Wang Hongwen is here to relieve me of my shift as Brixton cultural supervisor.  Night, comrades.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> *cuddle up to picky instead.*  Nighty night!



I'd rather slam my knob in a door...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

Domski said:
			
		

> I'd rather slam my knob in a door...


i'd slam the door for you.


----------



## Domski (Mar 31, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i'd slam the door for you.



Now there's a post worthy of some applause


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2004)

i didn't realise you were into extreme pain.


----------



## pk (Apr 1, 2004)

LOL... HB, oh so predictably you again pull the "racist" card on me.
Handy when you have nothing else to say.

You have a different style of moderating, I have a different style of posting.

Dish it out by all means, but don't throw the toys out the pram when you get some back.

Just take on some of the gripes on board, is all anyone can ask.

Think before you start condemning groups of people in Cafe Cairo, for example... slagging off people on the grounds that they are "too white" is racist and intolerant mate, you should know that by now.

And no I won't go away.


----------



## miss minnie (Apr 1, 2004)

there really shouldn't have been a problem for a bunch of adults to take a step back and have an objective look at the issues.  i feel very ashamed to be associated with the brixton forum now.  it must look ever so welcoming to outsiders.   

i'm outta here.


----------



## pk (Apr 1, 2004)

Seems to reflect Brixton itself.

Big up all the mugging stories and the Claphamites will be scared away, the style bars will close, and the "gentrification" is reversed, then we can get back to drinking in dusty bars playing distorted reggae versions of "My Heart Will Go On".

Actually present Brixton as a welcoming place and before you know it there'll be a Starbucks on each corner and Brixton market will be turned into a Yoga centre for all the "Talullahs", and the old Cooltan centre will become a Jaguar showroom.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Passionate debate is one thing, exclusion is another.

I'm into integration and diversity, is all.

Even badly sung lover's rock music I'm prepared to tolerate.

Crack addicted parasites begging for money and needle dropping junkies in kiddies playgrounds emptying their bowels because they can I am not, however.

Can I love Brixton and hate the open drug dealing?

I think so.

'Culture" my arse. 

Greedy cunts who don't give a fuck as long as they make money, more like.


----------



## newbie (Apr 1, 2004)

miss minnie said:
			
		

> there really shouldn't have been a problem for a bunch of adults to take a step back and have an objective look at the issues.  i feel very ashamed to be associated with the brixton forum now.  it must look ever so welcoming to outsiders.
> 
> i'm outta here.



Sad isn't it.

Brixton street politics has always been like this, though.  A playground for insiders to wave their tailfeathers and dismiss anyone who isn't just like them.


----------



## tarannau (Apr 1, 2004)

Bit depressing isn't it?

Although there are a hell of lot of good things going on in this forum, sometimes they're obscured by all this guff. Same old faces, same old scores to settle. Quick to post up the same, unchanging arguments in aggressive style - like pb in the world politics forum, only played tag team between equally committed individuals.



For gawds sake, I'm with Miss M on this one - take a step back and look how this thread's turned out. No-one's trying to restrict anyone posting, but is having the last word and points-scoring always that important?


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 1, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Ernesto doesn't live here. Athos - he hasn't said. But it makes a difference.


IIRC Athos lives in Surrey.


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 1, 2004)

Athos said:
			
		

> I for one think that Hatboy is a big part of the problem, or perhaps I should say that his style of moderating, and general attitude on this forum, are.


This is rich coming from the person who was arguing that urban75 should let BNP members post freely on these forums.


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 1, 2004)

Perhaps some people ought to take a step back and switch on their sense of humour. The latter parts of the exchange last night, on both sides, were pretty tongue in cheek. Do we have to be so very precious?    Really! 

Not the best use of bandwidth, I readily admit, but neither a damning indictment of evil politicos spoiling  all the  fun for everyone else. As I already said, the whole thread started off as a troll. It was intended to cause offence. It's not as though some worthy debate got hijacked, is it?

For all his foibles I, for one, don't _at all _ like the way hatboy has been attacked and that is why I have jumped in. As Jezza put it, I think he is far more sinned against than sinning. And  I'm not surprised he feels paranoid sometimes. I expect he feels a bit let down by some people who ought to  know better.

Newbie, could you actually _be_ any more po faced? 

Frixton Bore-'em, anyone?


----------



## Baub (Apr 1, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> on the basis of yr posts in this thread, you'd have to look fucking suicidal before anyone said anything positive to you about yr meagre efforts. yr comprehension of english appears as limited as yr wit: chauvinism is different from bigotry, and both are very different from misogyny.
> 
> although i am always pleased to discover that others enjoy my posts, i have never approached anyone to find out what they thought of my posts: any praise i've received has been the (presumably) spontaneous response of people.
> 
> ...



In other words, "if you don't agree with us or challange us (The Gang of Bore?) we will call you names and attempt to ridicule you in a boring childish way"    ?


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 1, 2004)

Baub said:
			
		

> In other words, "if you don't agree with us or challange us (The Gang of Bore?) we will call you names


  Do you see what you did _there_?? 

You really need to read your posts back before you post them, baub.


----------



## Baub (Apr 1, 2004)

Baub said:
			
		

> In other words, "if you don't agree with us or challange us (The Gang of Bore?) we will call you names and attempt to ridicule you in a boring childish way"    ?



Whoops, I forgot to add


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2004)

Baub said:
			
		

> In other words, "if you don't agree with us or challange us (The Gang of Bore?) we will call you names and attempt to ridicule you in a boring childish way"    ?


which do you mean? "if you don't agree with us or [don't] challenge us ..." or the more fuckwitted (and likely  ) "if you don't agree with us or [do] challenge us"?

i don't find yr posts, nor domski's, challenging save in their turgidity.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2004)

Baub said:
			
		

> In other words, "if you don't agree with us or challange us (The Gang of Bore?) we will call you names and attempt to ridicule you in a boring childish way"    ?


you don't like children, do you? why do you think being compared to a child is hurtful?

yr apparently someone with no imagination and little joy in life.


----------



## LDR (Apr 1, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> you don't like children, do you? why do you think being compared to a child is hurtful?
> 
> yr apparently someone with no imagination and little joy in life.



Being compared to a child suggests that they are immature.  

With all due respect, I do think you and IntoStella are bullying people you don't agree with.  At least that's the way it comes across to me.

I'm not saying that I agree with everything Domski, etc. but why be so nasty to him?


----------



## Baub (Apr 1, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i don't find yr posts, nor domski's, challenging save in their turgidity.






			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> yr apparently someone with no imagination and little joy in life.



Sigh, sticks and stones, Mr Bombastic


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 1, 2004)

LD Rudeboy said:
			
		

> Being compared to a child suggests that they are immature.
> 
> With all due respect, I do think you and IntoStella are bullying people you don't agree with.  At least that's the way it comes across to me.
> 
> I'm not saying that I agree with everything Domski, etc. but why be so nasty to him?


Domski started the tread deliberately to  cause offence. He admitted it himself.  He can be extremely offensive when he wants to be. The accusation that_ he _ is being bullied is well wide of the mark. 

Why be so nasty to him? For one, I don't care for being called an old queen, a bitter and twisted old crone or other sexist, ageist and arguably homophobic garbage. 

What next? Are you going to start accusing people of bullying pbman?


----------



## hendo (Apr 1, 2004)

I have just returned from visiting my computerless Dad in Manchester to find one of the nastiest threads I think I've ever seen in the Brixton forum.

This latest has all the shitty qualities of the worst of Urban 75 and deserves only the bin.

Personal abuse, witless bollocks about other people's alleged attitudes, nasty pointscoring, freelance hatboy-baiting; it's got the lot.

Miss Minnie has posted the best material on it; a plea to lose the aggression and allow proper debate to restart.

Let's follow her advice.

The irony is that the most debated issue here is the one we disagree least on, ie that gentrification needs to be controlled if its not to shut out the less privileged.

And another irony is that I know a good number of the people spatting on here and if they met in the pub they'd get on like a house on fire.

Respect for one anothers views should be at the base of what we do here. Let's get it back, let the issues be kicked around and not one another, and we'll get back a wide variety of quality posts, and people won't be frightened off. 

The alternative is this nihilistic bollocks; unthinkable in something as much fun and as interesting as the Brixton forum can be at its best.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2004)

beaten to it.

i find it distasteful that someone should start a thread to attack one poster. i've said this on threads aimed at other posters, and i've yet to receive a decent answer. those same posters who start this sort of thread are generally the same ones who tell other people to fuck off, or call them all manner of sexist abuse. when people who respond to that sort of provocation are then called bullies and subjected to further abuse, that's really taking the piss (and the biscuit).


----------



## LDR (Apr 1, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Why be so nasty to him? For one, I don't care for being called an old queen, a bitter and twisted old crone or other sexist, ageist and arguably homophobic garbage.



I agree that he was out of order to call you that, but I still think you're just as bad TBH. He has apologised after all, while you continue to belittle him.  Why? 

<edited to add:  I don't want to fall out with anyone as I like drinking with you lot, so I'm quietly getting my coat and leaving you guys to it. >


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2004)

be lucky, ldr!


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 1, 2004)

Picky -- yr box!


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2004)

done .. . .


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 1, 2004)

hendo said:
			
		

> The irony is that the most debated issue here is the one we disagree least on, ie that gentrification needs to be controlled if its not to shut out the less privileged.


 I wish I could agree but there is enormous  disagreement over this. 

That's what this row has been all about -- hatboy being personally attacked because, at the end of the day,  he is concerned about gentrification. And then loads of other people have piled in with every little grievance they have ever had against him.  If my response has been inappropriately fierce, I apologise, but I really, really, _really_ don't like lynchings.


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 1, 2004)

Has this thread really done any harm? 

Perhaps I'm being naive but my luverly grey haired mother says a good old humdinger often clears the air.

She'd draw the line at people repeatedly beating each other over the head with blunt instruments, or rolling in the gutter outside the Albert, but I honestly don't understand Miss Minnie's and Hendo's objections.

If someone has been upset or put off posting or suffered bad dreams or had to see their shrink as a consquence of this thread then I'm sorry.

But there is such a thing as an eggshell personality, much loved by trial judges and personal injury lawyers:


> JULIAN MATTHEWS (Barrister, Seven Bedford Row) gave a legal viewpoint of the developments and potential for the treatment of psychiatric injury by the courts. He discussed the legal distinction between physical and psychiatric injury, the impact of *‘the eggshell personality’ *and the question of causation....


----------



## Athos (Apr 1, 2004)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> This is rich coming from the person who was arguing that urban75 should let BNP members post freely on these forums.



TeeJay, you have deliberately givien a misleading impression of what I said, to score some cheap points.  For anyone who may be interested, TeeJay and I were debating the 'correct' limitations to free speech (in the philosophy forum), which encompassed a discussion of the 'no platform' policy.  I explained that although I'd rather not be exposed to racism, some good could come out of challinging those views (rather than merely ignoring them).


----------



## marshall (Apr 1, 2004)

Only person on this thread that's made any sense is PK. 

Really, where would U75 be without him...


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 1, 2004)

And you of course.


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 1, 2004)

She call me Mr. Bombastic say me fantastic, touch me in me back
she say I'm Mr. Ro...mantic
She call me Mr. Bombastic say me fantastic, touch me in me back she say
I'm ro... Smooth just like silk


----------



## marshall (Apr 1, 2004)

'And you of course.'

 

NO, AK. I hold my hands up. I'm a crap poster. I wish I wasn't, but I am. Doesn't stop me from finding entertainment in lurking in the shadows, though...


----------



## fanta (Apr 1, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> Has this thread really done any harm?
> 
> Perhaps I'm being naive but my luverly grey haired mother says a good old humdinger often clears the air.



No, and like you I'm glad Domski started it. It was not just a 'troll'! On the contrary it has done some good. I think several posters felt that there *is* an elitist cliquey smugness in the Brixton forum that needed to be challenged and ridiculed. I think they were correct!  

Elitist cliques absolutely *hate* being pillioried like this. They're extremely touchy about being laughed at and having their own small-minded prejudices confronted.

Which of course makes it all the more amusing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2004)

marshall said:
			
		

> Only person on this thread that's made any sense is PK.
> 
> Really, where would U75 be without him...


shurely "what would u75 be without him..."

and the answer's "a much better place".


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 1, 2004)

fanta said:
			
		

> No, and like you I'm glad Domski started it. It was not just a 'troll'! On the contrary it has done some good. I think several posters felt that there *is* an elitist cliquey smugness in the Brixton forum that needed to be challenged and ridiculed. I think they were correct!
> 
> Elitist cliques absolutely *hate* being pillioried like this. They're extremely touchy about being laughed at and having their own small-minded prejudices confronted.


 Have you only got the one record? Tell you what, next time I go down Dr Barnardos I'll get you some new ones .  You want to believe most people hold the same view as domski and you but the evidence is piling up that in fact,  you are in a minority. The ''elitist clique'' only exists in your pitifully stunted imagination. 





> Which of course makes it all the more amusing.


and you accuse other people of smugness?    You're forever launching nasty personal attacks on others and then bleating about howwid people who won't play nice. It's boring.


----------



## fanta (Apr 1, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> You're forever launching nasty personal attacks on others and then bleating about howwid people who won't play nice. It's boring.



Really? How very strange! How then do you explain why I have never been told off for doing so by any moderators unlike, er, *you*?

Like I said: *Elitist cliques absolutely hate being pillioried like this. They're extremely touchy about being laughed at and having their own small-minded prejudices confronted.*


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 1, 2004)

fanta said:
			
		

> Really? How very strange! How then do you explain why I have never been told off for doing so by any moderators unlike, er, *you*?


 Unlucky for me, seeing as many posters in various forums have told you to go fuck yourself. Must have been in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Just because you keep repeating the same pitiful troll isn't going to make it come true.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2004)

intostella,

it's a bit sad when a raddled old troll repeats a lie so often they start to delude themselves, in't it?


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 1, 2004)

fanta said:
			
		

> Elitist cliques absolutely hate being pillioried like this.


Your not a revoluntionary trollskyist are you?


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 1, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> intostella,
> 
> it's a bit sad when a raddled old troll repeats a lie so often they start to delude themselves, in't it?


 Oooh hoo.   







< Scuttles off to put tinfoil up on windows. >


----------



## Snorkelboy (Apr 1, 2004)

Have the constructive criticisms of the Brixton forum which weren't posed in a personal or confrontational fashion been forgotten then - or are you ignoring them?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2004)

tinfoil on heads
whitewash on windows
--source: _protect and survive_, hmso


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 1, 2004)

fanta said:
			
		

> I think several posters felt that there *is* an elitist cliquey smugness in the Brixton forum that needed to be challenged and ridiculed. I think they were correct!


I think it's more that whenever "several posters" attempt to present what they fondly believe to be an "argument" in the Brixton forum they're either ignored or have their intellectual knackers shot off.

Which of course makes it all the more amusing.


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 1, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> tinfoil on heads
> whitewash on windows
> --source: _protect and survive_, hmso


Ahh, that's where I've been going wrong all these years.


----------



## zubaier (Apr 1, 2004)

Snorkelboy said:
			
		

> Have the constructive criticisms of the Brixton forum which weren't posed in a personal or confrontational fashion been forgotten then - or are you ignoring them?



i think you have your answer...


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2004)

what are these "constructive criticisms" of which you speak?

hurrah! another 666!


----------



## tarannau (Apr 1, 2004)

FFS. Is this still going on?

I suspect that many people rightly or wrongly perceive the Brixton forum as cliquey simply because of threads like this. The same suspects, points-scoring furiously and incapable of letting a thread drop with good grace. There'll certainly never be any backing down, you know that. 

Ironic or not, the same posters tend to appear in rapid succession throughout this thread. It's not about people not wanting to contribute, more that that many simply can't be bothered under certain conditions. If you were feeling a little timid, would you feel equipped to deal with a set of prolific posters, seemingly in tag-team mode, that will argue a point until the death? Frankly, I suspect many just can't be arsed with the aggravation. I barely can...


Like most others, for example, I had made my mind up on Domski long before things went downhill in a bluster of repetitive posts seeking the last-word. There was no need.  I like you all, respect and agree with most of your opinions on the area, and I'm still finding this tiresome. 

Let it drop. Please...


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 1, 2004)

Fair enough. 

Don't go, HB. 

I'm going home now.


----------



## Snorkelboy (Apr 1, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> what are these "constructive criticisms" of which you speak?
> 
> hurrah! another 666!



Well there's loads - too many to post them all - but how about these:


> Although I have no desire to get drawn into this argument, I have to say this is by far the most intimidating forum on U75, and a certain kind of nostalgic snobbery is quite common. I've just moved to Brixton and therefore like it for what it is today, rather than what it was like five or ten or twenty years ago. I have to admit that on this forum I fear being looked down upon for having this opinion.





> have to say i've not been keen on the brixton forum for some time. and i've lived around here for over 20 years. i always think twice before i post here and i'm giving up posting more than a subdued sentence or two now.
> 
> it's a very 'edgy' forum. hatboy, sorry, you're a lovely guy in real life but you make the debates here such hard work.
> 
> ...





> seriously though intostella, there is a feeling of a 'clique' - intentional or not. maybe you dont see it, but other "outsiders" do, and to totally dismiss it seems a bit daft to me. unless of course you are happy with people feeling excluded from this forum?
> 
> maybe it is natural that this feeling exists? obviously those that live in brixton are always going to feel they have a better understanding of the area than those who simply work or socialise there. true or not. but there can be a frosty feeling of "who the fuck are you to comment" from time to time, and it's getting boring
> ?



I don't think anyone should go.

But it would be nice to have a reasonable discussion of some of these issues.


----------



## sufilala (Apr 1, 2004)

hi all,

interesting spat this week,
where's ernesto eh?? keeping quiet cos he lives in brixton suburbs?  

so...

i see 2 big FAT conflicts here which simmer on and on and occasionally burst into flames...

1. Mod style - i had an issue with this for a long time, but mebbie not the way you think, basically if you mod and are a poster you have a big conflict of interest, you can acknowledge this and get on with it - which i reckon is what hb does, or you can choose to ignore it and try and not let the 2 roles clash, which is what the other mods seem to try and do..
in the end tho i prefer hb's style - where all the cards are on the table, to Mike's where he basically sets himself up to fail as a neutral party...

2. Brixton issues - c'mon admit it y'all, most people who post here conform to the hated stereotype that we all moan about...
most of us are white, employed, middle class - i'm pretty certain, but i'd be happy to be proved wrong.
i've lived in & around brikky for a long time, but what can i say, that makes me like a fucking yuppy pioneer, i chose to be here, which is a choice a lot of people don't have, i honestly care about the area, deeply and in me own ways i hope i've contributed a lot 
but to slag off others who make the same choice is hypocricy for me...& it is a theme that runs DEEP thru this forum, 
of course the area's changing & no-one wants it to become notting hill/upper st, but get out of denial, it's not healthy


but do i let it wind me up? fuck no! when i got fed up i posted a highly aggressive post on the tagging thread denouncing the forum as a haven of Nimbies and fascistis, which gave me enormous satisfaction, and stimulated a gratifying amount of intelligent responses, as well as a fair bit of well-deserved abuse


I see old hb more often off u75 than on, so i too have a conflict of interest to declare, but i really appreciated the way him & mrs M welcomed me to the forum when i arrived,

basically what aurora said on p1
i find p&p much worse, cos over there you post up s'thing you think is worth saying and it disappears under a pile of trolls so you don't get any responses at all...

peace and love


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2004)

sufilala said:
			
		

> in the end tho i prefer hb's style - where all the cards are on the table, to Mike's where he basically sets himself up to fail as a neutral party...


I didn't realise I'd "failed" quite so disastrously.

And when and where did I 'set myself up as a neutral party'? 

I must have missed that bit.


----------



## Bob (Apr 1, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> I didn't realise I'd "failed" quite so disastrously.
> 
> And when and where did I 'set myself up as a neutral party'?
> 
> I must have missed that bit.



I was particularly impressed that this thread happened after your plea for people to chill out!


----------



## sufilala (Apr 2, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> I didn't realise I'd "failed" quite so disastrously.



i certainly wouldn't say that! - but must be tricky to be a neutral mod and post in  discussions about stuff you care about, no? ...i'd find it difficult...


----------



## miss minnie (Apr 2, 2004)

Bob said:
			
		

> I was particularly impressed that this thread happened after your plea for people to chill out!


go and have a look at that chill thread - everyone calms down - except hatboy,  and hb you did it the time before too.  everyone takes a deep breath, calms down, has a laugh and while we're doing that the moderator has another stab.  why not try to chill out with us?

sorry hb honey, if you only saw my reply to you last time - i had caps lock on.  luckily i don't post in haste - i write it down, take a breath, count to ten and then delete it.  'cos there is no point posting in anger - it only ever makes things worse.  

i mention it now because i think you will stay and i really hope that you can change small things like that.  i, for one, would admire you all the more for it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 2, 2004)

<gets coat, leaves>


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 2, 2004)

sufilala said:
			
		

> i certainly wouldn't say that! - but must be tricky to be a neutral mod and post in  discussions about stuff you care about, no? ...i'd find it difficult...


Which opens the can of worms about whether mods should be appointed or elected. If they were elected then the conflict you mention would disappear: if anyone moaned about a mod in the way HB's been moaned about you'd simply blame democracy itself. Urban75 as a whole - all voting members - would have only themselves to blame for having elected him.

I'm not advocating elected mods. I suspect it would be unworkable. And if it aint broken why mend it? But elected mods would take the sting out of the problem you mention.


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 2, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> But elected mods would take the sting out of the problem you mention.


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!     

Even worse than the absolutely monstrous idea occasionally mooted of having Big Brother style evictions of posters. 

Ah, the tyranny of popularity.


----------



## Ol Nick (Apr 2, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> I'm not advocating elected mods. I suspect it would be unworkable. And if it aint broken why mend it? But elected mods would take the sting out of the problem you mention.


Bugger elections. Brixton was HB's forum. If you want to shout and be abusive the general forum is great for that. It's really good fun.

But for the Brixton forum I'd turn it round and say the Editor picks the moderators and lets them establish their rules. Then let the posters pick and choose where they want to post. If there's demand for Brixton Unmoderated Forum then let someone set it up. Build it and they will post.


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 2, 2004)

Ol Nick said:
			
		

> Bugger elections...
> 
> But for the Brixton forum I'd turn it round and say the Editor picks the moderators and lets them establish their rules....


Fair enough, but that still leaves the problem described by sufilala: the potential conflict between a mod's two roles: as mod and as poster.

It could also put mods in a difficult situation should a conflict arise between them and the editor. That's the problem with a patronage-based system of appointment compared to an election-based system.

In a patronage system you always run the risk of patronage being withdrawn. You're then left high and dry - otherwise known as being 'hung out to dry' - which happens to Government Ministers all the time. 

Patronage is withdrawn and you're fucked. It happens in the workplace too, to thousands of people every day. It's how non-democratic organisations operate. Isn't it happening on a large scale in the House of Lords at present?

I've never known the editor do this, and think he never would, but it's an inherent risk of a patronage-based system of mod appointment.

But if you're voted in you're more secure, against attacks from both above _and_ below.

Having said that - and one reason I support the current u75 system - I've met at least four u75 moderators and the idea of anyone being able to 'discipline' any of them via withdrawl of patronage is laughable. 

The only circumstances in which I could imagine Mrs Magpie shaking in her boots is at the sight of an empty glass in the Albert...


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 2, 2004)

Ol Nick said:
			
		

> But for the Brixton forum I'd turn it round and say the Editor picks the moderators and lets them establish their rules.


I don't see where the turning it round bit comes in. This how things stand. Mike picked HB to run the forum and to establish how that forum is moderated. There have been arguments, yes,  but I don't think HB should be removed from the position he already holds (should he want to retain it). Just because some people have come in and caused a lot of trouble doesn't mean that upheavals  should be made for the sake of it.


----------



## Ol Nick (Apr 2, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> I don't see where the turning it round bit comes in.


I can't remember. I was probably trying to sound clever. But since you and AK agree with me I must be in the clique. But I'd rather be in the pub. So I'm off. I do hope everyone can relax this weekend.


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 2, 2004)

A few points:

  Somewhat confused issues on this thread.Their are criticisms of HB and also criticisms of those who supposedly make Brixton Forum and unwelcoming place-a clique-not named but Im assuming the Gang of Four include me.

  Reading through these posts I agree with a lot with Annas.I also note how even tempered Annas responses to the issues on this thread.My posts on this thread have been lacking in the personal confrontation area-probably why they have not been responded to or picked up by Domski or Fanta.

  Intostella is her usual inimitable self.As I know Intostella Im probably prejudiced in her favour.I find her posting style highly amusing and witty.She has a way with words I dont have.

  Red Jezzas post IMO are always to the point and are not abusive.

  A point made by Hendo-that if the people posting here met in a pub they would get on-is IMO correct.Posting up on the net does mean you dont see the whole person.Thats true however of life in general.We deal with people everyday on a superficial level-not necessarily knowing them that well.Maybe its part of human nature-the need for an Other to label and hate whom one does not really know that well.(Sorry Anna if I bring in Lacanian psychoanalysis here  .)

  I dont see the Ed as "neutral" as Sufila states.Hes IMO has strong opinions about Brixton-nothing wrong with that.I also dont agree with Sufilas statement that most people here are white middle class.A sweeping assumption.

   I agree with Intostella that the reason Im supporting HB here is that this does feel like a lynching.I would like to point out that HB has criticised me in the past.HB has also deleted one of my posts.(A deletion I accepted the reasons for and am not going to divulge.)This is a while back and I was not going ever to mention it.As Domski has been laying into HB as though HB only picks on certain kinds of people Im bringing it up.So I think Domski should put things in perspective.

  And if ur reading this HB I think you should not give up on being part of U75 or being a moderator.

  I dont agree with ms Minnie when she says that this make her ashamed of Brixton Forum.As someone who has had a lot of experence of being in groups-I take this kind of arguing as part of life.It may not seem adult to some but you get this behaviour in all walks of life.Unless it gets destructive it blows over.


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 2, 2004)

Ol Nick said:
			
		

> Bugger elections. Brixton was HB's forum. If you want to shout and be abusive the general forum is great for that. It's really good fun.
> 
> But for the Brixton forum I'd turn it round and say the Editor picks the moderators and lets them establish their rules. Then let the posters pick and choose where they want to post. If there's demand for Brixton Unmoderated Forum then let someone set it up. Build it and they will post.



  Wrong their are already general rules on posting established by the Ed to cover the whole site.

  I think Annas made some salient points re electing Mods.I however think that a "democratic" U75 could be a nightmare.Their would be a tendency for an elected dictatorship.The position of Mod would become really one where posters with "incorrect" thoughts could be kicked off the site.Different groups would attempt to gain the position of Mod to pursue their own agenda and control the site.Well known experts at this are Trots and the Labour Party.


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 2, 2004)

Ol Nick said:
			
		

> I can't remember. I was probably trying to sound clever. But since you and AK agree with me I must be in the clique. But I'd rather be in the pub.


 You can be in _both_, you know.


----------



## sufilala (Apr 2, 2004)

definitely an assumption, G

but to be sure the posters on here don't represent every part of the brixton community & wmc posters are over-represented, still doesn't mean there's not plenty constructive to say about the place, but i still detect a strain of denial/hypocrisy/nimbyism that does piss me off....

all the same i've lived in & around brikky for a long time and the site has really enriched my appreciation of the area


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 3, 2004)

Gramsci said:
			
		

> I dont agree with ms Minnie when she says that this make her ashamed of Brixton Forum.As someone who has had a lot of experence of being in groups-I take this kind of arguing as part of life.It may not seem adult to some but you get this behaviour in all walks of life.Unless it gets destructive it blows over.


Exactly. All this breast-beating from Miss Minnie, Hendo and others. People argue. Couples sometimes break the china. Groups split and then re-form. Alliances are formed and then broken and then re-form. It doesn't matter. Grow up and stop being so po-faced!


----------



## miss minnie (Apr 3, 2004)

grow up yourself.  what made me ashamed was not the 'arguments' but the two pages of savagery from a certain two posters.  debate is something to be proud of.  there's been more bullying than debate on this thread, imo.

and gramsci - do you not remember that i was in one of the groups with you for all those years?


----------



## editor (Apr 3, 2004)

Ol Nick said:
			
		

> But for the Brixton forum I'd turn it round and say the Editor picks the moderators and lets them establish their rules.


For the record, any new moderators have to be approved by *all * the other moderators. If I tried to foist someone unsuitable on these forums, the mods would tell me to fuck right off!


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 3, 2004)

miss minnie said:
			
		

> grow up yourself.


<smacked wrist>


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 3, 2004)

miss minnie said:
			
		

> grow up yourself.  what made me ashamed was not the 'arguments' but the two pages of savagery from a certain two posters.  debate is something to be proud of.  there's been more bullying than debate on this thread, imo.


 There has been unpleasantness from a good number of posters in this debate, across more than one thread, and also a good and healthy pinch of humour. Sorry to hear that the latter has gone over your head. I recall also what AK said about eggshell personalities. 

The dynamic of a thread like this changes all the time. One minute it's all spikey and next people are  laughing. Personally, I think that's great.  As much as one might like to, you can't control the way an argument is going to go.


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 3, 2004)

Gramsci said:
			
		

> I think Annas made some salient points re electing Mods. I however think that a "democratic" U75 could be a nightmare.Their would be a tendency for an elected dictatorship.The position of Mod would become really one where posters with "incorrect" thoughts could be kicked off the site.Different groups would attempt to gain the position of Mod to pursue their own agenda and control the site.Well known experts at this are Trots and the Labour Party.


You usually elect people when you want someone to actively go round doing things - hence having a manifesto and getting a 'mandate' to take certain actions. However, moderating a forum is a more like the judiciary - trying to have a fair and agreed set of rules that can be applied impartially, keeping a stable and consistent environment that people can choose to come and use, having a designated person who has a general responsibility for policing the place and settling disputes. This isn't really a role that lends itself to competative and "sectarian" (ie party political) elections and the position isn't really the same kind of 'decision making power' that members of a legislative or executive have. People should be careful when talking about democracy to not forget the importance of fairness, impartiality and justice - and never forget that to even have elections you will always need someone to organise and oversee the elections in the first place.

Wooo - I am having "theory" withdrawal symptoms... better get back to the right folder eh?


----------



## sufilala (Apr 3, 2004)

sweet irony
the same reasons people moan about this forum; antagonistic, 'in yer face' etc. are so similar to what a lot of folk say about brixton...


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 3, 2004)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> You usually elect people when you want someone to actively go round doing things - hence having a manifesto and getting a 'mandate' to take certain actions. However, moderating a forum is a more like the judiciary - trying to have a fair and agreed set of rules that can be applied impartially, keeping a stable and consistent environment that people can choose to come and use, having a designated person who has a general responsibility for policing the place and settling disputes. This isn't really a role that lends itself to competative and "sectarian" (ie party political) elections and the position isn't really the same kind of 'decision making power' that members of a legislative or executive have. People should be careful when talking about democracy to not forget the importance of fairness, impartiality and justice - and never forget that to even have elections you will always need someone to organise and oversee the elections in the first place.
> 
> Wooo - I am having "theory" withdrawal symptoms... better get back to the right folder eh?



   Top post


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 3, 2004)

miss minnie said:
			
		

> grow up yourself.  what made me ashamed was not the 'arguments' but the two pages of savagery from a certain two posters.  debate is something to be proud of.  there's been more bullying than debate on this thread, imo.
> 
> and gramsci - do you not remember that i was in one of the groups with you for all those years?



   Funnily enough did not cross my mind when I posted up-but I did remember later on .Fair enough comment-you know how some of those groups we were involved fell apart under what were basically personal animosities and all the power struggles that did go on in groups.

  I think the experience of that affects my posting style.I havent survived in groups without unconsciously learning how to deal with them.My posting style whilst opinionated and argumentative rarely ever goes into "shouting" mode.I just get on with my job in my group and in the long run people see that.

  Ive seen in groups people "savage" each other.I make up my own mind on the situation.I support one or neither or let them get on with it.In the case of HB I agree with Intostella that it comes across as a lynching-so Ive made it clear I want him to stay.


----------



## pk (Apr 4, 2004)

sufilala said:
			
		

> sweet irony
> the same reasons people moan about this forum; antagonistic, 'in yer face' etc. are so similar to what a lot of folk say about brixton...



Exactly!

I guess that makes me a misfit.


----------

