Cheers lads..............not sure exactly what i said to earn your joint (is joint ok?) displeasure, but you do seam to be kind of making ck's point for him.

BTW

quote:

Originally posted by JaysPlays:
Playfull,

Oh hell! We must be an axis of evil! We've actually written a play together! Not a 10 min job, not a one acter, but a full-lenght two act play. Damn, set G W Bush after us for actually bothering to write!

Low blow well landed Jay........i must remember not to mention my lack of experiance or insecurity on any other writing forums or it might be used to ridicule me by someone i liked and whose work i praised.

Playfull - you haven't earned my displeasure at all (excepting, perhaps, that you perceive that Jay and I are somehow ganging up on Lewes, which actually isn't true; we just both happen to share the same low opinion of PhilThePratt, which Lewes doesn't).

Lewes earned our pique a tad with his reference to us being a 'lynchmob' for PTP - and, again, I'll only say that if we were so wrong, how come TPTT TVS have taken action against him and not us?

But, as Lewes pointed out and I've tried to reinforce - it's only a Forum - and Moonbird is right, a dying one at that! I find it rather sad that PTP should have caused such antagonism. It seems Jay and I are being pilloried for merely asking for the bone fides of someone who claimed specialist knowledge. Because, actually, that's all we've done!

As for CK's comment - s/he's absolutely right. the appearance of PTP divided this Forum - as PTP hoped, I suspect. The two camps were those of us that had good cause to disbelieve him/her, and saw the danger or perpetuating the myth (or simply didn't want to look foolish) and those who wanted to play along, or wanted to believe it, or did believe it.

Look back - the only anger that has arisen is from that genesis. And if Jay's comment offended, maybe you have to recall that we've had some considerable and unwarranted stick from Lewes and you appeared to be defending him! Actually, although Jay's reply was to you, I don't think it was a barb at you - rather it was a response to the antagonism against him for doing no more than dare to ask questions of PTP!

Ah, well. "It's Only A Game Show." Psychologically I've found it very interesting - but I'm off now to brush my backhair and canines and find a tree to kip in!

Sorry Adman Ck did not post that the appearance of PTP (your term not anyone elses) divided the forum.

But they did post

I don't post often mainly because this is not the most friendly of places. I've said that before and I believe it's because a couple of the members - jaysplays and adman - can be quite aggressive in their posts when someone doesn't agree with them. I know some people will find this offensive (and I can't help that and am certainly not sorry to bring it up) but I believe it is as Lewes says, like bullying.

Jesus Christ!

In my post there was a full stop! I said s/he's absolutely right." I then went on to suggest that the appearance of PTP had a lot to do with it. I was agreeing with her/him!

I disagree that Jay and I are aggressive when someone disagrees with us - fervent, perhaps, passionate even, but not aggressive - and I'd challenge anyone to prove that (PhilThePratt and ancient Moonbird history aside).

Or is this post in itself 'aggressive' maybe?

Frankly, I don't give a cr4p any more. If you have nothing better to do than nitpick over two sentences, avoiding the wider issues contained in the rest of my last post, you go ahead.

Ooh Ooh.

No one ever believed that he [who shall not be named] was likely to be who he said he was- but Sadie Sadie and I [and others] got a vibe from his postings which made us think yes/no maybe.
He had limited entertainment value and the right to be heard.

But this is not the issue.
The forum is not divided over: "is he- is he not".

The issue, with the greatest respect, is one of respect, of tolerance and good manners.
Our motto, I venture to suggest, should be this [and hung above the forum entrance:

"BRING US YOUR CREATIVITY, YOUR GENIUS, YOUR TALENT LONGING TO BE FREE [AND SUFFER US THE CRANKS AND THE DELUDED] ALL ARE WELCOME HERE.

Contrary to what you may think, I have a great deal of affection for you and Jay- Jay who now seems to always now appear dressed in black and stalk the forum battlements, muttering to himself.

Both of you have amused me and enlightened me over the past year.
My harsh comments were made in frustration and in sadness for the loss of the older, friendlier forum.

quote]The issue, with the greatest respect, is one of respect, of tolerance and good manners.[/quote]

With respect, the issue is far more than one of respect; the truth of the issue is that it is an issue of truth.

PhilThePratt started in his first posts by attacking or patronising myself, Swann and Jay, and claiming intellectual high ground from a fake persona as justification; hardly respectful in itself! S/he was highly critical of us, offering inside insights that were beyond his/her wit and knowledge, again claiming the justification of knowledge. Mrs Rachie had no wish to dialogue with him/her for fear of being perceived as foolish.

You say that nobody believed PTP. At least two other posters on this Forum stated that, on balance, they did believe PTP was indeed Neil Pearson.

Such impersonations are far from uncommon on Forums; and they inevitably lead to division amongst previously harmonious groups.

Those who wished to believe, or be perceived to believe, were offended by our wish, our right to demand proof of his/her identity and, in the breach, our ability to make PTP look as foolish as s/he indeed was.

The fact that others wished to engage with him/her is immaterial if their perceived belief permitted him/her to continue to post false, or at best not validated, information, and - much worse - to attack the honest and open posts of other respected, valued and liked members of this Forum (and I omit Jay and I from that definition).

Jay and I queried his/her right to do so. S/he refused or were unable to validate their claim. The Moderator removed his/her posts and (I believe) two other identities which appeared as supposed 'official proof'. S/he stopped posting because s/he saw that we would continue to do likewise - and, I suspect, because his/her PTP identity and ability to post may be blocked as well as the other 'official' identities that the Moderator removed.

Others then became irate at our actions and began to cite us as being aggressive for doing no more than upholding our right (a) not to be fed misinformation and (b) not to have our honest views attacked. If you're one of those who did not agree with our right and ability to do that - well, it's not really your day, is it?

If s/he had attacked your views with that claim of justiication, or those of any of the 'old gang', or even those of Caicos and Moonbird or a new, unknown member, I would have done exactly the same thing. Indeed, had YOU seriously claimed to be Neil Pearson, and upon challenge and lack or proof continued to make that claim, I would have reported your posts, too.

The aggression was initially that of PTP - not Jay or I.

But all other considerations aside - when PhilThePratt was angered that Jay did not accept PTP's right to offer insight, advice and help, and when PTP posts to my friend Jay that because Jay does not believe PTP then Jay is 'unconvinceable, and therefore ultimately unhelpable', I would have hoped that from the previous online friendship of others here there would have been more indignation, more anger and more support for Jay than just that which came from me. A forlorn hope, sadly.

No wonder Jay feels angry; nobody else but me (and, in part, Mrs Rachie) came to his defence when we really could have done with some support against this arrogant, posturing fool who wanted to offer 'advice' to the gullible; when, in fact, he was at the same time either insulting or patronising others. Worse, those who did not rise up in support actually stood behind PTP and took exactly the same stance as PTP, either attacking our integrity, throwing insults or patronising us!

I will suffer cranks and the deluded until they mislead or attack my friends, and if they continue to do so when I ask them to cease I will use every weapon I can find on Jay's battlements against them. And if others who should have been beside my friends stand behind the cranks and deluded instead, then the others might get and feel wounded. That's the penalty for poor judgement.

So; go ahead; there's surely a 'silverback' line you can throw at me there? An quick aside about arrogance? About being antagonistic? Or unfriendly? Or dictatorial?

TMI!

I think in all conscience, I have done my best, to resolve this contentious issue.

I don't think any useful purpose can be served by continuing this particular discussion.

We're clearly going to agree to disgree on what is the fundamental issue here.

Adman,

I have re-read CK's post and i am suprised that you think 's/he's absolutely right' as it really does not show you in a very good light.

Anyway. i have had my fill of this debate. I strongly think you are wrong and have behaved badly in this matter - and i am sure that you feel exactly the same regarding me. Can i suggest that we resolve our differences in another place at another time (i mean we continue the discussion over a couple of pints in a nice Cotswold pub)

I will continue to post, but not on this subject again. So feel free to have the last word (at least with me) regarding this whole sorry afair.

Hmm. Against my better judgement I feel compelled to add a comment from a rather more distanced forum-participant - but nevertheless a regular visitor: I've written my goodbyes on this site before having felt the 'atmosphere' turn distinctly sour and exclusive but, having found it entertaining and informative, have returned mainly to read and occasionally post. My reason for departing before was because there was antangonism involving Adman, Jays Plays and another writer in particular. I regret to say, Adman and Jays, that your overbearing straddling of this forum drives me away once more. As some on this site have stated repeatedly, the NP issue was merely a catalyst for some out-of-proportion reactions and...yes...bullying. Adman and Jay - forgive me, I've quite deliberately never really entered into a dialogue with either of you before and this is why: You are both, without doubt, intelligent, witty, interesting individuals and (very probably) writers of considerable talent. I must also say (reminding you of my more objective status) that - speaking in support of each other as you frequently do - you are a powerful, vociforously defensive energy on this forum and I for one have found this intimidating, exasperating and infuriating on many, many occasions.

My intention in writing this post is not to provoke (although I know, true to form, you will both feel compelled to write reams and reams attacking my comments and defending your own). I merely wish to suggest a course of action to you both which, so far, rarely seems to come into the equation: That is to listen to others' opinions with the respect and attention that you deem absolutely pre-requisite for your own; to consider that your way of processing the world is NOT the definite way and that the many varying views stated here are what make GOOD DRAMA! Of course, your conflicting views are included in that definition, but not (sadly) when we hear them ad infinitum.

I shan't be returning to this forum - not even to see your responses (I believe, by now, I could 'write the script' for what they will look like). I would like to think though that you may read my comments and spare a few more moments that usual to really digest the fact that you're coming across in a negative way to more than one person on this forum. In which case you might want to maybe...just maybe consider adapting your own behaviour and trying to look at your own approaches from a different perspective for once - as opposed to investing so much energy in persuading us all why others are in the wrong!

Well Sadie Sadie etc... what's wrong with a bit of good old "kick ass" now and again - that's drama, guts and fire - JUST what we need to inspire the pen to get scribbling (or is that a bit nasty for your way of things?)

Thank you, Sadie. Your confidence is well placed.

AdMan. Please. I beg you. Get some help.

NP

Adman needs no help - the chaff will fall by the roadside and wither

Sadie,

If you read this - understand how you feel, but very sorry you feel you don't want to post any more - we need voices like yours.

Good luck with the play and post the dates/venue here (if 'here' still exists then).

playfull

Sadie Sadie,
I know how you feel.

This was my immediate reaction; but then I reconsidered.

Why leave; and leave the bullies-boys in charge; they'll think they've won; that it's their forum.

Good luck with the play.

Lewes

I go away for a couple of days…

You know, I’d be upset about this if it wasn’t so ludicrous.

I’ll state it again, if you believe that I have bullied anyone, report the post – let the moderators do their job.

As for leaving the bully boys in charge! LOL

And, of course, the same goes for me.

I know it won't make any difference to the very people for whom it should make a difference, but I left the forum for the same reasons as Sadie.

Sad, because Minxy, Lewes, Sadie, Playfull, Crampy, Gravedigger and others were all good company in the lonely avocation we share.

Jay, if you could somehow channel the fantastic energy you devote to proving you are always right into something - like your endeavour with Adman, my synopsis, a new play - then perhaps you wouldn't have dispersed this electronic band of playwrights in a fug of bitterness and bad feelings.

I only echo Lewes, Sadie, PhilStein . . .

Bye from your friendly neighbourhood Swann

P.S. In talks with a production company for Whole of the Moon!

I'm taking one last look around, also Swann.

I've seen On the Third Day- better late than never, I suppose.

Great news about "The Whole of The Moon"-
I wondered I guessed and I tried
you just knew...

I Some saw the crescent you
saw the Whole of The Moon"

Peace White Light and Joy

Swann1719

x Lewes

Congrats, definitely Swann - v good news. Are there any other forums you frequent where one day we might see a notice of when the performance is on?

Lewes - come on, you know you love it here What was your opinion of the play?

No, I don't see the point in posting a review at this late stage...
especially when all it's likely to produce is a two hundred word tirade/autobiography.

It's very surprising that two obviously gifted, funny and enthusiastic people should have such a blind spot, and be capable of such insensitivity.

Oh, oh, I think I shall shift to Playfull's American site.

I remmber when this forum was fun and the times it really rocked

Hi lewes,

You didn't go on the same night as me did you?

btw you were mentioned by Kate Betts and her hubby! In a nice way too!


Swan,

Big congrats and good luck! A production company! Is that TV? And was 'the whole of the moon' your TPTT submission? If the answer is yes to both of those then i want to point out that i suggested it would make a good TV drama! Which might just turn out to be the one interesting thing i said in all my posts on this bl**dy forum!

quote:

I'm taking one last look around, also Swann.

Me too, I'm done here.

Best of luck to you Swann. As a Londoner I feel very privileged to have so many theatres nearby so I do go to the theatre a lot. Hopefully I'll be seeing your play in the near future.

Thank you Playfull and Lewes, I have really enjoyed reading your posts.

Best of luck to you all.
ck33