Politics Today

[Jason H]

Did you apologize to her?. You were "duped"?
I'm just doing what you have done, Jason. The rules are the same for both of us, right!

So let me get this straight, you're expecting me to go out, find her personally and say to her "You don't know me, but I once said something about you on a 4th division Football club forum that turned out not to be true, I'm sorry about that"?

This is a new level of absurd.

 

[Jason H]

So what is the point of the edit function ? If not to give an individual the freedom to correct, amend, add, subtract or withdraw THEIR OWN words from public view, and for whatever personal reason ?

If the edit function is used (deliberately or otherwise) to discredit another poster and perpetuate a myth that they lied, leading to others jumping in, should said poster not have the opportunity to have their name cleared?

 

[Jason H]

Would you mind posting your original post about that councillor?

No, it's all on record and still there, I didn't go back and edit the post and deny all knowledge.

 

[IndoMike]

No, it's all on record and still there, I didn't go back and edit the post and deny all knowledge.

You referred back to my post re Tavy. I'd like to see your post again re Grenfell. It's fair for me to ask that.

 

[IndoMike]

If the edit function is used (deliberately or otherwise) to discredit another poster and perpetuate a myth that they lied, leading to others jumping in, should said poster not have the opportunity to have their name cleared?

If the edit function is used (deliberately or otherwise) to discredit another poster and perpetuate a myth that they lied, leading to others jumping in, should said poster not have the opportunity to have their name cleared?
[/QUOT

I haven't perpetuated any myth.

 

[tavyred]

Four other posters have accused Tavy of lying or not telling the truth......

Sir, Sir, it wasn’t me, it was the big boys what done it and then ran away!!!

 

[IndoMike]

If the edit function is used (deliberately or otherwise) to discredit another poster and perpetuate a myth that they lied, leading to others jumping in, should said poster not have the opportunity to have their name cleared?

Still waiting for your Grenfell post.

 

[IndoMike]

Sir, Sir, it wasn’t me, it was the big boys what done it and then ran away!!!

Nothing like selective editing, Tavyred.

 

[Jason H]

Posts 9576, 9580, 9582 and 9599 all "perpetuate the myth" as they all relate to you denying all knowledge of the edited post and/or remarking on Tavyred's character as a result.

This led to posts 9652 (Anonymous) and 9658 (G2K - especially this one as it directly references the "Greens" posts from Tavy as being a lie) accusing Tavyred of lying. G2K had the decency to apologise to Tavyred for being duped by you into believing he (Tavyred) had lied about your support for the Greens.

And as for the Grenfell post, I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve aside from attempting to deflect from your own ditch-digging and come out on the offensive. You asked if I'd apologised to the Councillor (sic) for my post about her involvement in Grenfell, I showed that I had. That wasn't good enough for you, apparently I had to do it personally, which is absurd (I even said in my post that had she read it I apologise personally), then I had to drag up the original post - why, I have no idea. I am not going to do so - this thread has already been totally derailed, and for me to repeat a post (which is there, in the public domain, unedited and subsequently apologised for) would add absolutely nothing.

I'm really not sure why you persist down this line - you put up a post by mistake (how, I'm not sure) which was read by the very person you were responding to, only to then deny all knowledge of the post having existed. Called out on this, you've turned aggressor, when a simple "Sorry, Tavyred, you're right, I did post this but I changed my mind afterwards" would have sufficed.

 

[IndoMike]

Exactly - I didn't divulge online which way I voted, nor will I. However, had I done so, I'd have let it stay on record and defended my decision if necessary.

If Mike didn't want people to see which way he voted, he shouldn't have posted it in the first place. It's not that difficult to do - if I don't want people to read something about me, I won't post about it.

So we repeat the question : why is there an editing function if not for people to change their mind and why aren't the originals (pre-edit) confidential. You want me to apologize for an accidental situation which I have explained. Are you saying my explanation is not true? Are you going to apologize for posting part of a post that I deleted?