The "ignore" option

Oss after Halos reply to Mark on Sat posted below that six active members supported, no post from whipster that I read contained anything that could have been put forward to justify your collective and behind closed door decision to ban him.

Without Marks publicity, attacks and continual histronics and Johns direct questioning this railroading wouldnt have occured and given how this forum came into being is disgraceful given two of our admin and founder were banned without any reason by Driscol

What happened to the policy and values of proper warnings , transparency and fairness that our founder began this with?

from our updated rules ".Please show respect to fellow members. Although we encourage debate on all subjects including sex, politics and religion. Please bare in mind that these are sensitive subjects and offence can easily be caused. Simply offending another member will not be met with banning or necessarily a warning, we understand that messages can often be taken out of context and have no interest in punishing people if they make mistaken comments. However, bullying and online harassment using this forum will not be tolerated!
"

The harrassment of whipster by Mark was clearly tolerated

I admit that my direct questions were not helpful and I did apologise at the time. However there were things said after such as the remark about Filipino looking like s**t that offended me and also others. If you look at the response by a female member on that "Madonna" thread recently you can see that.

i hadnt realised whipster had been banned--but in my opinion it was well deserved and overdue......which was a pity. i found some of his travel experiences interesting-----but it seemed he was on here just to stir up trouble--with very little positive advice or input.

he would have been booted off the dark side a lot sooner----which reflects the tolerant attitude of the management of this site. long may this continue.

I thought there was anti swear software on here what whipster actualy said was Thai in tagolog means S$&t not that Filipnos are S$£t if thats not misrepresentation what is?

the female member who,s been here since 2013 and made a total of two attacking posts in 8 minuits?

I've tried to keep out of this, but I thought I'd comment seeing as I had a bit of a toy-throwing episode with Whipster myself.

To say that he was in some way a victim is way off the mark. Why would people just suddenly start picking on a new member for no reason? It's a ludicrous suggestion.

Keith says he has met him, so probably saw his posts through rose tinted specs somewhat because he knows him as a person. We don't know him as a person so only had his posts to go on, and he was quite clearly being provacative and trying to wind people up.

With me he suggested that my wife was a spoilt rich kid because she liked the Beatles. Then, when I picked him up on this, he indicated that I must have "a screw loose". So I went into one a bit.

It's also interesting that those who couldn't see anything wrong into his posts then, themselves, went into a bombardment of abuse against someone who had complained about Whipster's posts.

To be honest, I think if he had stayed here he woud have settled down a bit and maybe got over his initial attitude and been an interesting poster.

The comment he made about the word "Tai" was a genuine one, because I asked my wife. It seems that was the post that eventually got him banned. There's no doubt, though, that he was causing a lot of unsettlement on here with his manner.

It takes a lot to get me going online, but he managed to reel me in. I'm sure he was doing it deliberately.

Ive met Dom, Apo, Mark and the late Al too Maharg I take people as I find them and as they behave towards me I loath hypocrasy though how I see it whipster is a brutally honest person provocative or not, some find me provocative, hard to beleive I know but Id rather have that than dishonest posers claiming some moral imperitive

No. This post made earlier on the 'Madonna' thread.

My wife @BlueberryCheeseCake was furious over some of the posts that he made that included:

1. Suggesting that a Filipina wife would likely rob her husband.

2. Suggesting the the Philippines would be better off if you removed all the Filipino and replaced them with Chinese people.

3. Suggesting that people who married Filipina women were people traffickers.

4. Suggesting that you could identify a Filipino if they were wearing a care home uniform or if they were in prison.

In addition, there is no anti-swear filter that I can see. The swear word was posted verbatim and was edited by a moderator.

Although I didn't agree with some of his views, I wouldn't have minded him staying around personally if he would have just desisted from making constant negative and offensive remarks about Filipino people and by inference, about my wife. I felt that he was trying to be offensive on purpose.

I also feel as @Maharg does, that it is telling that a certain set of the forum who thought that his posts were amusing then went over to the attack after his departure - not that I am surprised because at least one of those people has been a permanent trouble-causer ever since I joined the forum.

I didn't personally go out of my way to persecute the man. I agree with @Maharg that he went out of his way to say annoying things and never once apologized when anyone said that they thought the remark was offensive. That is a pity because he might have had some interesting things to say.

However, it was ruined by the sheer volume of BS.

That is why, for the first time on the day he was banned, I also said that I thought the forum would be a better place without him in it, and I stand by that.

I agree with @bigmac that his departure was overdue and frankly Keith, I think that your objections have nothing to do with @whipster and everything about scoring a point against @Markham

<EDITED>
It initially appeared to me that you had a personal axe to grind there, but since @oss has kindly explained to me that you are merely a believer in 'free speech' I have edited this part of my response.

I don't see what the problem is. Free speech or no the guy was on a mission to annoy people, and he did, and he's gone.

Onwards and upwards......but not too high.

Yeah, me too. People on an internet forum that I haven't met I can only judge on their posts.

The guy was on a wind-up and lapping it up. It was easy to see that. I don't see where hypocrisy comes into it.

I see. I must have misread the tone. I shall edit the last post accordingly.

If whipster knew that he had a possible online friend who he had previous run-ins with, I think it would have been better for him to tread lightly until he was bedded in and trusted by many people.
It is a shame as he had the potential to have a positive influence here as he had lots of experiences to share.
I didn't find many things to complain about but the swear word threw me, to be honest.
When many people complained to the moderators, they acted correctly IMO.

I still stand by the option of the ignore button as this limits possible conflict now and in the future and that has got to be a good thing for a more harmonious place to exist online. "Al The Teach" mentioned this last year and I agreed that limiting conflict is a very good idea.

That thoughtful post is one of the most useful views that I've seen posted in this whole thread of hot air. Absolutely.

The unfortunate thing about forums is that we don't often get the chance to chat with people in real life to have a better understanding of how they are as a person.
This is why it was such a great day last year when we had the "get-together" at Cora's.
My wife even had tears of happiness when she was chatting with other ladies associated with "british-Filipino" and she had never met anyone before.
One day isn't enough time to meet other members though

Close but not actually what Whippy wrote, which is this:

substitute an anagram of "tish" for "EDITED".

I don't know what Whipster found so amusing with what he just said. He clearly understood what the word meant. Maybe someone can explain to me but I tried to interpret that whichever way possible but still didn't find it funny.