The Sidebar Thread

[Digger]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1215056&postcount=346

"I will f***ing fight anyone who says anything against him on this"

Second hand it may be, but it's on this forum and it's a threat, directly by you, of violence.

As I said, you have form. Not honesty, sadly. But form, none the less.

Did i threaten violence against you yesterday?#

And please be a man and address why i am not allowed reference your tweets, and also address your actions on twitter towards me last summer, and how you can reconcile them with your attack on me today. Cheers.

 

[Digger]

No it is not.

If it had you would have quoted a tweet, or some actual reference that is relevant. You didn't - you outed their twitter name which reveals their personal name.

Again - if you do have some animosity on twitter, then why bring it up here?

Which to me is as accurate as their name on here - i have no idea which is real...

as far as i am concerned it's a twitter persona like you or I...And it is relevant.

 

[martinvickers]

Did i threaten violence against you yesterday?#

By implication, and taking on board your anger issues and clear previous threats of violence, yes, you did.

 

[Netserk]

No, not when it's one for personal use with their identity involved. If the person has the same username as this place and has referenced things on it to the forum, then yes, I do think it's fair game. MartinV has never mentioned a twitter account he has and you have brought one in here with no clear certainty that this was indeed his which proves the point.

Wait a minute. Someone here held me accountable for something written on twitter, despite the fact that I have never linked to that account or anything similar. Are you saying that should be punished?

AFAIK Eshnar has never linked to his twitter profile, yet many here know which is his. Should one be banned if one ask Eshnar here if that twitter account is his?

 

[Digger]

By implication, and taking on board your anger issues and clear previous threats of violence, yes, you did.

Anger issues...have you met me? We've been there...by implication

Do i get to use tweets from your account to exemplify your cowardice and anger issues?


Still won't address my previous points I see...

 

[martinvickers]

Wait a minute. Someone here held me accountable for something written on twitter, despite the fact that I have never linked to that account or anything similar. Are you saying that should be punished?

AFAIK Eshnar has never linked to his twitter profile, yet many here know which is his. Should one be banned if one ask Eshnar here if that twitter account is his?

In the public forums, with no context, and naming a site with a personal name attached?

Absolutely, yes. No question.

Ask in a PM if the request is genuine. It's blatantly clear in this case it wasn't.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Which to me is as accurate as their name on here - i have no idea which is real...

as far as i am concerned it's a twitter persona like you or I...And it is relevant.

Yet the name on the twitter account is clearly not 'martinvickers' - and is quite obviously someones real life name.

 

[martinvickers]

Anger issues...have you met me?

Thank Buddha, no. What an unpleasant thought.

 

[gooner]

Wait a minute. Someone here held me accountable for something written on twitter, despite the fact that I have never linked to that account or anything similar. Are you saying that should be punished?

AFAIK Eshnar has never linked to his twitter profile, yet many here know which is his. Should one be banned if one ask Eshnar here if that twitter account is his?

I don't know anything about your account and whether you use the same username as this place or you allow forum members to follow you on it. That's your own problem what you do and whether you think someone has disclosed your own personal identity against your own wishes.

I don't know Eshnar's account but by your comment it seems well known to some forum members. He may have allowed that for all I know and he probably has no problem about it. He's entitled to do that if he wishes to. I don't know the facts and couldn't care less. This account in question had no link to this forum and was never a topic of discussion on here. It's not even sure if it's MartinV's account so why was it linked here? Some forum members probably have accounts which they want no link whatsoever to this place and may do so as they don't want personal information disclosed in their bio or tweets to people here who have no business with it. They are more than entitled to that.

If a person wants their anonymity protected which they have more than enough right to on the forum, then yes that right should be respected. It's out of order to bring in an account when you're not even sure that is the person in question.

 

[involution]

This account in question had no link to this forum and was never a topic of discussion on here. It's not even sure if it's MartinV's account so why was it linked here?

How can you say there is no link? He comes to this forum to attack people. He uses a Twitter account to attack the same people. It is a full court press. If he is too stupid to keep his real life identity separate from the fights he starts here then it is his own problem.

Some forum members probably have accounts which they want no link whatsoever to this place and may do so as they don't want personal information disclosed in their bio or tweets to people here who have no business with it. They are more than entitled to that.

Those people are smart enough not to use those accounts to aid their attacks on forum members.

 

[the sceptic]

How can you say there is no link? He comes to this forum to attack people. He uses a Twitter account to attack the same people. It is a full court press. If he is too stupid to keep his real life identity separate from the fights he starts here then it is his own problem.



Those people are smart enough not to use those accounts to aid their attacks on forum members.

Excellent post. If it was so easy to figure out who he was on twitter, maybe he shouldnt be using his real name there. That is internet 101.

 

[gooner]

How can you say there is no link? He comes to this forum to attack people. He uses a Twitter account to attack the same people. It is a full court press. If he is too stupid to keep his real life identity separate from the fights he starts here then it is his own problem.



Those people are smart enough not to use those accounts to aid their attacks on forum members.

He's free to tweet and question who he likes on the twitter account. He's also free to use it for personal means and interaction which have no links to this forum. Hence, in this case he may not want to have no link with it to the forum and to have it protected with regards to members not knowing about his personal details.

 

[martinvickers]

Excellent post. If it was so easy to figure out who he was on twitter, maybe he shouldnt be using his real name there. That is internet 101.

That's the great thing about the circus. Wait long enough, the clowns will arrive.

 

[The Hitch]

Anger issues...have you met me?

Thank Buddha, no. What an unpleasant thought.

So you haven't met digger.

Why then did you suggest yesterday that you had?

This post is ironic considering you rarely go a post without insulting someone...yesterday you spoke of my known anger issues...have we met? Do you know anyone who has met me?
No.

Don't be so sure - It's a small island.

You suggested to a poster that its possible the two of you had met, knowing full well that you had not.
What's the purpose of that?

Why not just answer honestly the first time - no we have not met?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Excellent post. If it was so easy to figure out who he was on twitter, maybe he shouldnt be using his real name there. That is internet 101.

The script is that Dig had no idea that it revealed his real name, could have been a pseudonym.

Of course this does still not address why the linked to the twitter profile in the first place, it had no relevance here.

 

[Digger]

The script is that Dig had no idea that it revealed his real name, could have been a pseudonym.

Of course this does still not address why the linked to the twitter profile in the first place, it had no relevance here.

It has - that you don't agree with me isn't my issue.

 

[martinvickers]

So you haven't met digger.

Why then did you suggest yesterday that you had?




You suggested to a poster that its possible the two of you had met, knowing full well that you had not.
What's the purpose of that?

Why not just answer honestly the first time - no we have not met?

Hitch, this isn't your fight, no matter what you think, but for the love of Beelzebub, read before you lash out.

have we met? Do you know anyone who has met me?

Two separate questions.

 

[Afrank]

Cool it with Martins Twitter Digger. Revealing real life information about a poster is against the rules. Your Twitter account is kinda linked with your account here and you seem fine with people knowing about it, but Martin obviously isn't okay with you revealing his twitter account or other info about himself from outside the forum.

 

[martinvickers]

It has - that you don't agree with me isn't my issue.

Forum Moderators deleted it. that answers your question. You're wrong. Again.

Edit : My apologies, Afrank. you have got in ahead of me; I defer to you.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It has - that you don't agree with me isn't my issue.

It has no relevance here.
A dispute on twitter has no relevance here. A tweet may have, if relevant, but you were not doing that - you only linked to their name.

 

[martinvickers]

The script is that Dig had no idea that it revealed his real name, could have been a pseudonym.

Of course this does still not address why the linked to the twitter profile in the first place, it had no relevance here.

Of course, if it was genuine curiosity, a DM would have sufficed, wouldn't it?

He didn't want clarification. He wanted to intimidate, to call out, to bully. He failed, but that was the intention, as is crystal clear from the previous threatening context.

 

[The Hitch]

Hitch, this isn't your fight, no matter what you think, but for the love of Beelzebub, read before you lash out.



Two separate questions.

Fair enough. My mistake, sorry.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Come on guys. Calm it down. I haven't got my moderator rights yet, but if you haven't calmed down when I do get them then my first act as moderator will be to delete large chunks of the "discussion" and dust down the "ban" key.

Thanks.

 

[martinvickers]

Fair enough. My mistake, sorry.

Thank you. And I apologise if I was curt, not your fault, but as you can see, this has been a frankly bizarre episode, and I have phasers set to stun

 

[the sceptic]

The script is that Dig had no idea that it revealed his real name, could have been a pseudonym.

Of course this does still not address why the linked to the twitter profile in the first place, it had no relevance here.

I dont care what happened. Just saying that if youre going to troll people, dont do it with anything thats got your real life name attached to it. This is so basic, maybe Martin should consider it a lesson learned and move on.