web analytics

TALKING IN THE DARK

By David Vance On February 4th, 2013

No, I am not talking about the Superbowl and New Orleans version of night time entertainment!

For the second time in recent months I am forced to appeal for greater civility amongst the ATW commentariat. Bluntly I am now totally fed up with some of the name calling and vicious insults that pass as debate here by some. I have not got the time to act as referee and nor would I even if I did. You are all adults and need to start behaving as such. I find it all very dispiriting and it stops me writing. Some may notice my contributions here vary. My interest in all things political remains undimmed but if you want to REALLY hear from me on ATW then those who bitch and name call better stop it now. It is becoming a bore and I will not put up with this. If the aim is to drive me away keep on going. If you want me here, behave.

Please do not email me, just behave in a way that is appropriate for adults.

60 Responses to “TALKING IN THE DARK”

  1. I understand your frustration David and we all have our views on who is most to blame but pointing that out and naming names can only cause more abusive comment. It would be nice if everyone just stopped calling any other commenter a moron or an idiot or a liar or any other personalised insulting term. Simply say that you don;t agree with someones links or ‘evidence’ and just state your own opinion without recourse to any personalised namecalling. It would be good if everyone could remember and stick to a golden rule.

    Get as heated and as passionate as you like about the topic but not about the other people talking.

  2. If anybody disputes what I put forward then open disagreement and even some insults are to be expected and generally acceptable. The problem is when I’m called a ‘liar’ given that the whole point of providing supporting evidence for opinions formed is to show the honesty of those opinions. I find that highly objectionable indeed.

  3. jeez i thought this was another bbc post…

    shh.. don’t mention getting told off on nolan this morning :)

    i heard it and cringed for ya!!! ;)

  4. David

    Sorry that this is all in danger of putting you off involvement.

    Your tolerance of people who delight in justing coming on here with asinine comments to put you down is amazing. Shame to think that whilst neither they or Jo/Percy could bring you down, that the bigger danger doesn’t come from them.

  5. aileen i refer you to davids’ tweet.

    David Vance‏@DVATW

    @stupiddave Looks like some have a sense of humour by-pass. Not my problem.

    you see its all in the humour..

    nite nite. ;)

  6. Hi Kateyo

    How’s your boycott Vance on the BBC campaign going for ya? Shshhh.

  7. ha!!

    Why haven’t you been on nolans telly show? Maybe you haven’t been hearting him enough on twitter…;)

    But on a serious note you do know once you lost your temper yesterday you lost the argument…!!!

    temper temper!!

  8. Kateyo, I too heard the radio show and what telling off was that then? I heard a woman who had been given a chance to put her argument forward who then started to interrupt David’s point of view. What’s more, started calling him names when she didn’t like what he said! He didn’t get angry just authoritative in asking her not to interrupt.

    I sometimes come across your posts on here and quite frankly cringe for YOU!!

  9. ‘don’t interupt me’# shouts david vance

    to be told off by the host,

    ‘sorry david actually its going to be a conversation if you don’t mind, we’re not going to have monologues’ said stephen nolan to david vance.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01qh5c8

    this is very similar to an outburst by david when interviewed last along with bumper, david shouted , yes shouted, ‘listen to me when i speak’…

    What’s more, started calling him names

    she did? what names was that then?

    She merely pointed o ut that david went from 0 to 90 thus proving her point that physical abuse of children happens when a person was heated. Once he got heated, the argument was lost..

    I sometimes come across your posts on here and quite frankly cringe for YOU!!

    making a comment on a blog isn’t comparable to talking and shouting at people on the bbc care of the taxpayer, especially when he has no mandate..;)

  10. If you disagree with someone try actually putting up an argument for your points of view. Instead of just insulting the person making the comment.

    If you have sworn off discussing with someone then don’t engage with them.

    This is an open site, that does not give anyone the right to jump into other peoples debates with insults and jibs.

    Self edit yourselves. Don’t engage with those that aren’t engaging with you. Stop relishing in pointing fingers at others and look at yourselves.

    I can only speak for myself. If you don’t want to engage with me then please don’t. Your input is not needed.

    If you pop in and act like an ass you have only yourself to blame if your called one.

    Grow up.

  11. Troll who are you talking to?

    Who has been called an ass?

  12. I’m talking to the group as a whole.

    Relating to the actual post.

    I haven’t had the chance to pull the clip you and David are bantering about.

    The topic of this post however is something that is important to the health of the site, which is very important to me.

    I am guilty of calling some asses, others have taken to stalking people with insults and even writing entire posts attacking others. It has reached a critical mass.

  13. Troll –

    You’re not “guilty of calling some asses”. You’re guilty of habitually insulting and abusing anyone who simply disagrees with you.

  14. that’s nonsense Pete.

  15. Kateyo — I listened to the radio link. To be fair, while I agree with David’s adversary, she did get more time than him and wasn’t interrupted by the host when she was setting her stall out at the start. I didn’t think David lost his cool at all; surely this is what good radio is all about: robust debate!

  16. It’s not nonsense troll.

    The point i was making is that everybody, yes every body, including david can go from 0 to 90 in a debate. Everyone is interested in the ‘health of the site’, but if you really are interested in it then take your own advice..

    Anyhow …. lets leave it shall we.

  17. Peter David got more time than her nearer the end after the phone callers, did you listen all the way through, he ended up with more ‘robust debate’ nearer to the end. All i am saying is, that it has happened before, with bumper. David actually shouted at bumper, ‘listen to me when i speak’, it was breath taking.

    Robust debate isn’t monologue, and if davids opponents can’t have monologues, neither can he….

  18. no we shall not.

    You provide a good example Kate, that conversation was between Pete and I. You but in and then say leave it alone? That is an example of the problem.

    Pete is perfectly capable of handling his own end of a conversation that he and I are having. Yet you felt compelled to put your two cents in and then say move on?

    Pete’s point was nonsense. My stating so was not insulting, and had nothing to do with you.

    I have taken my own advice. I didn’t interject myself into you and Davids conversation, and when you asked what my comment was about I answered you.

    You jumped into a conversation that you were not part of. Look in the mirror Lady.

  19. The normal give and take is fine. The sharp elbows too, are fine – it can’t be ATW without them.

    Anyone here can call me an ” ass ” or similar, and many have. People here have said ” fuck you ” to me with a smile, and I didn’t have the slightest problem with it.

    But some here have said things that are so completely immoral that no one should ever say them in any context. It is part of a very long pattern of self absorbed viciousness, and none of it can be excused by ” heat of the moment ” defenses.

  20. Troll — This is a blog. If you want private one-on-one conversation I hear email works well.

    Popping in and commenting on the conversation is allowed, gratuitous insult is not. Some people do a lot of the latter and should stop.

  21. Troll I refer you to the above comments from Phantom and Petr, they’ve answered your comment to me very articulately and I’ve no problem with them jumping in on our conversation, ;)

  22. I don’t jump into the middle of Someones conversation and insult them.

    It is a blog, and everyone does have the opportunity to comment on what is being said. There are those on here that go out of there way however to jump in just to insult and not add a point of view.

    You Petr on several occasions have pulled things into threads from other threads that have nothing to do with a current conversation. You don’t do it to add your point of view you do it to just throw gas on a fire.

    Others pop in to do just what you said insult, Pinky does it on a regular basis. Yet where is your outrage?

    If your going to comment on what others are talking about try doing it by expressing your point of view. It would be a nice change.

  23. Kate

    In Petr case this time neither do I. He stayed on topic and added his own point of view.

  24. Instead of all just arguing and blaming why not read David’s post again and reflect on it and then for added measure read and follow the good advice in the first (and I must say brilliantly written :) subsequent comment on this thread.

  25. //If you disagree with someone try actually putting up an argument for your points of view. Instead of just insulting the person making the comment.//

    Troll, there is nobody here more guilty of gratuitious personal insults, name-calling and telling lies about others than you.

    On just one thread yesterday you called mahons “a fool”, “a hysterical fanatic” and “scum”, and called another other commenter “a scumbag” and a racist.
    You also claimed they had said things that they very definitely did not.

    You can play the innocent wee lamb number now, but we all know what a foul mouth and mind you have.
    If David wants to know who’s most responsible for destroying most threads, he need look no further than you.

  26. that is the problem Colm

    Get as heated and as passionate as you like about the topic but not about the other people talking.

    Certain people can’t, even on this thread.

  27. Noel

    I am not playing the wee Lamb on anything. Nor have I ever lied about anyone.

    Mahons and I have a long relationship. We do trade insults, much which pass over your head. Yet both of us engage with each other. If it gets to heated we back off.

    I rail against him because I respect him. He is a Lawyer and even though I take great pleasure in chastising that profession I goad him because I know that when he applies his training he can be the best debater on this site. He is after all trained in the art of arguing logically.

    I have asked you before and I do so again Please do not engage with me. You are childish and thin skinned.

    Look at your comment on here. Do you engage in what has transpired between you and I? NO. You try to bring arguments with others into your comment as examples, yet you do it poorly.

    If you want to address why I called someone a racist why not ask why I feel that way?

    You are also selective in your outrage. You not only don’t point out others behavior when it is directed at me, and I don’t want you to. I can deal with my fetters myself, but your outrage is selective and therefore false.

    As I said, Please don’t engage with me, mind your own business, and let others mind theirs.

  28. This post is about behaving like adults and not throwing around reckless insults, so Noel is perfectly on topic.

  29. Also Troll — Noel is right. When people simply disagree with you you lash out.

    Example:

    You are Blinded by your religion to ever respond to your comments again.
    Stay off my posts. Your Fanatical religous opinion is not welcome and will not be tolerated.

    That was to the – very reasonable and polite – Peter.

    That’s mild, of course. This one’s a bit more typical:

    “Noel only you as a terrorist supporter… Besides being an idiot and an ass your a fool… if you were here I would be punching you in the face. Do you get me? and I mean it.”

  30. Petr

    you just did exactly the point that I said you do. You pull things out of context and edited from other posts.

    Both those pieces you bring are edited out of comments on another thread, both are partial remarks and both add nothing from you except to try and pour gas on a fire.

    Lets look at the full context of just my comment on a post that had 139 comments.

    Grizzly Mama / Troll, on May 2nd, 2010 at 11:11 PM Said:

    Noel only you as a terrorist supporter can find any form of me implying that I would feel any kind of wonderfull on this subject.

    Besides being an idiot and an ass your a fool.

    Al Queada Heiarchy doesn’t mean shit to us the countries we view as supporters of this type of warfare will be attacked. It is not a wish of mine it is the way we deal with threats.

    You end a threat by destroying the sources, you would think that if you learned anything about us from Iraq you would have learned that.

    Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, but they were a terrorist state, Iran would have also been bombed in Bush’s last year if the Traitor Senator Leahy didn’t have a false security assesment created and then gave it to the press.

    You live in a fantasy world and if you say one more time that I think the exploding of a car bomb in the US would be wonderfull I will delete everyone of your comments untill David bans me from the site if you were here I would be punching you in the face.

    Do you get me? and I mean it.

    Puts my words in a different view, doesn’t it?

    Noel was saying that I think the exploding of a car bomb in the US would be wonderfull and he said it more than once.

    So now explain why you edited the comment, why you took it out of context?

    You can try to make this about me, a lot of you do.

    I have disengaged from most of you. I ask that those that feel I am the problem Please Please disengage.

    If you choose not to own your own shit.

    Petr you committed Liable. You added nothing except an example of how slimy you are.

  31. Puts my words in a different view, doesn’t it?

    No, it doesn’t. He shows you gratuitously insulting Noel.

    So now explain why you edited the comment, why you took it out of context?

    It’s not out of context. We’re discussing on this thread the problem of people not behaving like adults and I gave an example. I also provided a link if people want to read the whole comment or thread.

    You can try to make this about me, a lot of you do.

    In fact you haven’t realised yet, it is about you! You are the worst offender when it comes to this stuff.

    Petr you committed Liable.

    If you mean libel, no I didn’t.

    You added nothing except an example of how slimy you are

    More insult. You can’t stop!

  32. By the way, Troll, when you see three dots [...] that means there’s a break in the quote.

  33. no Petr you Lied by selectively editing together words. You provide a perfect example of the problem while proving my point that you really have nothing of your own to add except to try and act as a provocateur.

    You’re not cute or smart or smug. You do nothing except try to fan flames with lies.

  34. No I didn’t lie. I quoted you and I indicated that the quote broke in places by putting in three dots. I’m not trying to provoke. This post holds good advice for you, others rarely engage in gratuitous insult. You are the main problem here, that’s the point I’m making.

    Note also that I haven’t insulted you on this thread, while you have insulted me. You make my point for me.

  35. It is obvious that truth and reality mean nothing to a large segment of our commentators.

    I ask that if you have nothing to say of your own, or about what is being discussed on any of my threads please stay off. There is one poster whose threads I already do not comment on.

    If any of the other “Posters” don’t want me on their threads please state so.

    However if the host of a thread has NOT asked me to stay off I won’t. If you haven’t noticed I have disengaged from 2 of the people that are only able to leave insulting comments. I will continue to add to the list of those that no matter what they say is ignored.

    Up till now it has been just two. Today it grows to 4 even if you attack me I will not respond. I ask all of you who that I bring nothing but bile to your throats. Do not comment to me, on my thread or any thread. If your comment is not directed at me I will not engage with you.

    Take the high road, behave yourself.

  36. Take the high road he said.

  37. Kateyo,

    I can’t see how you see that as shouting. David raised his voice after the second time of being interrupted to be heard. It wasn’t shouting and neither was it heated. The lady then made the scurrilous claim that David goes from 0-90 and gets heated and she wouldn’t like to be around him disciplining a child, then asks if he has children. Implying he is some kind of child abuser. It was then that Nolan interjected and asked for personal insults to stop, effectively telling the woman off! I wonder if you hear it as shouting as it is convenient for the pointless dig you wanted to have at David.

    As to the mandate. Is it only elected people with an opinion, in your view, who are allowed to appear on Nolan? If so that is totalitarian rubbish.

    It seems ironic on a post David has put up, more or less saying he is fed up with people backbiting and making unkind remarks, you choose to come and sneer at him in a distasteful way. Something you seem to do quite frequently at the moment.

    I, for one, am pleased there is someone who will stand up to the posturing person that is Nolan and the biased BBC, with its biased audience which it has during working hours. There aren’t many people I imagine the BBC could find brave enough to face that prospect. However, if you think you could provide a better argument to their leftist views, why don’t you apply?

  38. Marilyn — David argued his point well I thought. But if the BBC was so biased it wouldn’t have David on so often.

  39. As a regular reader and casual commenter, I know who exactly not to engage with on this site. Cut and thrust debate can be invigorating but ugliness is always ugly.

    As a contributor from the sidelines I understand that my opinion holds no weight but as a relative neutral it might be constructive in some way.

  40. To address a point that a number, from all sides of all political issues here, are thinking

    I propose that the honorable gentleman under discussion leave the website.

    If he remains, the best case scenario is that the site remains a series of bantustans where people are banned on some threads and are boycotting others. This is highly constricting of all conversation.

    Any other proposal to remedy things – of this individual or that other recusing themselves permanently, will not solve the problem, and will only move it around. If it will help, I’ll leave right now, and will never complain.

    In business, sports, or anything else, if something is clearly not working, you stop doing it.

    I think that his time is best spent elsewhere.

    I have seen other blogs, including nonpolitical ones, taken down over things like this. It will be well within David’s rights to take this thing down now.

    I would not want that to happen – there is much that is good here – but he may want to exercise the privilege of a bartender to escort an unruly customer, one who bothers the others and who changes the demeanor of the entire room, to go home.

    Many of use have been bad – I had some huge nasty rows with some – but most have learned to interact much better over time. Our friend won’t change, can’t change.

    I’d wish him well in all his future endeavors.

  41. If you want to address why I called someone a racist why not ask why I feel that way?

    Is being called a ‘racist’ supposed to be an insult?

  42. you know on this I will engage Phantom. Only once.

    I have chosen to ignore you and your comments. I broke that once over the past month I find it important that I do so now.

    You want me to leave? That will not happen.

    You are the one obsessed with me. You repeatedly throw comments out about me that I have not responded to nor will I. You did an entire hate post on me. Something that no one has ever done on another poster.

    Now your asking me to leave? Go to hell.

    No one is banned from any threads but yours. I have “asked” those that can’t add civilly to not add at all. Pinky still does, but she is not deleted nor is she responded to.

    Yet you can’t help but spew your hate in my direction.

    Stop obsessing about me, stop commenting about me, stop involving me in the bile and hate that is your existence.

    Your a sad man. Keep your hate to yourself. Go seek help.

  43. Allan I guess so I was told I insulted someone by saying it.

  44. No one here is banned from my posts, even you. Even that you got wrong.

    I will speak as I wish.

    There is no hate, only clear eyed observation.

  45. Is being called a ‘racist’ supposed to be an insult?

    Yes.

  46. They are free to comment on any post by me – which are few – but there will be a three strikes you’re out rule. Call someone a ” fucking asshole “, that’s strike one. Call someone an ” inbred ” , that’s strike two. Make a comment hoping that children get blown up, that’s strike three.

    These are rules of engagement that most have a very easy time complying with. It comes in the ” decent human being ” instruction manual.

    From the Zombie Post
    http://www.atangledweb.org/?p=38984

  47. Troll – I am described as ‘racist’ and when I asked what it actually meant, it included such descriptions as ‘wanting Britain to be white’. Well of course I want Britain (and all countries of Europe) to be white just as I want China to be Chinese, India to be Indian and Africa to be African.

    There is no hate, only clear eyed observation.

    Correction – There is no hate, only immediate disengagement when being thrashed.

  48. I was unaware that you were the referee.

    The new Tim Donaghy!

  49. I don’t wnat anyone to leave, I just want everyone to genuinely respect David’s wishes, and for pities sake, no-one should be e mailing him to complain about anyone else. Fight your battles here, civilly or don’t fight a battle if you don’t want to engage with someone.

  50. I can’t see how you see that as shouting. David raised his voice after the second time of being interrupted to be heard. It wasn’t shouting and neither was it heated

    if you raise your voice you are shouting. He was heard perfectly, he just wanted silence when he was talking, like he did when he debated bumper, ‘listen when i speak’, its a conversation not a platform for someone with no mandate. If he wasn’t heated why didn’t he challenge it when it was said?

    As to the mandate. Is it only elected people with an opinion, in your view, who are allowed to appear on Nolan? If so that is totalitarian rubbish.

    No. But then again his appearances on nolan are too frequent, there are other people out there with right wing views such as his, its simply lazy to ask the one person to represent the one view to say that the show is complying with bbc balance rules. It’s not balance if its the one right winger all the time. Use a few others is all I’m saying.

    I, for one, am pleased there is someone who will stand up to the posturing person that is Nolan and the biased BBC,

    What utter rubbish, david vance doesn’t stand up to nolan nor complain about bbc bias on there, if so give one example of him doing it. No, he goes on for the exposure and the dough ;) Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn’t make the beeb biased.

    with its biased audience which it has during working hours

    didn’t hear david complain about the bias that gerry kelly endured on a show filled with a completely one sided audience of fleg supporters. Is that not bias on david vances part?

    There aren’t many people I imagine the BBC could find brave enough to face that prospect.

    They managed alright until now, didn’t they?

    However, if you think you could provide a better argument to their leftist views, why don’t you apply?

    I’m not a right winger but you could try ;)

    you choose to come and sneer at him in a distasteful way

    Actually i wasn’t sneering. I’m perfectly entitled to comment on a public appearance that we all pay for. Or is it only you can do that, which you’ve done here with a different point of view to me, but you still expressed an opinion, as dv does when he criticises the bbc and they still pay him taxpayers money to go on. :)

    Do try harder..!! ;)

  51. This thread isn’t about David’s TV appearances, but the (mis)behaviour or commenters on ATW.

  52. Colm, your initial thoughts were brilliant, it would be lovely if they were taken to mind by one and all, but as you can see from the comment stream, certain folks can’t seem to take a hint even when it’s spoken out loud, on the front page by the site owner.

    David doesn’t follow most threads anymore, he appears to be a busy man with many varied interests, so how would he know if someone was running amok on atw, using their keyboard as verbal flamethrower in nearly every exchange with other visitors and fellow contributors unless someone points it out?

    If our good friend doesn’t want to know or deal with it in the future, so be it, the place is his to do with as he pleases.

  53. Troll –

    You managed to insult Petr Tarasov (“slimy”) and Phantom (“sad”) on this thread.

    Do yourself and everyone a favour right now: scroll to the top and read DV’s words again. Don’t just look along the sentences. Read and understand what he’s saying.

    And no-one’s interested in your problem with Phantom.

  54. NPD comes to mind, Pete.

  55. Kateyo

    Try harder? Nah, youre not worth it. I just saw your nasty comments regarding the radio show and wanted to give a more honest and positive opinion about it. You came onto a thread about people’s unkind comments and behaviour and left a snidey comment which you tried to pass off as humour. Maybe it’s you who needs to try harder and follow David’s wishes as to how he would like his site to run, given that he does it on a voluntary basis.

  56. I will endeavor to be like Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce whose great heartbreaking speech “I will fight no more forever” is the sentiment perhaps best taken up by all. This is not to say I won’t disagree and point out illogic, foolishness and falsehood with my usual zest and flair, but I will try to do so with humor instead of profane exasperation.

  57. but I will try to do so with humor instead of profane exasperation.

    well watch out for marilyn patrol…;)

  58. Well played Marilyn.

  59. ha ha…lol

  60. Pete Moore, on February 5th, 2013 at 9:15 PM Said:

    Troll –

    You managed to insult Petr Tarasov (“slimy”) and Phantom (“sad”) on this thread.

    Do yourself and everyone a favour right now: scroll to the top and read DV’s words again. Don’t just look along the sentences. Read and understand what he’s saying.

    And no-one’s interested in your problem with Phantom.

    The two points above are not insults they are observations. What words are now on your list that I and it seems to be only I may not utter?

    Please provide the list as that I may not utter such viscous insults like “sad”

    and your probably right no one is interested in his behavior or their own, only mine. Tsk Tsk

    You’re all such noble creatures hindered by the leper that Trolls amongst you popping up and eating the children as they cross my bridge…. boo hooo hooo

    as I sad don’t engage.

    and Mr Moore please provide that list of words that cause offense when only uttered by me.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.