|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Silbury Hill » Silbury updates |
This topic is locked
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Paulus 769 posts |
Jul 31, 2007, 11:46
|
||
|
Hi Little One! Littlestone wrote: Mr Carr, you have posted a couple of dozen comments on this thread, and perhaps another dozen comments elsewhere on TMA (including your somewhat irrelevant thread of Stonehenge at Live Earth, where you merely wittered to yourself). In all, your comments seem to comprise of taking issue with what others post and little else. Hmmm....forgive me, but countless times you do exactly the same thing as what you are wittering on about here! But you, of course, exceed with considerable greatness, as you've been wittering to yourself and your little group for many more years. Might I ask: is the TMA forum intended to be one where you and your hierarchy rule the roost, or can others come in and disagree without being pushed aside and/or insulted? Littlestone wrote: Nigel Swift (and others at Heritage Action and on TMA) have campaigned tirelessly over many years for the right course of action to be taken with regard to the conservation of Silbury while minor irritants such as yourself do little other than try to subvert threads, and the incompetents at English Heritage continue to flap from one disastrous course of inaction to another. Quite right. But the overbearing "I am right - you are wrong!" attitude is imbued within much of the communications at times. Many times, other folk try to point this out, only to be told that they don't know what they're on about, or to shut up, or be insulted, or god-knows-what other juvenile psychologies. However, if the TMA newcomer wholeheartedly agrees to thee, there's the communal licking-of-the-arse literacy: i.e., "ooh, thank you"; "ooh, you're such a nice person", etc. It's like listening to politicians rubbing each other up! Honestly. Now I know you're gonna take this as another of Paulus' insults, but I don't mean it in that way at all. If I was as bad as that, I'd have started up a thread message, much as you have, called summat like, 'Mr Lilltestone' or something - and then started to make derogatory or insulting remarks on a person's contribuitions to TMA. Littlestone wrote: If I may ask you a question Mr Carr: do you actually have something of megalithic interest to contribute to TMA or are you just here to irritate those of us who do? The same has gotta be said of you LittleOne. You talk and talk...and talk...and talk. But, unless others talk on your wavelength, your ego deems it of little worth. Self-aggrandizement comes to mind - regularly. ...Oh and one final thing: howzabout keeping much of the politics of HA on HA's website, so allowing many other ideas and subjects more room to be discussed on TMA forums; or has TMA become a political extension of HA? Cheers - Paulus x
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jul 31, 2007, 13:04
|
||
|
In a nutshell, Paulus, where, in that long diatribe is there any reference to Silbury? Where, on this thread, have you made a contribution to the issues under discussion? And your statement that "...howzabout keeping much of the politics of HA on HA's website, so allowing many other ideas and subjects more room to be discussed on TMA forums..." For heaven's sake, 'more room' - the TMA Forum is big enough for anyone to contribute anything they want as long as it's of megalithic interest. If a thread doesn't interest you then don't read it, start one of your own. Having said that, the seriousness of the issues being discussed here are far more important than individual personalities. People either have something of value to contribute to the thread or they do not.
|
|||
|
Paulus 769 posts |
Jul 31, 2007, 13:26
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: Having said that, the seriousness of the issues being discussed here are far more important than individual personalities. People either have something of value to contribute to the thread or they do not. It was YOU who started the personal bit here - not anyone else. YOU started a bit entitled 'Mr Carr' - did you not? YOU started insulting him personally, or decrying his input. Or have I misunderstood you? YOU - no one else. It's a part of what you do - reasonably regularly LittleOne. WHY???
|
|||
|
Paulus 769 posts |
Jul 31, 2007, 13:42
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: In a nutshell, Paulus, where, in that long diatribe is there any reference to Silbury? Where, on this thread, have you made a contribution to the issues under discussion? ...and, of course, what's starting a thread about insult someone got to do with Silbury aswell? Innit weird how, if someone points out to you your prattish behaviour (dunno if it's genetic or if you practice!), it suddenly becomes "diatribe." What curious event in your life disabled your ability to evolve past the dim-witted teenager, still uttering (in various verbal forms) pre-individuation nonchalance?
|
|||
goffik 3926 posts |
Jul 31, 2007, 13:47
|
||
|
Oi! Stobbit you two - I'll knock yer heads together! ;o) G x
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jul 31, 2007, 13:56
|
||
|
You're very good at asking questions Paulus and very bad at answering them (re: the questions to you in my last post). Perhaps you should cool down a bit, and if you read the whole of this thread you'll see why so many people both here and on other threads have become irritated with Mr Carr (who actually hasn't imputed anything). And on the personal insult theme; this from your own profile, "And please don't get any ideas about the modern New-Age shamans [or pagan-druids for that matter] being owt like the real thing, cos they're not: they're shams not shamans!)"* Shams not shamans? Do you not consider that may be insulting to the pagans and druids who post on TMA? Time to take a long hard look at yourself Paulus. Meanwhile, please feel free to post on this thread, but unless you and Mr Carr have anything of worth to contribute to it don't expect any further replies from me. * http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/user/1582
|
|||
|
Paulus 769 posts |
Jul 31, 2007, 14:11
|
||
|
Hi Goff! goffik wrote: Oi! Stobbit you two - I'll knock yer heads together! ;o) G x Sorry to seemingly start an argument, but it truly truly puzzles me why on earth Littlestone keeps doing what he does. It's damn obvious that there's some unresloved psychological problem he has with people that disagree with him, but why keep bringing such a blatantly visible ingredient up here on TMA for all to see? The doods egomania is blatant, but I didn't think he was so dim as to constantly show off his other unresolved issues aswell. I don't mind anyone throwing insults at me, that's OK (gimme all y' got!) - but I get sick of him throwing it at other people. It's simply what a bully does - and then, sometimes, other weaklings come along and join in with him. I'd just rather we got rid of such psychologies. But, whilst it keeps emerging, I'll keep emerging and ask if they can keep such prattish behaviour aside (be it him or anyone else). Probably fighting a losing battle though... Cheers - Paulus
|
|||
|
goffik 3926 posts |
Jul 31, 2007, 14:20
|
||
|
Hi Paulus! I'm not so sure that's the way it is... Y'see, the way I see it is that we get quite a few antagonists appearing on this site (quite a few who have been previously banned and return under rather flimsy pseudonyms!) - their sole intention seems to be to create bad feeling among other contributors... I don't think LS is out of order at all. In fact he probably speaks for quite a few of us (who, rather sensibly, just avoid eye-contact with aforementioned idiots! ;o) )! It's these trolls that so frequently appear that keep many of us from posting as much as we'd like to... Hope all is good at your end! G x
|
|||
|
Paulus 769 posts |
Jul 31, 2007, 14:21
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: You're very good at asking questions Paulus and very bad at answering them (re: the questions to you in my last post). Perhaps you should cool down a bit, and if you read the whole of this thread you'll see why so many people both here and on other threads have become irritated with Mr Carr (who actually hasn't imputed anything). And on the personal insult theme; this from your own profile, "And please don't get any ideas about the modern New-Age shamans [or pagan-druids for that matter] being owt like the real thing, cos they're not: they're shams not shamans!)"* Shams not shamans? Do you not consider that may be insulting to the pagans and druids who post on TMA? Time to take a long hard look at yourself Paulus. Meanwhile, please feel free to post on this thread, but unless you and Mr Carr have anything of worth to contribute to it don't expect any further replies from me. * http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/user/1582 OOOOOOOHH!!! Doing the old - "I'm not gonna talk to you anymore" stampy-footy lark, ey!? How blessed am I!? Please don't think that I'll give you the same ignorance LittleOne. My 'Personal Profile' is my personal profile. It tells people about me, blatantly, up-front, as I am. If that insults people, I'm sure they can have their own opinions as to "He's a pratt, dickhead, arrogant...whatever." I've no problems with that at all. But at least people know where they stand and they know they'll get straight talking from me. YOU, of all people, have decried just about everything I mention in my profile over the last few years, on personal levels, with various people. And you know you have. New-Agers, leys - even scientific rationale which doesn't accord with your limited view of reality. Pot calling t' kettle, etc. You're an egomaniac - it's quite obvious, hiding behind the false image of Mr Nice Guy. At least admit it!
|
|||
|
Paulus 769 posts |
Jul 31, 2007, 14:40
|
||
|
Hi Goff - goffik wrote: Hi Paulus! I'm not so sure that's the way it is... Y'see, the way I see it is that we get quite a few antagonists appearing on this site (quite a few who have been previously banned and return under rather flimsy pseudonyms!) - their sole intention seems to be to create bad feeling among other contributors... Hmmm...perhaps it's a northern thing then...? (or izzit just me?) I s'ppose I've gotta ask: what's the real problem with antagonists? Some of them can actually make you think, differently. And that's gotta be good. Some evoke the old emotional 'AAARRRGGHHHH!!! - F**k off" exclamation, obviously - but that's summat I think, if we're emotionally and psychologically strong - or rather, 'adult' - we can deal with. Otherwise there's the potential for something to become little other than a clique, where alternate views or disagreements are fled from, instead of musing over. And I know that there are different educational and evolutional levels to each and everything we explore, but in occluding some we reinforce the clique mentality - and that's gotta be wrong, surely? goffik wrote: I don't think LS is out of order at all. In fact he probably speaks for quite a few of us (who, rather sensibly, just avoid eye-contact with aforementioned idiots! ;o) )! Echoing what I've just said: there are also quite a few TMA people I've spoke to (via emails and first-person) who think the contrary. Occasionally they emerge and make the passing remark that they can't be arsed anymore, but they're simply not into having to make any effort into trying to widen or challenge the parameters. They can't be bothered arguing (though I think the word used by the forum folk would be 'discussiuon' - though it turns out to be something very different many times). Surely that's bad innit? Cliquey? I spent 6 months thinking "Fuck TMA" for such reasons (but my arrogance brought me back!) - and there are notably others who have stopped adding sites similarly. Not good. I think we need to widen a bit more tolerance in disagreement - wot d' y' think? Howzabout - those who don't like people disagreeing with them should piss off; and those who enjoy a good argument encouraged!? Or, perhaps, widen the forum into differing subject matters, as elsewhere? We could have HA section, where the politics of megaliths and those really into that can waffle and argue to their heart's content. A NewAge section where ley-hunters and energy-liners can dowse their little ways? Pure archaeomancers, where the nitty-gritty of archaeology is reeled over? A Myth & Folklore section, for the mythographers and fairy-hunters among us? We've just entered Europe after all - howzabout widening the forums aswell...? goffik wrote: Hope all is good at your end! G x Cheers for asking! VERY good at this end for various reasons. How's your Well's wbsite coming alongby the way? Any further development? Cheers - Paul
|
| Pages: 67 – [ Previous | 1 … 60 61 62 63 64 65 | Next ] | This topic is locked |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
