I had hoped to avoid this course of action, but I am now locking this thread.

Much of what has been written here has been constructive debate, articulately rendered. It is deeply disappointing to discover further insults being levelled at other forums users, and that, given that the copy and pasting of entire articles from other sources represents a potential breach of copyright, there has been a need to moderate this thread even further.

I must point out, at this juncture, that, no matter who you believe another member may be; no matter what you may believe their intentions to be; no matter how justified you believe that you are, the exchange of insults is not what this forum is designed for.

It is perfectly possible to compose replies that convey your meaning without constituting a breach of our Terms of Service.

I would ask you all to remember that persistent failure to adhere to the rules of play will result in the deletion of your member name.

Kind Regards

Community Editor

I'm doing my best to support you defiant. Edited to remove breach of copyright Community Editor

 Sorry defiant and community for different reasons.

Lol thanks i'll take a pew, make sure to sit a bit out of the firing line though...!

Conmankiller, can I throw in some popcorn?!

Of course, don't worry - worried, your more than welcome.

Conmankiller, can I throw in some popcorn?!

Will do Ck.Hey if we ever differ do you think it would descend to some of the above? I think not.Off to watch Sleep Clinic on the BBC.....lol....quite appropriate !!

backfoot:Fair enough!! I tried. Jeez.

Why are you getting so upset it's not a cause you feel strongly about is it ? and it's not someone you know trying this on :(   I don't mind it all because I know his game you see it's not the first time we have both met he's dropped a few hints now and not just as saopaulo

 

backfoot:Fair enough!! I tried. Jeez.

: - ) Grab a cold one and come join me, on the fence : - )

I don't know what some of your stuff means defiant but I'll try again to show you we are on the same side. On the 10 Downing St website there is a petition in favour of scrapping the BBC licence fee and you can sign it online - petitions.pm.gov.uk/bbctax 

backfoot:Fair enough!! I tried. Jeez.

Fair enough!! I tried. Jeez.

backfoot:Saupaulo made in a first posting some reasoned comments which come across as a thoughtful position.

Yes I suspect I know who that really is but this is who he's pretending to be

http://tvlicenceresistance.info/index.php/topic,306.0.html

 It's Sao Paulo too not saopaulo 

backfoot:  A BBC employee is entitled to have a say even if you don't approve of it. If you have a different opinion then fine, counter it but it does come across to me as a neutral, as being completely OTT towards the poster.

You'll note one thing about them and that is they make everything they say sound like a fact when it's nothing more than an opinion.  They do things like this too so they can cause trouble on a thread and like this guy register as someone their not

backfoot:  The other spat on the thread was similar where two people personalised it

Something tells me two people are in fact one if you know what I mean 

Once he gets something brewing he'll go away and only come back to stoke the fire

Defiant,

If you look at one of the earliest postings on this thread,you will see I took a stance which supported your own overall view.

That being said,your debating style is very aggressive and quickly becomes personalised.Saupaulo made in a first posting some reasoned comments which come across as a thoughtful position.Yet you have quickly turned to attack this as being an argument of either a previous poster here, or from another forum or from a BBC employee.Does it matter? A BBC employee is entitled to have a say even if you don't approve of it. If you have a different opinion then fine, counter it but it does come across to me as a neutral, as being completely OTT towards the poster. The other spat on the thread was similar where two people personalised it against each other rather than the argument itself.The thread was moderated quite rightly in accord with the written conditions.

I hope you will see this as trying to be positive towards good debate.

saopaulo:

A personal view from Freepress contributor, Robert Henderson.

2/7/05: I have always had objections to the licence fee. It is a poll tax enforced by an extensive and expensive bureaucracy armed with extensive powers to harass the public. The practical consequences of the fee are the poor subsidizing the rich and thousands of the poor, mostly women, brought before the courts each year for non-payment of the licence fee.

I think this is a very powerful argument against the licence fee. What do you think defiant?

 

I think "subsidizing" is American spelling but the guy is on the right track.  Most of the people who agree with the TV Licence are selfish people who expect everything to be given them on a plate while others suffer

 

A personal view from Freepress contributor, Robert Henderson.

2/7/05: I have always had objections to the licence fee. It is a poll tax enforced by an extensive and expensive bureaucracy armed with extensive powers to harass the public. The practical consequences of the fee are the poor subsidizing the rich and thousands of the poor, mostly women, brought before the courts each year for non-payment of the licence fee.

 

I think this is a very powerful argument against the licence fee. What do you think defiant?