Heads-up to anyone who uses the same password everywhere

[Charlie Reams]

Derek Hazell has modified his popular Gandiseeg forum in such a way that he can see everyone's password. He used this ability to get Kirk's password and then handed that on to Richard Brittain, who used it to log into Kirk's personal email, c4c and apterous accounts. So if you have a Gandiseeg account and you used the same password elsewhere, you should probably change it on the other sites.

But remember! Derek still has the moral high ground because one time I said Jeff Clayton is boring and it wasn't to his face.

[Howard Somerset]

Derek Hazell has modified his popular Gandiseeg forum in such a way that he can see everyone's password. He used this ability to get Kirk's password and then handed that on to Richard Brittain, who used it to log into Kirk's personal email, c4c and apterous accounts.

If that's true, then he's as despicable as RB, and my respect for him will have plummeted.

[Jon Corby]

How do you know this Charlie?

[Charlie Reams]

How do you know this Charlie?

Psychic skills.

Derek still has an account here so he's welcome to dispute the claim if it's untrue.

[Ian Dent]

What a cock.

Gandiseeg is offline now though.

[Jon Corby]

Derek still has an account here so he's welcome to dispute the claim if it's untrue.

Or he could just use Kirk's.

[Howard Somerset]

Derek still has an account here so he's welcome to dispute the claim if it's untrue.

Or he could just use Kirk's.

Or probably a lot of other people's.

[Jon O'Neill]

Just to clarify what happened here, RB (who is 100% responsible) relayed how he did it to me, I relayed that on to Charlie so he was aware, and between the two relayings, something was misinterpreted. RB is an admin at Gandiseeg, he obtained the encrypted passwords and hacked them. So the suggestion that Derek has modified the forum to be able to see passwords, or that he passed it on to RB, is not true. But definitely do not use the same password on Gandiseeg as you have anywhere else.

[David Williams]

RB is an admin at Gandiseeg, he obtained the encrypted passwords and hacked them.

Would such a thing be possible here?

[John Bosley]

Sounds like approaching illegal here.

[Charlie Reams]

RB is an admin at Gandiseeg, he obtained the encrypted passwords and hacked them.

I don't really believe this. Admins don't have access to the encrypted passwords; you need access to the database directly, which only Derek would have. It's possible that Derek passed only the encrypted versions to Richard, so you can decide whether that's any more respectable. (And if Derek shared database access with other people then that's just as bad.)

Would such a thing be possible here?

Theoretically yes. The passwords are stored in encrypted form in the database, so even if I were to look through the database (which obviously you shouldn't trust me not to do) I would only be able to see those, so I wouldn't be able to log into any other site as you. However it is possible to conduct a brute-force attack by trying huge numbers of candidate passwords and seeing whether they match the encrypted version (and that comparison has to possible or there would be no way to log in). Of course if you have a good password then it won't be in any list of likely candidates, so I'd probably never get it. And in general you shouldn't trust me when I say that the passwords are stored encrypted etc. So best of all would be to use a different password on every site you care about, and then you don't have to trust me at all, so I would encourage you to do that.

Sounds like approaching illegal here.

Oh that happened a while ago. If Kirk were interested in pursuing the case, Richard and possibly Derek would certainly be looking at fines or jail time.

[Ian Fitzpatrick]

If Kirk were interested in pursuing the case, Richard and possibly Derek would certainly be looking at fines or jail time.

Then I think he should!

[Jon Corby]

Sounds like approaching illegal here.

Oh that happened a while ago. If Kirk were interested in pursuing the case, Richard and possibly Derek would certainly be looking at fines or jail time.

David Williams didn't write this.

[David Williams]

Sounds like approaching illegal here.

Oh that happened a while ago. If Kirk were interested in pursuing the case, Richard and possibly Derek would certainly be looking at fines or jail time.

David Williams didn't write this.

Yes I did. I hacked into John Bosley's account.

[Jon Corby]

David Williams didn't write this.

Yes I did. I hacked into John Bosley's account.

Haha, I went to do a similar comedy reply and that was the only reason I noticed that you had changed me to Richard Brittain! Nice one.

[Lesley Hines]

Just to clarify Jono's response, RB is 100% responsible, all on his jack. He is a dba as he set up the database stuff originally. It's very common to have more than 1 dba anyway (e.g. there were 12 dbas in the regional team at my last IT employer with responsibility for ~250 machines, all with unlimited admin access), but it's not normally abused in such a horrible way. All this was done without Derek's prior knowledge (he assures me) or approval. Derek doesn't know how to extract the passwords from the database in the first place, and didn't.

[Ben Hunter]

Just to clarify Jono's response, RB is 100% responsible, all on his jack. He is a dba as he set up the database stuff originally. It's very common to have more than 1 dba anyway (e.g. there were 12 dbas in the regional team at my last IT employer with responsibility for ~250 machines, all with unlimited admin access), but it's not normally abused in such a horrible way. All this was done without Derek's prior knowledge (he assures me) or approval. Derek doesn't know how to extract the passwords from the database in the first place, and didn't.

If we paint an unflattering enough picture of Derek's IT skills he'll eventually crack and admit to it all and show us exactly how he exploited collision vulnerabilities in the forum software's compression functions before utilising his prodigious social engineering talents to convince Richard Brittain to be his fall guy.

[Jon Corby]

Just to clarify Jono's response, RB is 100% responsible, all on his jack. He is a dba as he set up the database stuff originally. It's very common to have more than 1 dba anyway (e.g. there were 12 dbas in the regional team at my last IT employer with responsibility for ~250 machines, all with unlimited admin access), but it's not normally abused in such a horrible way. All this was done without Derek's prior knowledge (he assures me) or approval. Derek doesn't know how to extract the passwords from the database in the first place, and didn't.

He was pretty tardy in taking action though too. Not that I really give the slightest fuck personally, but let's not overdo the 'innocence' here.

[Lesley Hines]

He was pretty tardy in taking action though too. Not that I really give the slightest fuck personally, but let's not overdo the 'innocence' here.

AFAIK his keyboard was broken, and by the time it was repaired the damage was done. I'm not the Derek Defence League, I just think it's harsh him getting the blame for something Richard did.

[Jon Corby]

He was pretty tardy in taking action though too. Not that I really give the slightest fuck personally, but let's not overdo the 'innocence' here.

AFAIK his keyboard was broken, and by the time it was repaired the damage was done. I'm not the Derek Defence League, I just think it's harsh him getting the blame for something Richard did.

Yeah, but he managed to post comments at the end of most of the threads. I'm not saying he's as responsible as Richard, but well, to repeat - let's not overdo the 'innocence' thing.

[Gavin Chipper]

Just to clarify Jono's response, RB is 100% responsible, all on his jack. He is a dba as he set up the database stuff originally. It's very common to have more than 1 dba anyway (e.g. there were 12 dbas in the regional team at my last IT employer with responsibility for ~250 machines, all with unlimited admin access), but it's not normally abused in such a horrible way. All this was done without Derek's prior knowledge (he assures me) or approval. Derek doesn't know how to extract the passwords from the database in the first place, and didn't.

He was pretty tardy in taking action though too. Not that I really give the slightest fuck personally, but let's not overdo the 'innocence' here.

Don't really see the issue here. The damage was done when Richard posted what he did. Derek could have deleted it all (as could I as it happens) but it had already been seen and arguably it would have been worse if half the people were commenting on stuff that half the people couldn't see. And as far as I know, no request was made to delete it. (And The News of The World didn't have to remove the Max Moseley video because it was already too widespread.)

And I have to say I'm disappointed with your presumptuous attitude regarding Derek, Charlie.

[Ben Wilson]

Derek could have deleted it all (as could I as it happens) but it had already been seen and arguably it would have been worse if half the people were commenting on stuff that half the people couldn't see.

Bit of a flawed argument. If someone posts a link to tubgirl here I'm not going to leave it intact simply because everyone's seen it once and precisely once. In this instance you set out to limit the damage that's been done. A responsible admin does that by deleting said offensive material rather than drawing attention to it. I'm not saying Derek is to blame for the debacle- that's 100% RB- but he could have chosen to nip it in the bud and save a lot of people a lot of hassle, and he instead actively chose not to.

[Gavin Chipper]

Derek could have deleted it all (as could I as it happens) but it had already been seen and arguably it would have been worse if half the people were commenting on stuff that half the people couldn't see.

Bit of a flawed argument. If someone posts a link to tubgirl here I'm not going to leave it intact simply because everyone's seen it once and precisely once. In this instance you set out to limit the damage that's been done. A responsible admin does that by deleting said offensive material rather than drawing attention to it. I'm not saying Derek is to blame for the debacle- that's 100% RB- but he could have chosen to nip it in the bud and save a lot of people a lot of hassle, and he instead actively chose not to.

I've no idea what tubgirl is, but I think whether it's best to delete depends on the circumstances.

[Richard Adams]

Surely everyone trusted with a key to this particular door, which had deliberately been left open by RB, has a duty either to close it or to justify their actions?

[Howard Somerset]

Just to clarify Jono's response, RB is 100% responsible, all on his jack. He is a dba as he set up the database stuff originally. It's very common to have more than 1 dba anyway (e.g. there were 12 dbas in the regional team at my last IT employer with responsibility for ~250 machines, all with unlimited admin access), but it's not normally abused in such a horrible way. All this was done without Derek's prior knowledge (he assures me) or approval. Derek doesn't know how to extract the passwords from the database in the first place, and didn't.

He was pretty tardy in taking action though too. Not that I really give the slightest fuck personally, but let's not overdo the 'innocence' here.

As I've already pointed out elsewhere, he was aware of what was going on very soon after RB started publishing the items, and appeared to do nothing for a number of days. Acting responsibly, he'd have closed down the forum many days before he actually did.

[Adam Gillard]

RB

I didn't know Rhys was such an evil mastermind.

[Ian Volante]

I've no idea what tubgirl is

Somebody needs to remedy this. Not me though, tempting as it is.

[Liam Tiernan]

RB

I didn't know Rhys was such an evil mastermind.

Really? Thought it was obvious by now.

[Marc Meakin]

I know I am entering a pot and kettle scenario, but I think Charlie ought to apologise, publicly, to Derek, for the slanderous comments made in his original post.
Derek is only guilty of not killing the topic stone dead,on his forum, but hey (back to pots and kettles) that is hardly henieous
Hang on a minute there is fifty quid gone missing out my paypal accout.......Derek, you bastard

[John Bosley]

I am now David Williams.

[Charlie Reams]

Derek has asked me to clarify that it wasn't him that accessed people's passwords, he just shared database access with someone else who did. So that's alright then!

Edit: 8000!

[Richard Adams]

Yes, it is, for the reasons Lesley states above - unless, of course, Derek knew (or ought reasonably to have known) that RB wasn't to be trusted.

[Marc Meakin]

Derek has asked me to clarify that it wasn't him that accessed people's passwords, he just shared database access with someone else who did. So that's alright then!

If that's your attempt at an apology then you must be Sue S(l)anders

[Charlie Reams]

Yes, it is, for the reasons Lesley states above - unless, of course, Derek knew (or ought reasonably to have known) that RB wasn't to be trusted.

Richard is still an admin on the site so Derek is definitely complicit in this now if he wasn't before.

Derek has asked me to clarify that it wasn't him that accessed people's passwords, he just shared database access with someone else who did. So that's alright then!

If that's your attempt at an apology then you must be Sue S(l)anders

It's not an apology. If Derek wants to split hairs about whether he stole the passwords himself or shared information with someone else which allowed them to steal passwords, that's fine with me. It's his forum, he shared the information that he had been entrusted with. In either case, anyone with a Gandiseeg account should assume that their password has been stolen, and can decide for themselves whether it matters if it was Richard or Derek that did it.

[Marc Meakin]

Yes, it is, for the reasons Lesley states above - unless, of course, Derek knew (or ought reasonably to have known) that RB wasn't to be trusted.

Richard is still an admin on the site so Derek is definitely complicit in this now if he wasn't before.

Derek has asked me to clarify that it wasn't him that accessed people's passwords, he just shared database access with someone else who did. So that's alright then!

If that's your attempt at an apology then you must be Sue S(l)anders

It's not an apology. If Derek wants to split hairs about whether he stole the passwords himself or shared information with someone else which allowed them to steal passwords, that's fine with me. It's his forum, he shared the information that he had been entrusted with. In either case, anyone with a Gandiseeg account should assume that their password has been stolen, and can decide for themselves whether it matters if it was Richard or Derek that did it.

Sue, are you going to COLin next month.

[Oliver Garner]

It's not an apology. If Derek wants to split hairs about whether he stole the passwords himself or shared information with someone else which allowed them to steal passwords, that's fine with me. It's his forum, he shared the information that he had been entrusted with. In either case, anyone with a Gandiseeg account should assume that their password has been stolen, and can decide for themselves whether it matters if it was Richard or Derek that did it.

If this is true, both are equally as culpable IMO.

[Gavin Chipper]

It's not an apology. If Derek wants to split hairs about whether he stole the passwords himself or shared information with someone else which allowed them to steal passwords, that's fine with me. It's his forum, he shared the information that he had been entrusted with. In either case, anyone with a Gandiseeg account should assume that their password has been stolen, and can decide for themselves whether it matters if it was Richard or Derek that did it.

Well it seems that they set it up together and both have access, and he wasn't to know what Richard would do with it. Unless it's automatically bad to have a forum with two people having access to the stuff.

[Charlie Reams]

It's not an apology. If Derek wants to split hairs about whether he stole the passwords himself or shared information with someone else which allowed them to steal passwords, that's fine with me. It's his forum, he shared the information that he had been entrusted with. In either case, anyone with a Gandiseeg account should assume that their password has been stolen, and can decide for themselves whether it matters if it was Richard or Derek that did it.

Well it seems that they set it up together and both have access, and he wasn't to know what Richard would do with it. Unless it's automatically bad to have a forum with two people having access to the stuff.

It's not necessarily bad, although Derek always calls it "my forum" and I know some people would have thought twice about signing up if they knew Richard would have access to their details, given his behaviour in the past. So perhaps it was just bad judgment on Derek's part. But since Richard is still an admin on the site, Derek evidently doesn't think so. As far as I can tell, he's endorsed Richard's illegal actions from when he knew about them until now, and doesn't show any signs of changing his tune.

I know Derek is a bit pathetic and some of you feel obliged to defend him on that basis, but let's be honest here for a moment. I'm happy to believe that Derek didn't know that the passwords could be stolen from the database, given his well-established incompetence. But he certainly knew that Richard had done it as soon as anyone did, and he did nothing to prevent it, or to stop it, or to ameliorate the damage after the fact. He's finally removed Richard's posts from public view today, weeks after anyone concerned had seen them anyway. So let's be honest about the kind of person we're dealing with here.

By the way, I did tell one lie. I said Derek asked me to issue the earlier correction, but he didn't really. He bitched about it on Facebook where I couldn't see it. Behind my back, so to speak. And we all know how horrendous that is, right?

[Richard Adams]

Richard is still an admin on the site so Derek is definitely complicit in this now if he wasn't before.

Is he really? If so, then I've run out of things to say in Derek's defence.

There are some interesting letters in today's Times: one quotes '36 Rules for the Conduct of Life' written in 1740 and awarded to anyone granted the Freedom of the City of London:

"...choose your friends carefully; ignorant, shallow and vicious friends will lead you into foolish and bad habits, while friends known for their integrity and wisdom will stand you in good stead, make you credible and contribute to your own wisdom and virtue."

On the subject of the WikiLeaks, another author writes :

'...it can never be in the public interest to publish private comments and thoughts without the express consent of the person who made them. None of these comments were intended for publication and they should have stayed that way.'

[Gavin Chipper]

It's not necessarily bad, although Derek always calls it "my forum" and I know some people would have thought twice about signing up if they knew Richard would have access to their details, given his behaviour in the past. So perhaps it was just bad judgment on Derek's part. But since Richard is still an admin on the site, Derek evidently doesn't think so. As far as I can tell, he's endorsed Richard's illegal actions from when he knew about them until now, and doesn't show any signs of changing his tune.

I know Derek is a bit pathetic and some of you feel obliged to defend him on that basis, but let's be honest here for a moment. I'm happy to believe that Derek didn't know that the passwords could be stolen from the database, given his well-established incompetence. But he certainly knew that Richard had done it as soon as anyone did, and he did nothing to prevent it, or to stop it, or to ameliorate the damage after the fact. He's finally removed Richard's posts from public view today, weeks after anyone concerned had seen them anyway. So let's be honest about the kind of person we're dealing with here.

By the way, I did tell one lie. I said Derek asked me to issue the earlier correction, but he didn't really. He bitched about it on Facebook where I couldn't see it. Behind my back, so to speak. And we all know how horrendous that is, right?

It's clear you're no fan of Derek but I think using words like "pathetic" and "incompetence" is more just about having a cheap dig than anything else.

I also have some powers on that forum and could have deleted the posts, so you could argue that I'm guilty as well. But it was a tricky situation. I found out about it on here first by reading Chris Davis's thread and then went over to Gandiseeg. I was in two minds about whether deleting the lot was the best thing to do once it was out there and suggested doing so. You might argue that we shouldn't wait to be told, but had you or someone else in the Sanctum made a direct demand that they be deleted they would have gone much more quickly (maybe a demand was made to Derek or Richard but I wasn't aware of it.) But arguably it would have been more awkward with some people knowing and some not and people not knowing who knew, for everyone (including those in The Sanctum).

[David Williams]

On the subject of the WikiLeaks, another author writes :

'...it can never be in the public interest to publish private comments and thoughts without the express consent of the person who made them. None of these comments were intended for publication and they should have stayed that way.'

The next time I overhear the Japanese planning to attack Pearl Harbor I'll be sure to ask them if they mind me passing the information on.

[Marc Meakin]

Sue S(l)anders wrote :By the way, I did tell one lie. I said Derek asked me to issue the earlier correction, but he didn't really. He bitched about it on Facebook where I couldn't see it. Behind my back, so to speak. And we all know how horrendous that is, right

But you did see it evidently and Derek knew you would anyway.

FWIW how culpable are you (Charlie) for all the bitching etc. on the sanctum (which you help set up, I believe)?
And you also silenced ONLY me as a result of the fallout, for which I am bitter.

[Jon O'Neill]

Sue S(l)anders wrote :By the way, I did tell one lie. I said Derek asked me to issue the earlier correction, but he didn't really. He bitched about it on Facebook where I couldn't see it. Behind my back, so to speak. And we all know how horrendous that is, right

But you did see it evidently and Derek knew you would anyway.

FWIW how culpable are you (Charlie) for all the bitching etc. on the sanctum (which you help set up, I believe)?
And you also silenced ONLY me as a result of the fallout, for which I am bitter.

Everybody else was quite level-headed about it I think.

[Marc Meakin]

Sue S(l)anders wrote :By the way, I did tell one lie. I said Derek asked me to issue the earlier correction, but he didn't really. He bitched about it on Facebook where I couldn't see it. Behind my back, so to speak. And we all know how horrendous that is, right

But you did see it evidently and Derek knew you would anyway.

FWIW how culpable are you (Charlie) for all the bitching etc. on the sanctum (which you help set up, I believe)?
And you also silenced ONLY me as a result of the fallout, for which I am bitter.

Everybody else was quite level-headed about it I think.

Sue S(l)anders wrote :By the way, I did tell one lie. I said Derek asked me to issue the earlier correction, but he didn't really. He bitched about it on Facebook where I couldn't see it. Behind my back, so to speak. And we all know how horrendous that is, right

But you did see it evidently and Derek knew you would anyway.

FWIW how culpable are you (Charlie) for all the bitching etc. on the sanctum (which you help set up, I believe)?
And you also silenced ONLY me as a result of the fallout, for which I am bitter.

Everybody else was quite level-headed about it I think.

Your moral compass is about as accurate as mine.
Check out Ryan calling me a fat paedo on this forum and Dod being, well, Dod (dickhead of Day) also publicising PM's was uncalled for by all of you (those that got death threats)

[Jon O'Neill]

Your moral compass is about as accurate as mine.
Check out Ryan calling me a fat paedo on this forum and Dod being, well, Dod (dickhead of Day) also publicising PM's was uncalled for by all of you (those that got death threats)

Calling someone something.
Writing limericks.
Publicising PMs.

Threatening to kill someone.

Have a think mate.

[Marc Meakin]

if every threat was tasken literally then Matt Green would be doing time.
If you can trivialise slanderous comments why are my (obvious to me anyway) joke Death threats taken seriosly.
Most sinister death threats are anonymous.
Dont you think I didn't know that most (turned out to be all) of you would piss your pants and go running to mummy.
My point (which admittedly was lost in translation, even Charlie didn't spot the cryptic message) was to illustrate how little anyone knows about me. I am a pacifist (bottle job) Kai could probably beat me up. So Admittedly only me and Sue (aka neanderthal Woman) were laughing.
Maybe someone else can cite other serious forum breaches in the past that has gone unpunished.
Bullying Alex Rivers and Julie T spring to mind.
Point?

[Lesley Hines]

Point?

Srsly, if even you're asking what the point is it's time to step away for a bit and calm down.

[Jon O'Neill]

if every threat was tasken literally then Matt Green would be doing time.
If you can trivialise slanderous comments why are my (obvious to me anyway) joke Death threats taken seriosly.
Most sinister death threats are anonymous.
Dont you think I didn't know that most (turned out to be all) of you would piss your pants and go running to mummy.
My point (which admittedly was lost in translation, even Charlie didn't spot the cryptic message) was to illustrate how little anyone knows about me. I am a pacifist (bottle job) Kai could probably beat me up. So Admittedly only me and Sue (aka neanderthal Woman) were laughing.
Maybe someone else can cite other serious forum breaches in the past that has gone unpunished.
Bullying Alex Rivers and Julie T spring to mind.
Point?

I think a fair banning policy is that if you break the law using c4c, you get banned from using c4c. Sending PMs telling me you know where I live isn't just an innocent joke. I don't know you, I don't know what you're capable of. Quite frankly you seem(ed) emotionally unstable.

Insulting someone isn't against the law. I'm actually baffled that you think it was unfair.

[Marc Meakin]

Point?

Srsly, if even you're asking what the point is it's time to step away for a bit and calm down.

Soz I meant, do I have a point?
I am calm AND i only lost it (much) earlier when the sanctum was slagging off my girlfriend.

[Marc Meakin]

Is slander not against the law then.

[Jon O'Neill]

Is slander not against the law then.

If Charlie bans himself, who will ban you when you go mental again?

[Marc Meakin]

Is slander not against the law then.

If Charlie bans himself, who will ban you when you go mental again?

Jono, I must concede that YOUR death threat was the most menacing.
I apologise to you personally for that, and I WILL DO IF WE EVER MEET.
My analagy is like if i was driving erratically and cut you up and you gesticulate and call me a cunt and give me the finger and wanker sign.Then at the next set of traffic lights I GET OUT MY CAR WITH A BASEBALL BAT and you piss your pants and call the police.
Point?

[Charlie Reams]

My analagy is like if i was driving erratically and cut you up and you gesticulate and call me a cunt and give me the finger and wanker sign.Then at the next set of traffic lights I GET OUT MY CAR WITH A BASEBALL BAT and you piss your pants and call the police.
Point?

Yes, that's a good "analagy" because you're the one who committed a crime in that situation. You should consider yourself very much on probation on this forum. If you continue to be a dick, I will ban you permanently.

[Jon O'Neill]

Is slander not against the law then.

If Charlie bans himself, who will ban you when you go mental again?

Jono, I must concede that YOUR death threat was the most menacing.
I apologise to you personally for that, and I WILL DO IF WE EVER MEET.
My analagy is like if i was driving erratically and cut you up and you gesticulate and call me a cunt and give me the finger and wanker sign.Then at the next set of traffic lights I GET OUT MY CAR WITH A BASEBALL BAT and you piss your pants and call the police.
Point?

I don't really get you analogy, but we've derailed this thread enough as it is without really getting anywhere.

[Marc Meakin]

My analagy sic. does notcontain any crime unless yielding a baseball bat is.
Iknow I am 'your' intellectual inferior (i have no O levels, as I coiuldn't be arsed to take them due to, irony of ironies bullying, but I still feel if your not one of 'us' you get treated unfairly.
2 Names, Matthew Green and David O'Donnell
I am also finding it amusing that 'you' have not addressed the Alec Rivers/Julie T Bullying going unchecked.

[Michael Wallace]

My analagy sic. does notcontain any crime unless yielding a baseball bat is.

I am not a lawyer, but (via wikipedia, you can check the sources if you want) "A person commits the offence strictly known as assault or common assault if he intentionally or recklessly causes another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence."

I think in the instance you describe the reasonable man would apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence.

[Lesley Hines]

Marc, please calm down.

Of course threatening someone with a baseball bat's a crime.
I'm not treated unfairly and I'm not one of 'us', and Matthew Green doesn't post on here any more. Tbf to Doddy I wouldn't apologise to someone who'd sent me death threats citing auto-erotic asphyxiation, although I did think that was a creative touch.
I didn't think Julie or Alec were bullied particularly - they usually gave as good as they got.

Seriously, if you want this to drop you have to calm down - it's not doing you any favours at all. I'm quite keen for this to drop - it's not the entertainment I log on for I'm sure everyone else feels the same.

[Charlie Reams]

Iknow I am 'your' intellectual inferior (i have no O levels, as I coiuldn't be arsed to take them due to, irony of ironies bullying, but I still feel if your not one of 'us' you get treated unfairly.

What does that have to do with anything?

2 Names, Matthew Green and David O'Donnell

At last, something we can agree on!

I am also finding it amusing that 'you' have not addressed the Alec Rivers/Julie T Bullying going unchecked.

Calling someone a twat is not a crime. Threatening to kill them is a crime. In an attempt to keep the peace, I've allowed you to keep posting here but (final reminder) this is probation. Don't try and out-argue me, don't try to have the last word, don't try to write a limerick about how you're going to kill me. Just get a grip and move on. Go back to posting whatever you were posting before or stop posting altogether, I don't mind which. If you want to continue to wail and thrash about then my patience will run out in exactly one post's time. But please don't make me ban you, it's so undignified.

[Marc Meakin]

My final word on the matter (in public anyway)

Firstly, Lesley, I THINK YOU ARE WONDERFUL AND ONE OF THE FEW WOMEN ON THIS FORUM THAT DOESN'T GET BULLIED or disrespected.
But please don't think I am not calm I AM PERFECTLY CALM AND i am on vacation and very much in love (synchronised retching at the sanctum lol) I JUST DON'T LIKE TO LOSE AN ARGUMENT, and I DON'T TAKE KINDLY TO THE 'ITS MY BALL so don't foul any of my friends or I wont let you play no more' mentality.
Secondly, Charlie, I am truly sorry if you cannot get over my mad moments in spite of my unreserved apologies, which I AM MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO THIS IN PERSON AT COLin although I WONT COME IF I WONT BE MADE WELCOME.
i think this threat of permanantly banning me should be put before a committee or at least another poll (yes i like polls and i miss derek).
I am prepared to move on but i am easily goaded (ya think) so baiters can you pm me.

And finally (on this subject) i apologise to all regular forum users for boring/annoying/scaring everyone.
But I DO NOT apologies for my puns.

Sorry also for caps lock malfunction.
Proof reading's for wimps lol

[Karen Pearson]

I'm quite keen for this to drop - it's not the entertainment I log on for I'm sure everyone else feels the same.

IAWTP

Firstly, Lesley, I THINK YOU ARE THE ONLY WOMAN ON THIS FORUM THAT DOESN'T GET BULLIED or disrespected.

Really? Personally, I've never felt bullied or disrespected. I can't really talk for anyone else but there are several other women I can think of instantly who have never been disrespected or bullied AFAIK.