Avoid OcUK unless you are homophobic and racist
Ben Rometsch
(http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/). I was banned recently for attempting to
argue with the owner of the company and the forums (mark 'spie' proudfoot)
regarding a thread on homosexuality.
I was shocked by spie's attitude. In short, he believes that homosexuality
is 'morally corrupt' (his words). He blames homosexuality (and not casual
unprotected sex) for the spread of AIDS. He also supports the Conservative
Monday Club and their views on the voluntary repatriation of immigrants.
The thread, along with a number of others on asylum and race have now been
deleted. One can only assume why.
He does not reply to email, and has banned a number of other forum members
for trying to argue with him. He has also stated on his forum that he will
not "allow these forums to be used for condoning homosexuality".
I suggest, if you have any sense of that is and is not 'morally corrupt',
that you avoid giving him and his company any business.
Vince Gibson
Vince
Jacob
There is no exaggeration of Spie's attitude here, and a moral stand should
be taken. There are plenty of better hardware stores around, and in my
experience OCUK is never the cheapest, so there's no reason to buy from
there (check out http://www.awars.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=47
for a comprehensive list of stores if you're not sure where to buy from
:) ).
"Ben Rometsch" <ben.ro...@blueyonder.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:Abhz9.20575$8P5....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
Michael Rodgers
news:Abhz9.20575$8P5....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> (http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/). I was banned recently for attempting
to
> argue with the owner of the company and the forums (mark 'spie' proudfoot)
> regarding a thread on homosexuality.
>
> I was shocked by spie's attitude. In short, he believes that homosexuality
> is 'morally corrupt' (his words). He blames homosexuality (and not casual
> unprotected sex) for the spread of AIDS. He also supports the Conservative
> Monday Club and their views on the voluntary repatriation of immigrants.
>
> The thread, along with a number of others on asylum and race have now been
> deleted. One can only assume why.
Why should the company owners beleifs on homosexuality be an issue when
placing an order for a CPU or something? I don't see why it matters what the
owner thinks about X, Y or Z as long as your goods are delivered in a timely
fashion at a good price.
I agree the moderating of the forums is perhaps questionable at times, but I
don't see what bearing this has upon ordering from the website.
--
Michael Rodgers, Plymouth UK
http://www.network-southeast.co.uk
Ben Rometsch
right, you may want to order elsewhere. I'm not saying you shouldn't order
from there, period. Of course, it's up to you.
I won't be ordering from there again, however.
"Michael Rodgers" <ne...@network-southeast.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aqk9pv$amjb7$1...@ID-43430.news.dfncis.de...
Jon
"Jacob" <j_li...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in
news:aqk8hr$ltp$1...@news.ox.ac.uk:
Dion L Heap
"Michael Rodgers" <ne...@network-southeast.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aqk9pv$amjb7$1...@ID-43430.news.dfncis.de...
>
> placing an order for a CPU or something?
It's a matter of personnal preference, depending on what your beliefs are,
if you thought the owner of a company was a complete tosser, would you give
them your business?
regards,
Dion L Heap
EBuyerdotcon
idea to discuss your homophobic and racist ideals on your own
companies forum is it?
But by airing his view in that place he is making it an issue for
every potential customer purchasing any product, something which hes
obviously realised now hes deleted those very views.
However if he don't want to sell anything to homosexuals or people of
ethnic origin and only wants to sell goods to those he deems of "pure
blood" its his loss!
EBuyerdotcon "Make the wrong choice!"
http://ebuyerdotcon.funurl.com/
Jacob
and you take appropriate action. It's particularly relevant since Spie is
using his company's forums to publicise his views.
Paul Hopwood
>I was shocked by spie's attitude. In short, he believes that homosexuality
>is 'morally corrupt' (his words). He blames homosexuality (and not casual
>unprotected sex) for the spread of AIDS. He also supports the Conservative
>Monday Club and their views on the voluntary repatriation of immigrants.
As much as I might disagree with his views is this really a place to
discuss them or, for that matter, why do they matter when supplying or
buying computer components?
We don't know Dave Athertons views on such issues, or Sams, or indeed
those of the CEOs/MDs/directors/shareholders/staff/pets of Aria,
ebuyer, Scan, Overclock.co.uk, Novatech, Komplett or any of the other
vendors discussed in this forum so it's hardly a balanced way of
selecting a vendor. Any one of them could be an axe-touting
homophonic KKK member with a taste for young boys, but if they don't
happen to voice their beliefs in a chat room it's okay to do business
with them?
Maybe we should just forget the old criteria of service, price,
delivery on time, stock, reputation etc and use this forum to build a
matrix of the business leaders' standing on various moral issues (sex,
race, colour, sexuality, football teams, do they like Marmite, toast
done one side or both, "inny" or "outey" etc) and use this as a means
of selecting the vendors we do business with?
--
>iv< Paul >iv<
[ Mail: pa...@hopwood.org.uk ]
[ WWW: http://www.hopwood.org.uk/ ]
Chesney Christ
>We don't know Dave Athertons views on such issues, or Sams, or indeed
>those of the CEOs/MDs/directors/shareholders/staff/pets of Aria,
>ebuyer, Scan, Overclock.co.uk, Novatech, Komplett or any of the other
>vendors discussed in this forum so it's hardly a balanced way of
>selecting a vendor. Any one of them could be an axe-touting
>homophonic KKK member with a taste for young boys, but if they don't
>happen to voice their beliefs in a chat room it's okay to do business
>with them?
They have made a specific - and wise - decision to keep their personal
beliefs to themselves and not allow those beliefs to interfere with
their business. This other individual has chosen not to do so, and by
allegedly publicizing allegedly bigoted and racist views quite openly
he's making a very clear statement to those who would consider doing
business with him - personally, if these allegations are true, I won't.
--
George H.W. Bush, as Presidential Nominee for the Republican party;
1987-AUG-27: "No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as
citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation
under God."
Chris Jones
> discuss them or, for that matter, why do they matter when supplying or
> buying computer components?
Because he has posted his views on *his company's* forums. If he is
homophobic, but only posts about it on some sort of sexuality forum
elsewhere, I would agree that it's not relevant. However, if he posts
something on his company's website, then it should be taken as the views of
his company. Personally, I'd rather not buy anything from that site now,
because I know that if I do the profits will be going to that guy.
If David Atherton posted some anti-gay message on dabs.com for example, then
I'd say the same thing. But as Chesney says, most people keep their business
and personal lives seperate.
EBuyerdotcon
wrote:
>We don't know Dave Athertons views on such issues, or Sams, or indeed
>those of the CEOs/MDs/directors/shareholders/staff/pets of Aria,
>ebuyer, Scan, Overclock.co.uk, Novatech, Komplett or any of the other
>vendors discussed in this forum so it's hardly a balanced way of
>selecting a vendor. Any one of them could be an axe-touting
>homophonic KKK member with a taste for young boys, but if they don't
>happen to voice their beliefs in a chat room it's okay to do business
>with them?
>
>Maybe we should just forget the old criteria of service, price,
>delivery on time, stock, reputation etc and use this forum to build a
>matrix of the business leaders' standing on various moral issues (sex,
>race, colour, sexuality, football teams, do they like Marmite, toast
>done one side or both, "inny" or "outey" etc) and use this as a means
>of selecting the vendors we do business with?
>
Brilliant idea! However I do think by airing those views on his own
companies website he is speaking on behalf of his company. Something
pretty damn reprehensible in my opinion.
Paul Hopwood
>They have made a specific - and wise - decision to keep their personal
>beliefs to themselves and not allow those beliefs to interfere with
>their business. This other individual has chosen not to do so, and by
>allegedly publicizing allegedly bigoted and racist views quite openly
>he's making a very clear statement to those who would consider doing
>business with him - personally, if these allegations are true, I won't.
From what I can gather he voiced these opinions in a chat room and
doesn't actually operate his business according to those opinions. I
also understand he's since removed those comments so has hence taken
the wise decision to keep his personal opinions to himself.
EBuyerdotcon
wrote:
>Maybe we should just forget the old criteria of service, price,
>delivery on time, stock, reputation etc and use this forum to build a
>matrix of the business leaders' standing on various moral issues and use this as a means
>of selecting the vendors we do business with?
That wouldn't work Paul. If you took ebuyer for example they have no
morals.
However turning your idea around 180 degree`s, the thought of putting
ebuyer staff in vats of goo to power "THE MATRIX" certainly holds some
sick appeal for me. ;)
Chesney Christ
>
>>They have made a specific - and wise - decision to keep their personal
>>beliefs to themselves and not allow those beliefs to interfere with
>>their business. This other individual has chosen not to do so, and by
>>allegedly publicizing allegedly bigoted and racist views quite openly
>>he's making a very clear statement to those who would consider doing
>>business with him - personally, if these allegations are true, I won't.
>
>From what I can gather he voiced these opinions in a chat room and
>doesn't actually operate his business according to those opinions.
It's nothing to do with how he *operates* his business, obviously. I'm
not trying to impose my own views on anyone else in this group, but
personally I don't have any tolerance for racism and I won't give a
racist my money. It's not *my* business to know whether or not other
people would, although it saddens me that people haven't learnt the
lesson of WW2, particularly at this time of year.
> I
>also understand he's since removed those comments so has hence taken
>the wise decision to keep his personal opinions to himself.
Unfortunately you can't retroactively alter your approach to how you mix
your business and your personal opinions.
Emma Edwards
"Paul Hopwood" <pa...@hopwood.org.uk> wrote in message
news:fgrssuoaa0gle6q39...@4ax.com...
should just forget the old criteria of service, price,
> delivery on time, stock, reputation etc and use this forum to build a
> matrix of the business leaders' standing on various moral issues (sex,
> race, colour, sexuality, football teams, do they like Marmite, toast
> done one side or both, "inny" or "outey" etc) and use this as a means
> of selecting the vendors we do business with?
>
>
People would not buy South African products for many years. Many people
boycott Nestle because of the ways they market baby milk in third world
countries - that boycott has been running for well over a decade. Other try
to buy 'fair trade' products. Malboro cigarettes have been boycotted because
of the company's alleged association with the KKK.
I will certainly not buy from Overclockers in the future - I haven't yet
because of reports in this ng of poor service but even if that situation
changes, I would rather spend my money with someone who is racist and
homophobic. Especially when they censor any opposition to those views.
There is a certain vendor who is a regular in this ng. They operate forums
also, although they are no longer directly associated with the company. I
have been involved with several debates in the 'debate' forum in which that
vendor has also participated. We don't agree on many things BUT he doesn't
censor my views in order to promote his own.
Regards
Emma
essdeekay
"Emma Edwards" <edwa...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:Mcwz9.1009$N%6.5...@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
:
: "I would rather spend my money with someone who is racist and
: homophobic."
Think you missed a rather crucial word out there ... *not* :-)
Seb
Paul Hopwood
>People would not buy South African products for many years. Many people
>boycott Nestle because of the ways they market baby milk in third world
>countries - that boycott has been running for well over a decade. Other try
>to buy 'fair trade' products. Malboro cigarettes have been boycotted because
>of the company's alleged association with the KKK.
Absolutely, but they're mostly issues around ethical trading - how a
business chooses to operate - and boycotting businesses who do not
operate in the manner you find disagreeable. There's nothing to
suggest Overclockers.co.uk are operating in a way which promotes
racism or homophobia, simply that their MD may of voiced (and since
retracted) an option.
>I will certainly not buy from Overclockers in the future - I haven't yet
>because of reports in this ng of poor service but even if that situation
>changes,
I wouldn't make a habit of buying from them anyway as they don't have
the best of reputations so it's somewhat academic. :)
> I would rather spend my money with someone who is racist and
>homophobic. Especially when they censor any opposition to those views.
I'm sure there's a "not" missing somewhere! Unless, otoh... ;-)
While I can't agree with anyone who is discriminatory (be it Racism,
Sexism, Homophobia etc) I have no evidence of his views, the
statements he may or may not of made cannot be substantiated as
they've since been removed. Indeed, I have no more evidence of his
racial or sexual viewpoint than I do of any other business leader and
one cannot do business based on hearsay. Don't get me wrong - I have
no reason to believe the people who have cited statements from the MD
of Overclockers are lying, but I have nothing to suggest they aren't.
Forming an opinion biased against someone on this basis is exactly how
hate and smear campaigns start and is no better than racism and
homophobia imho. Had I been involved or witnessed the original
exchange of views I might consider things differently but the
Overclockers are a business, their MD is *not* Overclockers.
Whose to say, that were you to boycott a vendor because of a "slip of
the tongue" by one of their leaders, you're not going to be taking the
business to someone who has far more extremist views but loves your
money too much to voice them?
Angus Rodgers
Paul Hopwood <pa...@hopwood.org.uk> wrote:
> Chesney Christ <thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >They have made a specific - and wise - decision to
> >keep their personal beliefs to themselves and not
> >allow those beliefs to interfere with their business.
> >This other individual has chosen not to do so, and by
> >allegedly publicizing allegedly bigoted and racist
> >views quite openly he's making a very clear statement
> >to those who would consider doing business with him -
> >personally, if these allegations are true, I won't.
>
> From what I can gather he voiced these opinions in a
> chat room and doesn't actually operate his business
> according to those opinions. [...]
Well, it's a PC business, after all!
--
Angus Rodgers
(angus_prune@ eats spam; reply to angusr@)
http://i.havent.got.a.web.site/
Martin
"Ben Rometsch" <ben.ro...@blueyonder.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:Abhz9.20575$8P5....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> (http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/). I was banned recently for attempting
to
> argue with the owner of the company and the forums (mark 'spie' proudfoot)
> regarding a thread on homosexuality.
>
> I was shocked by spie's attitude. In short, he believes that homosexuality
> is 'morally corrupt' (his words). He blames homosexuality (and not casual
> unprotected sex) for the spread of AIDS. He also supports the Conservative
> Monday Club and their views on the voluntary repatriation of immigrants.
>
> The thread, along with a number of others on asylum and race have now been
> deleted. One can only assume why.
Aren't the forums supposed to be related to overclocking? Personally, I
don't mind what you put in each other's bottoms - that's your business - but
there's a place for everything!
Martin
J
>I suggest, if you have any sense of that is and is not 'morally corrupt',
>that you avoid giving him and his company any business.
But yet I'm sure you buy from companies, that make men look like
idiots on TV ads. Or companies that always show that it's always
females in control. Or that it's a coloured guy out doing the white
man. Or ads showing naked people, or even worse naked children.
Where's the difference?
Do you bother to boycott those? Yet, they are shoving out how they
feel about the world, "should be"..??
He's only doing the same. If you boycott everything that you don't
like then you're a man of action. But don't just pick on the man
because he goes against political correctness. Because you're going to
start seeing a lot more of it in the coming years.
At least the guy has some views, instead of sitting on the fence like
lots of people today.
As for the people who said they can't tolerate racism. I sure do hope
you can't tolerate racism from coloureds towards whites either then.
Because racism is racism, no matter what the colour it's aimed at!
I'm personally fed up with the straight white men being trashed by
coloureds, feminazis, and homosexuals. If you don't believe me, then
just look at the ads you see everywhere. And see how many are trashing
the straight white man. How many times he's made to look a fool. It's
about time it stopped.
There is a recent photo in the Freeman's catalogue in the school
cloths section, showing two young coloured girls laughing at a white
boy. The white boy has a sign on his back saying, "Hit me!"
But if that was two white boys laughing at a coloured girl. Then one
of two things would have happened. 1) It would never have been used.
Or 2) it would have been across the news as being a disgusting photo
and should have never been used.
The fact it shows a white boy being tormented then it's totally
ignored. Which I think is disgusting!
As a side point bullying should be stamped out full stop anyways. But
its idiotic ideas like that don't help the world in anyway!
It may be because of this sort of thing happening, that the man in
question is getting so fed up?!
Don't even bother saying I'm racist, or homophobic. I'm just trying to
point out, where's the fairness if no-one sticks up of the whiteman?
Jacob
There are also forums for the discussion of other issues, and Spie posted
his views in a thread entitled "Is Homosexuality Wrong?"
Andy
OcUK because of what's been posted here, and yet no evidence of this thread,
be it transcripts or links, has been posted. At the moment, it's all
hearsay, and effectively just gossip.
"Ben Rometsch" <ben.ro...@blueyonder.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:Abhz9.20575$8P5....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
Jacob
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk I don't think he deleted the threads
because he was withdrawing his comments. He deleted the threads because he
saw them as "promoting/condoning homosexuality", and he said as much (see my
post where I've posted a copy of one of the threads in question :) ).
Jacob
"Paul Hopwood" <pa...@hopwood.org.uk> wrote in message
news:5a2tsugnk1919i317...@4ax.com...
Chris Jones
> about 1/10th of its final length. Anyway, Spie had made a
> few posts by that time, and here's a copy of the thread (HTML):
Well, from what I can see there, he didn't make any particularly outrageous
remarks - he simply stated that, in his opinion, homosexuality is morally
wrong.
He seemed fairly polite about it too, I was expecting loads of gay-bashing
or something. *shrug*
Jacob
you can't see messages with HTML, so I'll try and attach a copy to this
message (damn, it won't let me :-( Says it doesn't support binaries. )
Look at my earlier post in a viewer that supports HTML, and you'll see the
thread :-)
If you can't do that, here are a few quotes from that thread from Spie:
"I'm not going to allow these forums to be used to make homosexuality more
acceptable. Lot's of members are children and as a result are extremely
impressionable."
"You are confusing equality with morality. Gay people are equal to straight
people but in my opinion morally corrupt."
"Being straight is more preferable than being gay. That is my opinion. These
forums are not going to help someone "decide" they are gay. These forums may
influence impressionable people though. "
"Andy" <andy...@hotNOSPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:aqmggv$dfp$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
Paul Hopwood
>"I'm not going to allow these forums to be used to make homosexuality more
>acceptable. Lot's of members are children and as a result are extremely
>impressionable."
That could be read a couple of ways. In the one sense I agree that a
forum on a computer components site is not an appropriate place for
discussing sexuality, be it pro or anti homosexuality. I certainly
don't read it as removing posts simply because they disagree with his
viewpoint, which has been suggested in this thread.
>"You are confusing equality with morality. Gay people are equal to straight
>people but in my opinion morally corrupt."
He's voiced an opinion about homosexuality but at the same time has
stated "gay people are equal"; which to me reads "*I* have a moral
problem with homosexuality but gays shouldn't be discriminated
against".
I really don't see why people are up in arms about it. It's hardly
the blatant gay-bashing I was expecting. He certainly doesn't strike
me as "anti-gay" or even promoting homophobic sentiments. Fair play
to him for having the guts to have an opinion and voice it without
feeling the need to enforce it on others, which is a substantially
better line than the "let's boycott the gay-bashing homophobic
overclockers.co.uk" mob are taking!
Seems the most common interpretation of "free speech" is the freedom
to speak if you agree with us! I'm sure I'll now be viewed as some
bigoted homophobic because for not advocating plunging his business
into bankruptcy, burning him at the stake or trashing his car but I
really don't see the problem in someone merely having an opinion!
Chesney Christ
>>"You are confusing equality with morality. Gay people are equal to straight
>>people but in my opinion morally corrupt."
>
>He's voiced an opinion about homosexuality but at the same time has
>stated "gay people are equal"; which to me reads "*I* have a moral
>problem with homosexuality but gays shouldn't be discriminated
>against".
There's a lot of "morally corrupt" things going on - why single out gays
for special treatment ? Because he is, of course, a homophobe. That's
what this is all about.
I don't buy this "children present" bollocks. There are images included
with people's posts that look like they're lifted directly out of a porn
mag. For example, take the ones that appear under posts by the chap
named "Scream". Is it acceptable to have pictures of lusty semi-naked
girlies around when children are about ? Are such pictures "morally
corrupt" ?
Andy
but is that what all this fuss is about?
I quote from your posting what Spie said :-
"I closed the thread. I'm not going to allow these forums to be used to make
homosexuality more acceptable. Lot's of members are children and as a result
are extremely impressionable.
Having said that I see nothing wrong in debating the issue in Speaker's
Corner, as opposed to General Discussion where the above thread was closed."
As far as I know, speakers corner on the OcUK forums is where the more
mature subject matter is actively debated, where as the general discussion
forum is more for the light hearted side of things. All Spie has said in
that post is that he isn't prepared to allow the forums to be used to
actively promote homosexuality. Seems to me that all Spie has done is
express his opinion in quite a low key way, and because his opinion differs
to yours (and possibly because you've been banned from the forums for some
reason), you've tried to make a huge public issue out of it. You made it
sound as if there was some form of vicious, malicious gay bashing going on,
when in fact there was nothing of the sort.
If the proof you have of Spie's alleged 'racism' is as flimsy as this proof
of his being homophobic, then I think that you owe Spie an apology.
"Jacob" <j_li...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aqmm2l$ho7$2...@news.ox.ac.uk...
had...@blueyonder.co.uk
you will be placing your order with....oh what a 2 faced capatilist
society wi live in.....thats assuming that you are not one of the many
people he his slagging off...
Ben Rometsch
"Emma Edwards" <edwa...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:Mcwz9.1009$N%6.5...@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
>
Julian Hales
"Ben Rometsch" <ben.ro...@blueyonder.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:Abhz9.20575$8P5....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> I used to spend a fair amount of time on the OcUK forums
> (http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/). I was banned recently for attempting
to
> argue with the owner of the company and the forums (mark 'spie' proudfoot)
> regarding a thread on homosexuality.
>
> I was shocked by spie's attitude. In short, he believes that homosexuality
> is 'morally corrupt' (his words). He blames homosexuality (and not casual
> unprotected sex) for the spread of AIDS. He also supports the Conservative
> Monday Club and their views on the voluntary repatriation of immigrants.
>
> The thread, along with a number of others on asylum and race have now been
> deleted. One can only assume why.
>
> He does not reply to email, and has banned a number of other forum members
> for trying to argue with him. He has also stated on his forum that he will
> not "allow these forums to be used for condoning homosexuality".
>
> I suggest, if you have any sense of that is and is not 'morally corrupt',
> that you avoid giving him and his company any business.
>
>
I cant see a problem with his views, and it seems hes man enough to come out
and say it, most people lie or havent got the bottle too!
Give MP a pat on the back!
Michael Rodgers
news:FuGcWLJb...@ntlworld.com...
> I don't buy this "children present" bollocks. There are images included
> with people's posts that look like they're lifted directly out of a porn
> mag. For example, take the ones that appear under posts by the chap
> named "Scream". Is it acceptable to have pictures of lusty semi-naked
> girlies around when children are about ? Are such pictures "morally
> corrupt" ?
Who cares if you buy it? If you don't buy it, then just don't use the
forums. Why on earth should any of this affect why anyone would buy from the
shop? It's pathetic!
Ben Rometsch
of voluntary repatriation. The entire OcUK forums were deleted a while back
for a big upgrade, so the thread no longer exists.
Spie personally banned myself and jacob for trying to stand up to his
homophobic and racist attitude.
I'm not saying people dont have to shop there. I'm just saying that if you
find his opinions distasteful, you may not want to buy from his store. It's
your choice.
"Andy" <andy...@hotNOSPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:aqmrum$aal$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
Ben Rometsch
It's a personal choice.
"Michael Rodgers" <ne...@network-southeast.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aqmu42$bc2u8$1...@ID-43430.news.dfncis.de...
Ben Rometsch
> the blatant gay-bashing I was expecting. He certainly doesn't strike
> me as "anti-gay" or even promoting homophobic sentiments. Fair play
> to him for having the guts to have an opinion and voice it without
> feeling the need to enforce it on others, which is a substantially
> better line than the "let's boycott the gay-bashing homophobic
> overclockers.co.uk" mob are taking!
both myself and jacob have been permanently banned from the forum because of
the argument we had with him over the issue. I'd say that's enforcing his
opinion on others.
If you dont feel that labelling homosexuals as 'morally corrupt' is in any
way homophobic then I think we are talking a different language to each
other. What would you call it?
Ben Rometsch
http://www.bennyr.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Spie.gif
is a screen grab I took. As I said, spie has deleted the entire thread, so
it's impossible to paste a direct link to the OcUK forum. I suggest if you
want to find out his true position on this you register and ask him.
"Andy" <andy...@hotNOSPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:aqmggv$dfp$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
Paul Hopwood
>> I really don't see why people are up in arms about it. It's hardly
>> the blatant gay-bashing I was expecting. He certainly doesn't strike
>> me as "anti-gay" or even promoting homophobic sentiments. Fair play
>> to him for having the guts to have an opinion and voice it without
>> feeling the need to enforce it on others, which is a substantially
>> better line than the "let's boycott the gay-bashing homophobic
>> overclockers.co.uk" mob are taking!
>both myself and jacob have been permanently banned from the forum because of
>the argument we had with him over the issue. I'd say that's enforcing his
>opinion on others.
... or possibly for using the forums on Overclockers to discuss the
matter? It's quite possible he simply deemed it inappropriate. I
don't think either of us are qualified to determine his reasons.
>If you dont feel that labelling homosexuals as 'morally corrupt' is in any
>way homophobic then I think we are talking a different language to each
>other. What would you call it?
I wouldn't call it anything because I know precisely as much about the
guy as you do - which is based on a couple of comments posted on a
chat forum! Maybe you'd be good enough to point out where I might of
said he wasn't homophobic?
Jacob
that straights are preferable to gays!!
"Andy" <andy...@hotNOSPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:aqmrum$aal$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
> You posted the thread after I'd made my posting.
Sorry about that. Your message only appeared after I'd written mine, and as
I'm new to newgroups I assumed you'd posted it later.
> I've read it with interest,
> but is that what all this fuss is about?
As I said, that was only the start of the thread. It was much longer when it
was deleted, but that gives you a good idea of Spie's attitude. Later on, he
said that homosexuality was wrong because AIDS can be spread by unprotected
gay sex! In fact, one forum member was banned for disagreeing with him about
that.
> I quote from your posting what Spie said :-
>
> "I closed the thread. I'm not going to allow these forums to be used to
make
> homosexuality more acceptable. Lot's of members are children and as a
result
> are extremely impressionable.
> Having said that I see nothing wrong in debating the issue in Speaker's
> Corner, as opposed to General Discussion where the above thread was
closed."
>
> As far as I know, speakers corner on the OcUK forums is where the more
> mature subject matter is actively debated, where as the general discussion
> forum is more for the light hearted side of things. All Spie has said in
> that post is that he isn't prepared to allow the forums to be used to
> actively promote homosexuality. Seems to me that all Spie has done is
> express his opinion in quite a low key way, and because his opinion
differs
> to yours (and possibly because you've been banned from the forums for some
> reason), you've tried to make a huge public issue out of it. You made it
> sound as if there was some form of vicious, malicious gay bashing going
on,
> when in fact there was nothing of the sort.
>
AFAIK (I didn't see the thread, as it was deleted), the thread in General
Discussion wasn't a debate on homosexuality - it was merely a forum member
saying he was bisexual. Also, Spie said he didn't want his forums to be used
to make homosexuality more acceptable, which implies that he doesn't think
homosexuality is acceptable - surely a sign of homophobia?? I don't mind
Spie having and expressing his opinions. What I take issue with is the
censorship (by banning members / deleting threads) of opinions on his forums
to reflect his own.
I don't think I've ever implied there was any "form of vicious, malicious
gay bashing going on", and to say I've "tried to make a huge public issue
out of it" when all I've done is reply to a thread on a newsgroup is quite
frankly ridiculous!
It's for you to make up your mind whether you want to shop at OcUK: you
obviously don't mind Spie's homophobic actions, but I certainly do.
> If the proof you have of Spie's alleged 'racism' is as flimsy as this
proof
> of his being homophobic, then I think that you owe Spie an apology.
>
I don't quite understand how you can label the proof "flimsy", but proof of
Spie's racism is in abundance in the threads on asylum seekers on his
message boards.
Paul Hopwood
>I don't quite understand how you can label the proof "flimsy", but proof of
>Spie's racism is in abundance in the threads on asylum seekers on his
>message boards.
It's not impossible his problem with asylum seekers, should he have
one, has absolutely nothing to do with race. But that wouldn't be
very exciting and helpful to this odd campaign against him, would it?
Jacob
That's totally wrong.
The reason he doesn't want homosexuality discussed is because he doesn't
want it to be acceptable in society - he made that abundantly clear. He also
has the twisted view that if his forum in some way helps a gay person to
come out, he has committed a heinous crime against society!
As has already been said, if you take no issue with this then fine. However,
some people may be interested to know about it, and may like to change their
computer components supplier as a result! No, of course Spie's opinions
don't directly relate to the operation of his business, but does that
matter? If you knew that the MD of CompanyX was of the opinion that all
<insert group you support here> people were morally corrupt to the point
that they shouldn't even be discussed 'in front of children' then would you
consider taking your business elsewhere? Maybe you wouldn't, but I certainly
would, and that would be where we differ :-). He's doing something I
strongly disagree with, and therefore I refuse to help finance him.
"Michael Rodgers" <ne...@network-southeast.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aqmu42$bc2u8$1...@ID-43430.news.dfncis.de...
Jacob
question, don't you think? I'd say it's fairly obvious from my posts here
that I've read the threads, and come to the the conclusion that Spie is
racist. You may not think that the attitude of "they should go back where
they came from" is racist, just as you don't think the opinion that
"homosexuals are morally corrupt" is homophobic, but I do, and I'm sure lots
of people agree with me.
It's up to you whether you agree or not, and it's also up to you whether you
shop at OcUK or not, and nobody's ever said anything to the contrary.
However, as many people may be interested in Spie's shocking attitudes, I
would say that it was entirely appropriate that this information be posted
here, and it's simply your decision to take no action as a result.
"Paul Hopwood" <pa...@hopwood.org.uk> wrote in message
news:683usu8heun0fb7iu...@4ax.com...
Andy
homosexuality". All that shows is that he moderates the forums actively. It
certainly isn't proof that he's a homophobic racist as has been claimed.
"Ben Rometsch" <ben.ro...@blueyonder.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:LdDz9.35212$8P5....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
Dion L Heap
"Ben Rometsch" <ben.ro...@blueyonder.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote in message
>
> both myself and jacob have been permanently banned from the forum because
of
> the argument we had with him over the issue. I'd say that's enforcing his
> opinion on others.
>
> If you dont feel that labelling homosexuals as 'morally corrupt' is in any
> way homophobic then I think we are talking a different language to each
> other. What would you call it?
Try looking at it another way, with regard to homosexuals, I don't have a
problem with them, what they do in the privacy of their own home is their
business, I don't want their beliefs pushed down my throat and I don't want
to have to watch two men snogging in front of me.
Now I own a business, a pub, the pub is in a fairly oppulent area, as with
all oppulent areas there is a degree of "recreational pharmaceutical" use.
For instance Cannabis and Cocaine. I caught someone snorting coke off the
windowsill in the mens toilets. The two people involved got a lecture, which
basically went like this:-
If you do what you do, fine, If you want to live your life how you want to
live it, fine, but don't EVER allow what you do with your life to interfere
with what I do with my life or my livelyhood or I will come down on you like
a ton of bricks! The parties involved accepted this (as they should, it is
reasonable). Do you not think similar 'rules' should apply to the above?
regards,
Dion L Heap
Michael Rodgers
> Because it's quite evidently one rule for gays and another for straights!
> That's totally wrong.
But it's also totally irrelevent when it comes to buying computer hardware
> The reason he doesn't want homosexuality discussed is because he doesn't
> want it to be acceptable in society - he made that abundantly clear. He
also
> has the twisted view that if his forum in some way helps a gay person to
> come out, he has committed a heinous crime against society!
That's his problem - nobody forces you to read the forums. Again, why should
it prevent you ordering from OCuk if the price is right? It doesnt ask 'are
you a homosexual' on the order form, does it?
> As has already been said, if you take no issue with this then fine.
However,
> some people may be interested to know about it, and may like to change
their
> computer components supplier as a result!
Then they are cutting their nose off to spite their face.
> No, of course Spie's opinions
> don't directly relate to the operation of his business, but does that
> matter?
No, it doesn't matter.
> If you knew that the MD of CompanyX was of the opinion that all
> <insert group you support here> people were morally corrupt to the point
> that they shouldn't even be discussed 'in front of children' then would
you
> consider taking your business elsewhere?
Not if his view didn't affect my purchasing, no.
> Maybe you wouldn't, but I certainly
> would, and that would be where we differ :-). He's doing something I
> strongly disagree with, and therefore I refuse to help finance him.
He's discussing his own views on his own forum. Why is anyone who disagrees
with anything a minority group does instantly branded
racist/homophobic/whatever these days? I'm not saying I fully agree with his
viewpoint, but it is his view, it was stated on his forums, and it is
nothing to do with ordering computer hardware.
Michael Rodgers
> > I really don't see why people are up in arms about it. It's hardly
> > the blatant gay-bashing I was expecting. He certainly doesn't strike
> > me as "anti-gay" or even promoting homophobic sentiments. Fair play
> > to him for having the guts to have an opinion and voice it without
> > feeling the need to enforce it on others, which is a substantially
> > better line than the "let's boycott the gay-bashing homophobic
> > overclockers.co.uk" mob are taking!
>
> both myself and jacob have been permanently banned from the forum because
of
> the argument we had with him over the issue. I'd say that's enforcing his
> opinion on others.
At last - a hidden agenda. You are obviously bitter becuase you've been
banned from the forums, and presumably want to settle the score by posting
this lot here?
At least we now know why you feel the need to post this.
Michael Rodgers
> Spie openly supports the conservative monday club, along with their policy
> of voluntary repatriation. The entire OcUK forums were deleted a while
back
> for a big upgrade, so the thread no longer exists.
The thread was after the upgrade. Why can't he support what he wants without
people like you slagging him off on a vendor feedback forum he doesn't know
about? This isnt a forum for you to rip the guy to shreds becuase you are
upset he banned you from his forum.
> Spie personally banned myself and jacob for trying to stand up to his
> homophobic and racist attitude.
AFAIK you insulted someone on the forum.
> I'm not saying people dont have to shop there. I'm just saying that if you
> find his opinions distasteful, you may not want to buy from his store.
It's
> your choice.
His opinions have no place on this news group.
Michael Rodgers
> As I said, that was only the start of the thread. It was much longer when
it
> was deleted, but that gives you a good idea of Spie's attitude. Later on,
he
> said that homosexuality was wrong because AIDS can be spread by
unprotected
> gay sex! In fact, one forum member was banned for disagreeing with him
about
> that.
And there was me thinking the member was banned for a childish and insulting
remark. Isn't it funny how rose tinted specs and a hidden agenda can change
the way you read things?
Michael Rodgers
> Here:
>
> http://www.bennyr.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Spie.gif
>
> is a screen grab I took. As I said, spie has deleted the entire thread, so
> it's impossible to paste a direct link to the OcUK forum. I suggest if you
> want to find out his true position on this you register and ask him.
I'm sorry but I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are worse than
he is. You obviously don't like the guy, and you have issues with his
opinions and the way he runs his forums.
Rather than taking the adult approach of just ignoring it and not bothering
to use the forums again, you decide to bring your issue here - a group for
the discussion of vendors customer service, problems, stock etc, and then
rip the guy to shreds over his opinions, which although strong, do not seem
offensive.
Are you of the opinion that anyone who doesn't absolutely love a particular
minority group should be singled out for this public flogging?
Emma Edwards
"Emma Edwards" <edwa...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:Mcwz9.1009$N%6.5...@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
> homophobic.
Damn - I missed out the NOT in that sentence - as has been pointed out!
Emma
Snowdon Computers
started the original threads on the forum?
If I had a website with discussion forums and some fag came on and started a
completely off topic thread about the acceptability of homosexuals then I
would probably be just af affronted. Not everyone finds homosexuals
acceptable or normal, personally I find the whole idea abhorrant and if it
were my discussion board on my website I would probably be just as tactless
in trying to drive people off who started threads such as these on my
computing related discussion boards.
IMHO computer discussion boards and NOT places where minorities can post and
try and drum up support for their perceived persecution from 'normal'
people. Unfortunately as the messages have now been aparently deleted we
only have the original poster's comments and have no way of knowing who
initiated the threads.
--
Best Regards
Niel Humphreys
Snowdon Computers
Snowdon Computers
> Because it's quite evidently one rule for gays and another for straights!
> That's totally wrong.
That's your opinion, mine differs.
> The reason he doesn't want homosexuality discussed is because he doesn't
> want it to be acceptable in society - he made that abundantly clear.
Perfectl acceptable, they're his boards. He started them for overclocking
related discussion not for gays to infest.
Snowdon Computers
> for special treatment ?
How do you know he did? How do you know the originator of the thread did not
abuse hisforum by initiating an off topic thread about gays - which he found
unacceptable?
Snowdon Computers
At last, a voice of sense in this thread.
Snowdon Computers
> > I really don't see why people are up in arms about it. It's hardly
> > the blatant gay-bashing I was expecting. He certainly doesn't strike
> > me as "anti-gay" or even promoting homophobic sentiments. Fair play
> > to him for having the guts to have an opinion and voice it without
> > feeling the need to enforce it on others, which is a substantially
> > better line than the "let's boycott the gay-bashing homophobic
> > overclockers.co.uk" mob are taking!
>
> both myself and jacob have been permanently banned from the forum because
of
> the argument we had with him over the issue. I'd say that's enforcing his
> opinion on others.
Really? He probably thought the same when someone started a discussion about
faggots in his computing related forum.
Snowdon Computers
> That's a bit of a silly comment to make if you haven't read the threads in
> question, don't you think? I'd say it's fairly obvious from my posts here
> that I've read the threads, and come to the the conclusion that Spie is
> racist. You may not think that the attitude of "they should go back where
> they came from" is racist, just as you don't think the opinion that
> "homosexuals are morally corrupt" is homophobic, but I do, and I'm sure
lots
> of people agree with me.
>
> It's up to you whether you agree or not, and it's also up to you whether
you
> shop at OcUK or not, and nobody's ever said anything to the contrary.
> However, as many people may be interested in Spie's shocking attitudes, I
> would say that it was entirely appropriate that this information be posted
> here, and it's simply your decision to take no action as a result.
>
Welcome to the real world, big scary place isn't it.
Snowdon Computers
Paul
negative views on homosexuals; furthermore he has the right to express
his views wherever he likes, especially on his own companies
chatboards where his own customers can read them.
However, people also have the right to choose to do business with a
company based on any factor they choose, and world wide, a lot of
people do factor in the political, social, and ethical opinions of the
owners of a company into their decision.
I think the discussion of any factor that could influence someones
choice of computer parts vendor is perfectly legitimate on this
newsgroup, and I can assure you, that while this guys opinions may
seem pretty irrelevant to a lot of you, I'm sure there are plenty of
us on here who genuinely feel aggravated by this guys views, and who
choose to give the matter some importance.
Speaking only for myself, I like to thank whoever was brave enough to
start this topic thread.
Speaking only for myself, I have bought from Overclockers in the past,
and the uterrances of their MD on their forum is enough for me to
decide not to do business with them again.
However I'm not going to delude myself into thinking that Overclockers
will be the slightest bit bothered by the loss of one gay customer who
has in the past used their supplied computer equipment to promote
tolerance and equality for homosexuals!
ttfn
Doug Ellison
> that you avoid giving him and his company any business.
Seing as they care more about their Seti work unit total - wanna REALLY get
them in the balls? Get a few members of their Seti team to leave :D
Not using them as a retailer doesnt take much debating - they're lazy, dont
answer email, ship stuff when they can be arsed and lie on their news page
Doug
Paul
<sa...@snowdoncomputers.co.uk> wrote:
>
>IMHO computer discussion boards and NOT places where minorities can post and
>try and drum up support for their perceived persecution from 'normal'
>people. Unfortunately as the messages have now been aparently deleted we
>only have the original poster's comments and have no way of knowing who
>initiated the threads.
Well like Durrhhh! bright boy,
this wasn't a discussion board dedicated to computers, but one under
the heading of 'Life' and subtitled 'Speaker's Corner: Intelligent
debate of newsworthy issues'
JK
Are you sure you're not saying that because you happen to agree to some
extent with his opinions about homosexuality? (I'm refering to your earlier
post - "Not everyone finds homosexuals acceptable or normal, personally I
find the whole idea abhorrant "). The very existance of this thread just
goes to show that a discussion group, be it on Usenet or a forum, does not
exist in a vacuum. Until proven otherwise we have to assume we are
discussing matters with people we can at least respect. If their views,
whatever they are, prove to be unacceptable to us, that bubble's burst. I
used to think you were a reasonable guy, for example...
BTW, did anyone else notice Spie's typo in his original comment - "I do
believe homosexuality is morally wrong for many reasons, not least of which
it robs children of the balanced approach to parenting provided *my* a
mother and father." I submit that M is not directly next to B on a
keyboard, that therefore this typo has a deep psychological root, and the
guy needs to get some therapy to deal with his issues.
(/me gets under desk).
Paul
It wasn't a 'computer related' forum!
Paul
It wasn't an 'overclocking' related discussion forum
Snowdon Computers
news:aqo08r$blgin$1...@ID-30720.news.dfncis.de...
> Snowdon Computers wrote:
> > "Michael Rodgers" <ne...@network-southeast.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:aqnpt8$bijb4$1...@ID-43430.news.dfncis.de...
> >> "Jacob" <j_li...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> news:aqn2vq$lv9$2...@news.ox.ac.uk...
with, and therefore I refuse to help finance him.
> >>
> >> He's discussing his own views on his own forum. Why is anyone who
> >> disagrees with anything a minority group does instantly branded
> >> racist/homophobic/whatever these days? I'm not saying I fully agree
> >> with his viewpoint, but it is his view, it was stated on his forums,
> >> and it is nothing to do with ordering computer hardware.
> >> --
> >> Michael Rodgers, Plymouth UK
> >> http://www.network-southeast.co.uk
> >
> >
> > At last, a voice of sense in this thread.
>
> Are you sure you're not saying that because you happen to agree to some
> extent with his opinions about homosexuality? (I'm refering to your
earlier
> post - "Not everyone finds homosexuals acceptable or normal, personally I
> find the whole idea abhorrant ").
Yes that is exactly what I am saying.
>The very existance of this thread just
> goes to show that a discussion group, be it on Usenet or a forum, does not
> exist in a vacuum. Until proven otherwise we have to assume we are
> discussing matters with people we can at least respect. If their views,
> whatever they are, prove to be unacceptable to us, that bubble's burst. I
> used to think you were a reasonable guy, for example...
I am reasonable - I just have opinions that may differ to yours. How does
that make me unreasonable?
Ben Rometsch
"Snowdon Computers" <sa...@snowdoncomputers.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aqo1k5$2fo$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
JK
> "JK" <j...@group.com> wrote in message
> news:aqo08r$blgin$1...@ID-30720.news.dfncis.de...
>> Snowdon Computers wrote:
>>> "Michael Rodgers" <ne...@network-southeast.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:aqnpt8$bijb4$1...@ID-43430.news.dfncis.de...
>>>> "Jacob" <j_li...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>> news:aqn2vq$lv9$2...@news.ox.ac.uk...
> SNIP
> with, and therefore I refuse to help finance him.
>>>>
>>>> He's discussing his own views on his own forum. Why is anyone who
>>>> disagrees with anything a minority group does instantly branded
>>>> racist/homophobic/whatever these days? I'm not saying I fully agree
>>>> with his viewpoint, but it is his view, it was stated on his
>>>> forums, and it is nothing to do with ordering computer hardware.
>>>> --
>>>> Michael Rodgers, Plymouth UK
>>>> http://www.network-southeast.co.uk
>>>
>>>
>>> At last, a voice of sense in this thread.
>>
>> Are you sure you're not saying that because you happen to agree to
>> some extent with his opinions about homosexuality? (I'm refering to
>> your earlier post - "Not everyone finds homosexuals acceptable or
>> normal, personally I find the whole idea abhorrant ").
>
> Yes that is exactly what I am saying.
>
So it's OK to shut someone up if you disagree with them?
>> The very existance of this thread just
>> goes to show that a discussion group, be it on Usenet or a forum,
>> does not exist in a vacuum. Until proven otherwise we have to
>> assume we are discussing matters with people we can at least
>> respect. If their views, whatever they are, prove to be
>> unacceptable to us, that bubble's burst. I used to think you were a
>> reasonable guy, for example...
>
> I am reasonable - I just have opinions that may differ to yours. How
> does that make me unreasonable?
OK, let's assume that you are reasonable. That implies that you are
prepared to have your mind changed if you are presented with evidence that
your views are effectively challenged (on your own terms). I would say that
I am reasonable in that sense. So how about you give a clear and honest
statement of your views on homosexuality, and I'll give mine. If you can
convince me you're right, I promise to agree.
Mike Jenkins
>OK, let's assume that you are reasonable. That implies that you are
>prepared to have your mind changed if you are presented with evidence that
>your views are effectively challenged (on your own terms). I would say that
>I am reasonable in that sense. So how about you give a clear and honest
>statement of your views on homosexuality, and I'll give mine. If you can
>convince me you're right, I promise to agree.
How about you take this to e-mail or other more appropriate place.
--
Mike Jenkins
Dreamcast FAQ - http://www.washu.clara.net
Private replies to mikejen...@hotmail.com , ta.
Mike's Auctions: http://makeashorterlink.com/?W49D31BA1
Snowdon Computers
> It doesn't make you unreasonable, it makes you a homophobe.
>
That's your opinion and you are welcome to it.
Snowdon Computers
> Snowdon Computers wrote:
> >> Are you sure you're not saying that because you happen to agree to
> >> some extent with his opinions about homosexuality? (I'm refering to
> >> your earlier post - "Not everyone finds homosexuals acceptable or
> >> normal, personally I find the whole idea abhorrant ").
> >
> > Yes that is exactly what I am saying.
> >
>
> So it's OK to shut someone up if you disagree with them?
It is certainly OK to shut someone up who is posting about an unwelcome
topic on your own messageboards, yes. If someone came into your house (your
property) and started spouting off ant gay opinions would you be happy about
it? The messageboards are his property and he has every right to do what he
wants. If that includes cencership then so be it.
> >> The very existance of this thread just
> >> goes to show that a discussion group, be it on Usenet or a forum,
> >> does not exist in a vacuum. Until proven otherwise we have to
> >> assume we are discussing matters with people we can at least
> >> respect. If their views, whatever they are, prove to be
> >> unacceptable to us, that bubble's burst. I used to think you were a
> >> reasonable guy, for example...
> >
> > I am reasonable - I just have opinions that may differ to yours. How
> > does that make me unreasonable?
>
> OK, let's assume that you are reasonable. That implies that you are
> prepared to have your mind changed if you are presented with evidence that
> your views are effectively challenged (on your own terms). I would say
that
> I am reasonable in that sense. So how about you give a clear and honest
> statement of your views on homosexuality, and I'll give mine. If you can
> convince me you're right, I promise to agree.
My personal feelings about gays are not relevant in this group, especially
in a thread that is bordering on being hopeflessly off topic as it is.
Besides if I posted my opinions on this subject I am leaving myself wide
open to being reported to my ISP for some reason or another so am keeping
them to myself.
Now let's get back to discussing VENDORS and accept that some people thing
gay is acceptable and others do not.
JK
I suspect that's already the case.
William MacLeod
> He also supports the Conservative Monday Club and their views on the
> voluntary repatriation of immigrants.
Ah, liberal lefty poster ALERT. Bring it on, the Conservatives have no
supporters left - you read that in the paper, didn't you? Sure to get you
a little public support from random NG punters.
> The thread, along with a number of others on asylum and race have now
> been deleted. One can only assume why.
Bring in a few politically sensitive issues to try and get support for
your side...
> He does not reply to email
Probably not yours, no. I wouldn't say this statement was true entirely,
would you?
> and has banned a number of other forum members for trying to argue with
> him.
If they show the same attitude as you then I'm afraid he banned them for
forcing their views upon himself and others on the forums. As is true for
an awful lot of the "oppressed" minorities.
> He has also stated on his forum that he will not "allow these forums to
> be used for condoning homosexuality".
Let's see, he pays for the server hardware. He pays for the bandwidth. He
pays for the administration costs. Do you really think this is
unreasonable?
> I suggest, if you have any sense of that is and is not 'morally
> corrupt', that you avoid giving him and his company any business.
I suggest that you take your liberal lefty views and set up your own
Overclockers business and see just how well you fare. You pay for your
own forums, you get to moderate people whose views you don't agree with.
You get to ban. You can make use of your strong minority views to gain
your market share.
As for OcUK, I have used them in the past and will continue to support
them, especially since you have made their stance known publically.
You do yourself and the various minorities mentioned no favours at all. I
take people individually as I find them and try not and label them till
I've found out what they're like for myself. I don't feel the need to
abuse people just because I don't agree with them about * issues. You're
a different case as you've making use of your viewpoints to try and lose
business for a company whom I have found to be reasonable in the past.
That is well below the belt.
You come across as a loud oppressive individual who thinks very little and
believes what he reads in the papers and thinks London is the be all and
end all....
Regards
William MacLeod
Martin
"Ben Rometsch" <ben.ro...@blueyonder.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:QSLz9.41761$8P5....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
Hold on Ben - The idea of men putting their penises in each other's anus' is
very unappealing to me - in fact the very thought makes me sick. However, I
would never discriminate against a homosexual in any way.
Does that make me a "homophobe" too?
Regards
Martin
Bagpuss
<willie@nospam.&macleod-group.com> wrote:
<snip>
>You come across as a loud oppressive individual who thinks very little and
>believes what he reads in the papers and thinks London is the be all and
>end all....
Well alot of people think B all of London ;-)
Trying to oppressing someone becuase you don't like their personal
stance on their own forum is no better than the forum owner him/her
self. Personally I think he is better for standing up and making
himself accountable for his beliefs even if others think they may be
morally wrong.
Still you are both (Ben & Mark) pretty much right about the initial
spread of AIDS for the same reasons, look at where was accepted as the
ground zero for the initial spread, and if some imagrants want to be
voluntary repartriation, why not give them financial assistance?
Better than them being somewhere they don't want to be. Oh and before
you have a paddy as my views do not represent the text book leftie
weenie stance, yes I do have gay friends, who also belive the same
thing as well as a few frends who came over when the Bosnian crisis
started in angst a good 8 or so years ago. A lot of imigrants do go
back, BTW, to help rebuild or improve their homeland and out of their
own expense.
--
This posting are my opinions alone and do not reflect the opinion
of other saggy old cloth cats be they a bit loose at the seams or
not.
I'm gonna drink till I re-boot
nigel. carron
<martint...@spammers.arnsbrae.plus.com> writes
>Hold on Ben - The idea of men putting their penises in each other's
>anus' is very unappealing to me - in fact the very thought makes me
>sick. However, I would never discriminate against a homosexual in any
>way.
>
>Does that make me a "homophobe" too?
Then maybe you should come to terms with the side of you that puts those
ideas in your head..???
--
njc AKA m...@baybus.co.uk (Paypal & nochex e-mail)
David Atherton
"Paul Hopwood" <pa...@hopwood.org.uk> wrote in message
> We don't know Dave Athertons views on such issues, or Sams, or indeed
> those of the CEOs/MDs/directors/shareholders/staff/pets of Aria,
> ebuyer, Scan, Overclock.co.uk, Novatech, Komplett or any of the other
> vendors discussed in this forum so it's hardly a balanced way of
> selecting a vendor. Any one of them could be an axe-touting
> homophonic KKK member with a taste for young boys, but if they don't
> happen to voice their beliefs in a chat room it's okay to do business
> with them?
My views are those of most intelligent people; capitalist on economics,
liberal and inclusive on society.
--
David Atherton, dabs.com plc
nigel. carron
<sa...@snowdoncomputers.co.uk> writes
>Really? He probably thought the same when someone started a discussion
>about faggots in his computing related forum.
Maybe they should have a disgusting foodstuff forum then..
Martin
"nigel. carron" <nigel....@baybus.co.uk> wrote in message
news:AaGnNaB0...@baybus.co.uk...
> In message <Q_Nz9.3336$XN5.482109@wards>, Martin
> <martint...@spammers.arnsbrae.plus.com> writes
> >Hold on Ben - The idea of men putting their penises in each other's
> >anus' is very unappealing to me - in fact the very thought makes me
> >sick. However, I would never discriminate against a homosexual in any
> >way.
> >
> >Does that make me a "homophobe" too?
>
> Then maybe you should come to terms with the side of you that puts those
> ideas in your head..???
I have, and I've decided I don't like it (personally). I have come to terms
with it enough to respect that it plainly works for some people and not to
discriminate as a result.
I think it's reasonable for homosexuals to expect parity in everything.
However, my personal reaction to male sodomy is instinctive and I expect it
to be respected in return.
Can Ben answer my question? Does that make me a homophobe?
Regards
Martin
Bagpuss
<nigel....@baybus.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <Q_Nz9.3336$XN5.482109@wards>, Martin
><martint...@spammers.arnsbrae.plus.com> writes
>>Hold on Ben - The idea of men putting their penises in each other's
>>anus' is very unappealing to me - in fact the very thought makes me
>>sick. However, I would never discriminate against a homosexual in any
>>way.
>>
>>Does that make me a "homophobe" too?
>
>Then maybe you should come to terms with the side of you that puts those
>ideas in your head..???
What by lots of practice until the though goes away? :-)
Ben Rometsch
my opinion, makes him a homophobe.
Of course I'm not saying you have to find sodomy appealing. It's whether you
discriminate against people due to their sexuality. I dont quite see what
sodomy has got to do with it. Lots of heterosexual couples practise it...Do
you find them morally corrupt?
Not all homosexuals are practising sodomists, by the way.
"Martin" <martint...@spammers.arnsbrae.plus.com> wrote in message
news:Q_Nz9.3336$XN5.482109@wards...
Ben Rometsch
Judging by your use of language when referring to homosexuals, along with
words like "infest", you appear to have made you position quite clear.
"Snowdon Computers" <sa...@snowdoncomputers.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aqnsut$a6f$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> "Jacob" <j_li...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:aqn2vq$lv9$2...@news.ox.ac.uk...
> > Because it's quite evidently one rule for gays and another for
straights!
> > That's totally wrong.
>
> That's your opinion, mine differs.
>
> > The reason he doesn't want homosexuality discussed is because he doesn't
> > want it to be acceptable in society - he made that abundantly clear.
>
> Perfectl acceptable, they're his boards. He started them for overclocking
> related discussion not for gays to infest.
Ben Rometsch
"Snowdon Computers" <sa...@snowdoncomputers.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aqnt13$vas$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> "Chesney Christ" <thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:FuGcWLJb...@ntlworld.com...
> >> There's a lot of "morally corrupt" things going on - why single out
gays
> > for special treatment ?
>
> How do you know he did? How do you know the originator of the thread did
not
> abuse hisforum by initiating an off topic thread about gays - which he
found
> unacceptable?
Ben Rometsch
asylum seekers. He has not helped the situation by banning me (twice) for
arguing with him.
It is not, however, a hidden agenda.
If it was a hidden agenda, why on earth did he remove the threads?
"Michael Rodgers" <ne...@network-southeast.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aqnpum$bhejj$1...@ID-43430.news.dfncis.de...
> "Ben Rometsch" <ben.ro...@blueyonder.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote in message
> news:OaDz9.35152$8P5....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> > > I really don't see why people are up in arms about it. It's hardly
> > > the blatant gay-bashing I was expecting. He certainly doesn't strike
> > > me as "anti-gay" or even promoting homophobic sentiments. Fair play
> > > to him for having the guts to have an opinion and voice it without
> > > feeling the need to enforce it on others, which is a substantially
> > > better line than the "let's boycott the gay-bashing homophobic
> > > overclockers.co.uk" mob are taking!
> >
> > both myself and jacob have been permanently banned from the forum
because
> of
> > the argument we had with him over the issue. I'd say that's enforcing
his
> > opinion on others.
>
> At last - a hidden agenda. You are obviously bitter becuase you've been
> banned from the forums, and presumably want to settle the score by posting
> this lot here?
>
> At least we now know why you feel the need to post this.
Ben Rometsch
software development consultancy, and am quite happy with that for the
moment.
Enjoy watching the tory party die, won't you.
"William MacLeod" <willie@nospam.&macleod-group.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2002.11.11.13.17.32.994563@nospam.&macleod-group.com...
Angus Rodgers
<martint...@spammers.arnsbrae.plus.com> wrote:
> "Ben Rometsch" <ben.ro...@blueyonder.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote in
> message news:QSLz9.41761$8P5....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> > It doesn't make you unreasonable, it makes you a homophobe.
> Hold on Ben - The idea of men putting their penises in each
> other's anus' is very unappealing to me - in fact the very
> thought makes me sick. However, I would never discriminate
> against a homosexual in any way.
I'm glad you said that, or else I would have had to return
the tainted homophobic base unit I just bought from you! :)
> Does that make me a "homophobe" too?
No. IMO the word 'homophobe' is a poor coinage, because what
it refers to is not a phobia (or even an ordinary fear - let
alone an aversion, or distaste), and even if it did denote a
fear, it wouldn't be a fear of the 'same' (homo-).
What you have a personal aversion to homosexual behaviour,
and that doesn't make you a bad person. (There's probably
no need for anyone to make up a Greek word for it, either.) :)
If you were to say that homosexuality is bad, rather than
that it just isn't to your personal taste, then (at least
as I understand it) that would count as 'homophobia', and
(more to the point) I would disagree.
Pedantry and jocularity aside, I'm pretty much in line with
those posters who have been put off buying from OcUK (not
that I was intending to anyway!) by this thread (subject, of
course, to unavoidable doubt as to the accuracy of the given
account of how and why people were banned from the forums).
I have mixed feelings, because it's not clear that the OcUK
proprietor conducts his business in any way that harms gay
people - and indeed, it is hard to see how he could do so,
which makes it this case different from boycotting a firm
whose business practices are believed to be immoral.
I just get a vague impression that, other things being equal,
he's not the sort of guy I would want to do business with.
But that could be mistaken, and I think it's a pity that
he's not taking part in this discussion himself.
(Years ago, when I was less jaded and possibly more foolish,
I used to spend too much time on the Net attempting to argue
with a bigot named Mikhail Zeleny, who was atrociously rude,
but also sometimes intentionally or unintentionally amusing.)
> > "Snowdon Computers" <sa...@snowdoncomputers.co.uk> wrote in
> > message news:aqo1k5$2fo$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > > > [big, big snip]
> > >
> > > I am reasonable - I just have opinions that may differ to
> > > yours. How does that make me unreasonable?
--
Angus Rodgers
(angus_prune@ eats spam; reply to angusr@)
http://i.havent.got.a.web.site/
Martin
>
> Of course I'm not saying you have to find sodomy appealing. It's whether
you
> discriminate against people due to their sexuality. I dont quite see what
> sodomy has got to do with it. Lots of heterosexual couples practise
it...Do
> you find them morally corrupt?
>
> Not all homosexuals are practising sodomists, by the way.
>
did not say homosexuals who enjoy sodomy are morally corrupt - I do not
believe that. I said I personally found the thought of it disgusting, which
is not the same thing.
I think I can safely conclude therefore that as long as I do not
discriminate, the fact that I don't like the idea of two men practising
sodomy does not make me a homophobe!
Regards
Martin
Bagpuss
<martint...@spammers.arnsbrae.plus.com> wrote:
<snip>
>Can Ben answer my question? Does that make me a homophobe?
>
Probably and also a racist and a draft dodger as the Hopolites used to
practice it in order to keep tight bonds in their infantry, gay or not
Martin
> > against a homosexual in any way.
>
> I'm glad you said that, or else I would have had to return
> the tainted homophobic base unit I just bought from you! :)
Phew! Then I'd have been stuck with your money *and* base unit......;>)
>
> > Does that make me a "homophobe" too?
>
> No. IMO the word 'homophobe' is a poor coinage, because what
> it refers to is not a phobia (or even an ordinary fear - let
> alone an aversion, or distaste), and even if it did denote a
> fear, it wouldn't be a fear of the 'same' (homo-).
>
> What you have a personal aversion to homosexual behaviour,
> and that doesn't make you a bad person. (There's probably
> no need for anyone to make up a Greek word for it, either.) :)
Agreed, but can't we have a fancy Greek word? How about Homosimpson?
Can't we all just get along?
Martin
Bagpuss
<ben.ro...@blueyonder.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote:
>I have no need to open an overclocking business. I run a successfully
>software development consultancy, and am quite happy with that for the
>moment.
>
>Enjoy watching the tory party die, won't you.
It think he is a bit late for that event :-)
Chesney Christ
>I think I can safely conclude therefore that as long as I do not
>discriminate, the fact that I don't like the idea of two men practising
>sodomy does not make me a homophobe!
Yup, that doesn't by itself make you a homophobe. There are a variety of
sexual practices & persuasions (within the law that is) that many people
find sickening, hetro or otherwise.. so nobody can really complain much
about that. It's another matter altogether to describe it as "just
wrong".
--
George H.W. Bush, as Presidential Nominee for the Republican party;
1987-AUG-27: "No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as
citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation
under God."
Chesney Christ
>Now I own a business, a pub, the pub is in a fairly oppulent area, as with
>all oppulent areas there is a degree of "recreational pharmaceutical" use.
>For instance Cannabis and Cocaine. I caught someone snorting coke off the
>windowsill in the mens toilets. The two people involved got a lecture, which
>basically went like this:-
>
>If you do what you do, fine, If you want to live your life how you want to
>live it, fine, but don't EVER allow what you do with your life to interfere
>with what I do with my life or my livelyhood or I will come down on you like
>a ton of bricks! The parties involved accepted this (as they should, it is
>reasonable).
It's not like they had any say in the matter, as if you were caught
tolerating such conduct on your premises you'd likely lose your license.
Just like if you had under age drinking going on. That is against the
law. (whether or not it SHOULD be against the law is another matter).
> Do you not think similar 'rules' should apply to the above?
No, because being gay is not against the law.
Chesney Christ
>I cant see a problem with his views, and it seems hes man enough to come out
>and say it, most people lie or havent got the bottle too!
It doesn't take any bottle to be a homophobe. In fact I think homophobia
is more about fear than it is about anything else.
Chesney Christ
>> So it's OK to shut someone up if you disagree with them?
>
>It is certainly OK to shut someone up who is posting about an unwelcome
>topic on your own messageboards, yes. If someone came into your house (your
>property) and started spouting off ant gay opinions would you be happy about
>it? The messageboards are his property and he has every right to do what he
>wants. If that includes cencership then so be it.
And as I'm sure you'll agree it's entirely within everyone else's rights
to comment or otherwise make observations on his moderation policy.
Bagpuss
<thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>A certain Julian Hales, of uk.comp.vendors "fame", writes :
>
>>I cant see a problem with his views, and it seems hes man enough to come out
>>and say it, most people lie or havent got the bottle too!
>
>It doesn't take any bottle to be a homophobe. In fact I think homophobia
>is more about fear than it is about anything else.
That'll be the -phobia bit then :-)
Bagpuss
<ben.ro...@blueyonder.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote:
>> I really don't see why people are up in arms about it. It's hardly
>> the blatant gay-bashing I was expecting. He certainly doesn't strike
>> me as "anti-gay" or even promoting homophobic sentiments. Fair play
>> to him for having the guts to have an opinion and voice it without
>> feeling the need to enforce it on others, which is a substantially
>> better line than the "let's boycott the gay-bashing homophobic
>> overclockers.co.uk" mob are taking!
>
>both myself and jacob have been permanently banned from the forum because of
>the argument we had with him over the issue. I'd say that's enforcing his
>opinion on others.
I'd say he is sticking his head in the sand by banning you.
>If you dont feel that labelling homosexuals as 'morally corrupt' is in any
>way homophobic then I think we are talking a different language to each
>other. What would you call it?
Unfortuntunatly there are people like that and you have to just accept
it. Bashing someone becuase they can't cope with the possibile to be a
moral person and have a same sex relationship isn't that much better.
Pitty him, not throw all the toys out yout pram.
Rob S
Excellent thread - 73 posts and still going, mainly off topic. Anyway my
standpoint is they shoud be renamed Overcockers, then we'd all know where they
stand.
maturely,
-Rob
robatwork at mail dot com
Dion L Heap
>
> It's not like they had any say in the matter, as if you were caught
> tolerating such conduct on your premises you'd likely lose your license.
> Just like if you had under age drinking going on. That is against the
> law. (whether or not it SHOULD be against the law is another matter).
>
> > Do you not think similar 'rules' should apply to the above?
>
> No, because being gay is not against the law.
You missed the point entirely!
regards,
Dion L Heap
Chesney Christ
>
And you missed mine. Your analogy about drug consumption doesn't apply.
William MacLeod
> I have no need to open an overclocking business. I run a successfully
> software development consultancy, and am quite happy with that for the
> moment.
Grand.
> Enjoy watching the tory party die, won't you.
You're talking to someone who used to canvass in mining villages in
Dalyell “father of the house” constituency and come out alive. I can see
past the end of my nose.
At some stage you have to seperate the men from the boys. We're seeing
the weasels popping out of their holes....
Regards
William MacLeod
Dion L Heap
> A certain Dion L Heap, of uk.comp.vendors "fame", writes :
>
>
It had nothing to do with drug consumption, it had to do with the habits of
people interfering with or having effect on the lives of others.
regards,
Dion L Heap