Double Standards Elsewhere

I previously reported on the double standards shown by the Healthypages forum.

Unfortunately, this principle exists elsewhere, namely on Andrew Gough's Arcadia forum.

When I cautioned a fellow member of the forum, clarmonde, about certain other members (in light of recently being stalked by them), I was sent this message by the board's Moderator ("Re: is everything connected to Highgate supposed to b sinister?.", 07 Apr 2010 9:45 pm):

I have had to delete part of your recent post, which was a personal attack. This is your second warning. Should you be warned again, you will be suspended from the forum. Please read the House Rules.

Here's what I wrote back ("Re: is everything connected to Highgate supposed to b sinister?.", 07 Apr 2010 10:05 pm):

Firstly, how would advising clarmonde to be "wary" of Caled and George be a "personal attack". George was suspended, but you seem to have allowed him back on again. Meanwhile, Caled has been harassing claremonde in PM, going by her own post.

I requested that you check the IPs of George and Caled, as they are possibly the same person. Instead, you seem to have ignored this.

Now, you're singling me out for "personal attacks"? This is after the numerous personal attacks against me, like David referring to me as an "idiot" for certain Protestant beliefs I have?

Are you kidding me?

To which they replied ("Re: is everything connected to Highgate supposed to b sinister?.", 07 Apr 2010 10:32 pm):

Advising someone to be wary of someone else is a personal attack.

Your request was not ignored. I replied to you about this, indicating that I was not able to reveal identities of forum members.

You are not being 'singled out', as you say. Other forum members are contacted frequently, but I am not able to let you know who has been warned and when.

Here's what I wrote back, minus the quotes from that reply ("Re: is everything connected to Highgate supposed to b sinister?.", 09 Apr 2010 12:48 am):

As opposed to the multitude of personal attacks against myself, and others that are allowed to take place on the forum?

Also note that if I'm making a personal attack by telling clarmonde to be "wary" she's the one telling Caledfwlch to leave her alone on the forum, and also making reference to private convos. Here's her latest.

And nor was I asking you to. As I said, it was only a matter of confirming whether or not they were the same person. I also noticed you allowed George back on, despite his stalking my home address and picture, which he proudly admits to doing.

Yeah, except the difference is, you've threatened to suspend me if I post anymore "personal attacks" (even something telling other forum members to be wary), meanwhile, it's clear that folk like damiana, David, Sheila, etc. are allowed to carry on unhindered.

That's a hell of a double standard.

This reply went unanswered. Later on, I was being harassed by another forum member, "Archangel Michael", so I reported him to the Mod ("See What I Mean?", 18 Apr 2010 5:48 pm):

Hi there Mod,

Archangel Michael has posted the same picture George sent me via PM. Except this time, he's published it on the forum itself:

viewtopic.php?p=60133&sid=efd3f0664f678b2bc8c6b75efe80a811#p60133

I suspect they're the same person, too.

I should note that the picture won't appear in that link because Archy edited it out after I raised a complaint about it on the forum. Should've just reported him, first.

So, what was the Mod's course of action for this stalker/harasser? Simple: suspend me, instead ("Suspension from the Arcadia Forum", 19 Apr 2010 9:07 pm):

Parts of your recent posts have been removed, as they constituted personal attacks and were potentially defamatory.

This is your third warning and therefore, in accordance with the House Rules, your account will be suspended for 14 days.

Your account will be reactivated on 3 May 2010.

Talk about tunnel vision. I still had enough time to fire off this response ("Re: Suspension from the Arcadia Forum", 20 Apr 2010 1:27 am):

You have got to be kidding me.

Are you actually saying it's ok for Archangel Michael to post personal pics (I can even send you the webpage as proof)...that it's ok for David and Barbara to make continuous attacks against me but you're threatening me with suspension?

What was the "potential defamation" I was engaging in?

If you keep up these double standards, I'm gonna have to have a word to Andrew about it. You're clearly discriminating against me.

That, too, went unanswered. So, I decided to contact the forum's owner, Andrew Gough ("Discrimination", Tuesday, 20 April 2010 1:38:39 AM):

G'day Andrew,

I really do hate posting this kinda stuff to you, but I honestly feel like I'm being discriminated against on your forum.

Even though I receive multiple personal attacks from David Farrant and damiana (Barbara Green) and even had the anonymous Archangel Michael post personal pics of me...the Mod sent me a message saying I am to be suspended for posting "potentially defamaing" information on the board and for making personal attacks.

What was this stuff? Who knows. He keeps censoring it without a chance of reply.

I'm not denying I can be a lil controversial, but I can at least back-up what I say. Meanwhile, I've been stalked, had attacks made against my intelligence, my racial background, etc. All of these have passed by without mention.

I hope I can procure some assistance in this matter from yourself.

~ Anthony

And here's what he wrote back ("RE: Discrimination‏", Tuesday, 20 April 2010 2:50:31 AM):

Anthony, hi. I was disappointed to hear this, but I can confirm that while the HGV portion of the forum is overly volatile, the one thing that cannot be tolerated is accusations of others being fraudulent. While on the surface this probably appears to be no worse than much of what you have been levied with, accusing another of being fraudulent or having made things up, brings legal connotations that, historically, have almost led to my site being shut down, for good. So there is a special sort of zero tolerance for that. I suspect this is why they suspended you. But I trust it is not for long?

Thank you for your participation and sorry that it has lead to this temporary hiccup Anthony.

Best,

Andy

It was good to have his sympathetic ear, but wasn't exactly what I was after in its own right. Also, they can't get their story straight? The Mod says I was suspended for "personal attacks", now it's accusing people of fraud? Which one was it?

Anyway, here's what I wrote back ("RE: Discrimination‏", Tuesday, 20 April 2010 10:44:25 PM):

G'day Andrew,

But that's the thing, if what I say con notates fraudulence, what about the stuff levelled against me? Like how many times does it need to be alluded that I'm a liar and deceptive and so forth. The charges levied against me had nothing to do with fraud, but "personal attacks".

And even then, what claims of fraudulence? Again, I'd love to answer to the charges, but the Mod doesn't bother quoting me and selectively censors my posts.

In fact, I first messaged the Mod about Archangel Michael posting personal pics of me (one he obtained from a previously suspended member, George) and who continued to harass me on the forum. The Mod's reply? To say I had been engaging in "personal attacks" and told me I was suspended (till May 3rd)! Like, what the hell is that about?

Surely if I'm to get booted off for personal attacks, then so should Dave and Barb, etc. There's something really outta whack going on here if I'm the only one being punished while they're allowed to carry on unhindered. Clearly your Mod has blatant double standards.

~ Anthony

Andrew didn't bother replying to my message, but, sure enough, I was unsuspended on the 3rd and allowed to post again.

What disturbed me (and still does) about the suspension, more than anything, was the sheer double standards on display. David and Barbara (among others) were given virtual free reign to continue (and still continue) to publish malicious posts, meanwhile, I get suspended.

Clearly, something is rotten in Arcadia.