Originally Posted by VPescado
Madame President,
First of all, I would welcome you to read my words a bit more carefully. I said that I was the first to raise this issue in this forum. I stand by what I say, and its an important distinction - not only as it makes what I said true, but because there are a lot of members out there that new or simply have not been involved in the specific history of which I speak.
We both know that I am not referring to a clique of people interested in the chess club, but in a specific clique that you are indeed a member of. So there is no sense in trying to convince you as you know the truth.
In another thread today, someone posted some old threads that cast a member of the other clique in a bad light. The post has been since deleted, but it was interesting that the account that posted it had been around for many years, but only posted 4 times including today.
You don't have to be a rabid conspiracy theorist to suspect this might have been a political dirty trick by someone of the TireFlock clique to attack an opponent using a secondary handle. This is exactly the sort of thing that many people associate with the TireFlockers and don't be surprised when these same pseudo-handles come out of the woodwork to vote for other members of this clique.
Very interesting observations. ^
Another interesting observation - from me this time
The fake handle used to make these posts was
not banned as a user due to making them. As is usual when trolls with no real previous posts make deliberately inflammatory posts purely to derail threads.
Of course that fake handle could NOT come back and make
more disruptive posts if it were banned. Think on that.
missydarlin is a moderator in that forum, and like her fellow mods (also both Talk Board members) could have easily banned that handle. I am aware that they all received a number of "report post" reports on that user.
At first it was partly edited, leaving the bulk of the post intact for quite a long time. Then eventually totally edited.
The moderator doing so left his comment - with his own Talkboard Election signature slate in place at the base. Totally in-appropriate for that Forum one would have thought, from any of the Mods there. Make a seperate post as a member if they wish, but leave it off all "official" actions. Common sense would indicate they check the "no signature" box for "official' posts in that forum, to give the
impression of impartiality to the debate, to side-stop this kind of editorial endorsement:
This Talkboard member is voting for: Bhatnasx, Cholula, Gleff, Missydarlin, Peteropny.
That user banning was
not done, despite that handle having clearly admitted on board
it was a fake handle of another well known original FT'er. I have little doubt of whom.
Randy had made it clear most thought, that there was to be
NO electioneering this year
in the Talk Board Forum. Many actions that went on there last year are rather sadly, now infamous. A dark page in FT history. I was advised that NO moderator
or Talk Board member would have
any role in this year's election debate - outside of THIS forum, so can only assume not everyone got that message.
Nope, there are
no cliques at work in this election. Heaven forbid.