Oh and I only found your forum yesterday when I searched for my username and the forum name on google yesterday.
Notice:
I am in no way affiliated with the BBC (or associated companies). I receive no payment of any kind in return for posting in this thread, I do so entirely out of my own will.
My posts are entirely my opinion.
I shouldn't have to post this, but since a certain group are making unsubstantiated claims I feel I need to.
Notice:
I am in no way affiliated with the BBC (or associated companies). I receive no payment of any kind in return for posting in this thread, I do so entirely out of my own will.
My posts are entirely my opinion.
I shouldn't have to post this, but since a certain group are making unsubstantiated claims I feel I need to.
Even though I never said the BBC own Freeview or Freesat, I said they pay towards the cost (therefore the Licence fee does) to the costs just like Arqiva, Sky, Channel 4 and Sky do.
Funny how the argument for the anti-Licence fee is that they do not use the BBC at all, and therefore shouldn't have to pay, except for the fact that they would probably be using Freeview.
Sorry for this long post but I don't have any webspace on which to post this to link to it.
I've been having a little email chat with Sao Paulo after I left one comment on a news post on that site. (Yeah. Stupid, I know!)
Note: I went nowhere near the forum.
Here are the messages in chronological order.
SP:
I now have your IP address so if you try trolling my website again I will be reporting you to your ISP who in turn I'm told contact the police. Is the BBC worth that to you? If you had no connection to the BBC you wouldn't be doing this all day everyday, loser.
CW:
Although I have never, by anyone’s definition “trolled” your website (and one comment on one story is not trolling) please feel free to take any action you believe is necessary. And, of course, I do indeed have absolutely no connection to the BBC whatsoever as I am sure the FOI request that I understand someone has made will confirm. Not that you’ll believe it of course.
SP:
You have been told to stay away and even published a screenshot at DS of your ban basically showing everyone there what you are. Now as stated if you continue your ISP will be told and they do contact the police as part of that procedure!
Also FOIs do not give information about the private PR companies the BBC use like this one
Now why don't you be a good boy and do as those guys tell you or you'll upset Mikw and Mossy
CW:
I did not post to your forums and you cannot ban people from posting general comments on your website unless you lock it down to members only.
As I said, your empty threats mean nothing to me and will not succeed in anything other than making yourself and your site look even more stupid than they do now.
Here’s some advice. If you lose the attitude, the paranoia and the conspiracy theories and actually tried debating sensibly then you might get a lot further with your cause than you do at the moment.
I honestly believe that you may have some good and points to make but unfortunately, they are well buried beneath, as I said before, paranoia and the conspiracy theories. This thread, for example, just makes you a laughing stock as there is not a single word of truth or accuracy in any of it.
“Now why don't you be a good boy and do as those guys tell you or you'll upset Mikw and Mossy”
See what I mean about paranoia/conspiracy theories. I don’t know either of these gentlemen personally; only through the forums.
I’m sure they’ll have a right laugh at your latest empty threats though
SP:
I can ban who I like on my site as Tom can do on ds for Hearst. If you think people like mikw and mossy who post 24/7 for thr bbc arn't connected to it then you are morr retarded than you look.
CW:
No, you’re wrong. DS can only ban people from posting to their forums. They cannot stop people from adding comments to the stories on their main website as they sign-in through third-party applications over which they have no control. Which is exactly the same as your site.
SP:
If that was the case your buds would have been banned for using Digitalspy as a platform to attack other websites and libal people with all those off-topic attacks.
Oh and please don't be a prat all your life, they do have admin control over the FB comments, I use it myself so know. You are just showing how thick you are. No wonder you think Mikw, Mossy etc are genuine. Makes prefect sense for them to be defending the BBC 24/7 doesn't it, idiot
CW:
I know they can delete comments but I’m not sure if they can actually block people. If you can then why don’t you?
That said, I can understand why you don’t allow anyone who doesn’t agree with you anywhere near your site; because your arguments are so weak and ill-thought-through that they simply don’t stand up to even a little scrutiny. As all the posts on DS clearly demonstrate.
So, how’s that complaint to my ISP going?
By the way, I wonder what the Daily Mail would have to say if I pointed out to them that you were stealing their copyrighted content for use on your own site? Which, of course, is illegal.
SP:
I can and I have. You were banned from the forum, told to stop trolling but then came to the blog.
This site is about abolishing your beloved BBC TV Licence and not a general site like DS. If you had any intelligence you'd know that.
As for arguments, well if the BBC are so great you wouldn't support them forcing everyone who watches live television to fund it..............now that's having zero argument!
Oh and as you still think you've done nothing wrong I have now contacted VirginMedia with the screenshot as proof. Now you go off acting clever.............well until they contact you
I'm sure Virgin Media will REALLY care about you commenting on a site. What a delusional prat. What does he think they are going to do. You have not done anything wrong.
They really are showing just what their true colours and what thy are all about. Keep us updated on what your ISP say, if anything.:D
Oh BTW, with regard to that message that was sent to your voluntary place of work, it seems to me that the law may have been broken - but please do get proper advice, this is just a bit of googling.
Malicious communications
Section 1(1) of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 provides that an offence is committed by any person who sends to another person, with the intention of causing distress or anxiety:
an electronic communication which conveys a message which is indecent or grossly offensive, a threat, or information which is false and known or believed to be false by the sender; or
any electronic communication which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or grossly offensive nature.
Electronic communication is specified to include any communication sent by an electronic communications network, and any communication (however sent) that is in electronic form, and should therefore cover forum and message board posts.
Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 provides for two further offences, very similar to that under the 1988 Act.
First, a person is guilty of an offence if he sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character, or causes any such message or matter to be so sent.
So, it's definitely worth getting advice / contacting the police about that message.
So, with the unpleasant things that were posted on the TVLR website about you (hope you copied it off), I think TVLR ought to be a bit more circumspect with their threats.
Also, I dont know what you posted, but unless you have contravened the law such as above, I fail to see why your ISP would contact the police.
R410,
I think you have a point there. they are using their forum as a base to co-ordinate abuse of individuals and disruption of other sites like DS.
I dont think their hosting ISP will take kindly to that, especially as it could be considered an offence.
Oh BTW banned poster Steve_Middling AKA feckthebbc has posted this on TVLR
feckthebbc
Newbie
Posts: 19
Reputation: 0
BBC TV Licence: No
Re: Are the pro-BBC brigade on Digital Spy for real?
« Reply #125 on: March 17, 2013, 06:11:17 PM »
Publish
yep I got a 48 hr ban so I am just sitting now thinking what a naughty boy I have been, maybe when I have done my time they will let me play some more?
So are we going to put up with more trolling from TVLR? His intent is absolutely clear.
I dont think their hosting ISP will take kindly to that, especially as it could be considered an offence.
Well not as kindly as Capita are taking it, having a random member of their staff named for no reason, a picture of his workplace and threats of driving a bomb up to the front door.
And I, apparently have now admitted to spamming. Seriously? Could someone please show me where I did that because, as far as I can see, all I said was "one post on one story is not spamming by anyone's definition"
And I, apparently have now admitted to spamming. Seriously? Could someone please show me where I did that because, as far as I can see, all I said was "one post on one story is not spamming by anyone's definition"
I read that. Cannot the amount of bullshit they spout over there.
But then they are not going to like you are they. You don't agree with their propaganda, you dare to question what they say and not just believe it like the sheep that are members there.
Looks like they have blocked my IP too, have not been able to access the site via Chrome all day. Such a shame I am a bit smarter than them and know a way around this block (no where near as complicated as it sounds, and completely innocent too).
(My pay is going to be short today, I have not posted a lot, since we apparently get paid to post :cool:)
Looks like they have blocked my IP too, have not been able to access the site via Chrome all day. Such a shame I am a bit smarter than them and know a way around this block (no where near as complicated as it sounds, and completely innocent too).
Me too. Bit of a faff but it works. And they can't stop it either.
I read that. Cannot the amount of bullshit they spout over there.
But then they are not going to like you are they. You don't agree with their propaganda, you dare to question what they say and not just believe it like the sheep that are members there.
Looks like they have blocked my IP too, have not been able to access the site via Chrome all day. Such a shame I am a bit smarter than them and know a way around this block (no where near as complicated as it sounds, and completely innocent too).
(My pay is going to be short today, I have not posted a lot, since we apparently get paid to post :cool:)
I wish DS would let us post links to that site. So much easier to send people there so they can see just what sort of paranoid conspiracy theories they post, plus the calls to spam other sites, flood comments with posts to drown out any comments they don't like etc.
I wish DS would let us post links to that site. So much easier to send people there so they can see just what sort of paranoid conspiracy theories they post, plus the calls to spam other sites, flood comments with posts to drown out any comments they don't like etc.
You forget attempting to get poster's information from other forums so they can try and take legal action...
You forget attempting to get poster's information from other forums so they can try and take legal action...
Most half sensible sites won't do **** unless they get an official request from at least a police officer (on official business), a lawyer or recognisable company contact, on headed paper/from a company email address.
Otherwise they risk opening the floodgates to all sorts of spurious claims.
A friend who mods another forum mentioned getting a "complaint" about a post praising a company ( the complainant was claiming to be from the company), asking for posts to be removed - it arrived from a hotmail address....
At the time I think he found it extremely amusing.
It's the same with ISP's, most will never pass on information without a court order of some sort (and would risk breaching the DPA massively if they didn't take care).
And that of course totally ignores the fact that the most a forum tends to have on a user is their email address, and a list of IP addresses, which can change every time you log in, so banning an IP address is generally fairly stupid as it usually doesn't work well, although banning an IP range is even more stupid*, but at least slightly more likely to work in the short term.
*"Look Mr X posts from a Sky IP address, lets ban every Sky user in London".
I wish DS would let us post links to that site. So much easier to send people there so they can see just what sort of paranoid conspiracy theories they post, plus the calls to spam other sites, flood comments with posts to drown out any comments they don't like etc.
I agree, mind you if you read some of the latest posts on TVLR they actually think that this is positive publicity!:D
Their "Team Leader" (now thats a laugh:D), Sao Paulo, is now attacking me by deliberately misrepresenting what I have posted.
My comments below were actually in response to a poster who claimed that "the BBC had made zero technical contribution to broadcasting".
About 5 other posters also commented on how ludicrous and ignorant a statement it was. It had nothing to do with "rating the BBC", and was a perfectly reasonable comment in context.
Sao Paulo
the beeboids are loony toons
This was his response to someone who didn't rate the BBC much
Quote from: dynamics
Are you for real?
If you are not on a wind up, then I can only say that you have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about.
Then of course there is this lie from Soa Paulo
Dynamics is definitely the banned member SteveNT. SteveNT was banned in May 2012
Quote from: Sao Paulo
The troll going by the name of Dynamics is SteveNT,
Comments
Notice:
I am in no way affiliated with the BBC (or associated companies). I receive no payment of any kind in return for posting in this thread, I do so entirely out of my own will.
My posts are entirely my opinion.
I shouldn't have to post this, but since a certain group are making unsubstantiated claims I feel I need to.
No Cyril, you just ban them;). Steve is no more
You dont have, just ignore the trolls.
Even though I never said the BBC own Freeview or Freesat, I said they pay towards the cost (therefore the Licence fee does) to the costs just like Arqiva, Sky, Channel 4 and Sky do.
Funny how the argument for the anti-Licence fee is that they do not use the BBC at all, and therefore shouldn't have to pay, except for the fact that they would probably be using Freeview.
I've been having a little email chat with Sao Paulo after I left one comment on a news post on that site. (Yeah. Stupid, I know!)
Note: I went nowhere near the forum.
Here are the messages in chronological order.
He has just proven himself to be a massive idiot.
They really are showing just what their true colours and what thy are all about. Keep us updated on what your ISP say, if anything.:D
Oh BTW, with regard to that message that was sent to your voluntary place of work, it seems to me that the law may have been broken - but please do get proper advice, this is just a bit of googling.
Malicious communications
Section 1(1) of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 provides that an offence is committed by any person who sends to another person, with the intention of causing distress or anxiety:
an electronic communication which conveys a message which is indecent or grossly offensive, a threat, or information which is false and known or believed to be false by the sender; or
any electronic communication which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or grossly offensive nature.
Electronic communication is specified to include any communication sent by an electronic communications network, and any communication (however sent) that is in electronic form, and should therefore cover forum and message board posts.
Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 provides for two further offences, very similar to that under the 1988 Act.
First, a person is guilty of an offence if he sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character, or causes any such message or matter to be so sent.
So, it's definitely worth getting advice / contacting the police about that message.
So, with the unpleasant things that were posted on the TVLR website about you (hope you copied it off), I think TVLR ought to be a bit more circumspect with their threats.
Also, I dont know what you posted, but unless you have contravened the law such as above, I fail to see why your ISP would contact the police.
R410,
I think you have a point there. they are using their forum as a base to co-ordinate abuse of individuals and disruption of other sites like DS.
I dont think their hosting ISP will take kindly to that, especially as it could be considered an offence.
feckthebbc
Newbie
Posts: 19
Reputation: 0
BBC TV Licence: No
Re: Are the pro-BBC brigade on Digital Spy for real?
« Reply #125 on: March 17, 2013, 06:11:17 PM »
Publish
yep I got a 48 hr ban so I am just sitting now thinking what a naughty boy I have been, maybe when I have done my time they will let me play some more?
So are we going to put up with more trolling from TVLR? His intent is absolutely clear.
I will of course report this to the DS mods.
I had thought that the inverted commas/quotation marks and the emoticon would have been a dead giveaway.
I refer you to post #323.
And that deals with my point exactly how?
Well not as kindly as Capita are taking it, having a random member of their staff named for no reason, a picture of his workplace and threats of driving a bomb up to the front door.
But then they are not going to like you are they. You don't agree with their propaganda, you dare to question what they say and not just believe it like the sheep that are members there.
Looks like they have blocked my IP too, have not been able to access the site via Chrome all day. Such a shame I am a bit smarter than them and know a way around this block (no where near as complicated as it sounds, and completely innocent too).
(My pay is going to be short today, I have not posted a lot, since we apparently get paid to post
I wish DS would let us post links to that site. So much easier to send people there so they can see just what sort of paranoid conspiracy theories they post, plus the calls to spam other sites, flood comments with posts to drown out any comments they don't like etc.
Yeah, I wasn't happy that thread got locked and then deleted. I was just about to post the proof that what I had said was correct....
Most half sensible sites won't do **** unless they get an official request from at least a police officer (on official business), a lawyer or recognisable company contact, on headed paper/from a company email address.
Otherwise they risk opening the floodgates to all sorts of spurious claims.
A friend who mods another forum mentioned getting a "complaint" about a post praising a company ( the complainant was claiming to be from the company), asking for posts to be removed - it arrived from a hotmail address....
At the time I think he found it extremely amusing.
It's the same with ISP's, most will never pass on information without a court order of some sort (and would risk breaching the DPA massively if they didn't take care).
And that of course totally ignores the fact that the most a forum tends to have on a user is their email address, and a list of IP addresses, which can change every time you log in, so banning an IP address is generally fairly stupid as it usually doesn't work well, although banning an IP range is even more stupid*, but at least slightly more likely to work in the short term.
*"Look Mr X posts from a Sky IP address, lets ban every Sky user in London".
I agree, mind you if you read some of the latest posts on TVLR they actually think that this is positive publicity!:D
Their "Team Leader" (now thats a laugh:D), Sao Paulo, is now attacking me by deliberately misrepresenting what I have posted.
My comments below were actually in response to a poster who claimed that "the BBC had made zero technical contribution to broadcasting".
About 5 other posters also commented on how ludicrous and ignorant a statement it was. It had nothing to do with "rating the BBC", and was a perfectly reasonable comment in context.
Sao Paulo
the beeboids are loony toons
This was his response to someone who didn't rate the BBC much
Quote from: dynamics
Are you for real?
If you are not on a wind up, then I can only say that you have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about.
Then of course there is this lie from Soa Paulo
Dynamics is definitely the banned member SteveNT. SteveNT was banned in May 2012
Quote from: Sao Paulo
The troll going by the name of Dynamics is SteveNT,
http://www.imagebam.com/image/9320cb244198741
A WHOIS search on the site address, or even tracert will reveal the host.......amongst other things. You should try it.
Well, I am rather pleased to get rid of trolls that try to disrupt this forum.;)
Thats definitely worth a pat on the back
Sao Paulo should change name to Sour Paulo