Mulley Watch

ntlbell

who gives a f*ck what he thinks to be honest.

mike65

ntlbell - got issues? If so leave them outside.

Mike.

cgarvey

ntlbell wrote: »

who gives a f*ck what he thinks to be honest.

A lot more people than care about what you think, obviously. Consider yourself warned.

ntlbell

cgarvey wrote: »

A lot more people than care about what you think, obviously. Consider yourself warned.

Warned for what exactly?

Can you explain what I did wrong? if it was some random "commentator" would I have got the same warning?

Thankfully I'm intelligent enough not to have to worry about what he thinks..

Dudess

Well then why are you posting?

ntlbell

Dudess wrote: »

Well then why are you posting?

why are you?

Dudess

Because I'm interested in what Damien Mulley has to say. I think he's a great writer.
You, on the other hand, are going through your usual phase of low-level trolling and sh1t-stirring and you just happened to pick this thread to indulge in it. If you don't give a **** about what Damien Mulley thinks and you are "intelligent enough not to have to worry about what he thinks" (Christ, he's a journalist - people do discuss what journalists say/write but kudos to you for your intelligence) again, why are you posting? Oh yeah... to troll.

Cabaal

ntlbell wrote: »

who gives a f*ck what he thinks to be honest.

Lots of people because it allows people to see there is failings in all this, I'd imagine you were warned due to foul language

Dudess

I'd say it's more to do with the fact that he used the thread to vent whatever frustrations he has (he does that every so often) and to belittle other users here.
Wait for it now: he'll come back acting all innocent.
ntlbell, imagine if someone put an article by a relatively well known commentator on mental illness on the Psychology forum and a user just posted up "I don't give a **** what they think". Of course you deserved a warning. If you can't see how you did, even with the analogy I just used, then really, you should re-assess this intelligence of yours.

kingkane

Dudess wrote: »

Because I'm interested in what Damien Mulley has to say. I think he's a great writer.
You, on the other hand, are going through your usual phase of low-level trolling and sh1t-stirring and you just happened to pick this thread to indulge in it. If you don't give a **** about what Damien Mulley thinks and you are "intelligent enough not to have to worry about what he thinks" (Christ, he's a journalist - people do discuss what journalists say/write but kudos to you for your intelligence) again, why are you posting? Oh yeah... to troll.

Err...Damien isn't a journalist. You could say he's a lot of things in this area like activist, agitator, blogger but he's not a journalist.

Dudess

Well he writes for a national newspaper and other publications so he is a freelance/part-time one anyway.

watty

Damien and I wouldn't be drinking buddies, but I think it was an unreasonable remark. This isn't Usenet.

The fact that RTE interviewed him means it is important what he said.

ntlbell

Dudess wrote: »

I'd say it's more to do with the fact that he used the thread to vent whatever frustrations he has (he does that every so often) and to belittle other users here.
Wait for it now: he'll come back acting all innocent.
ntlbell, imagine if someone put an article by a relatively well known commentator on mental illness on the Psychology forum and a user just posted up "I don't give a **** what they think". Of course you deserved a warning. If you can't see how you did, even with the analogy I just used, then really, you should re-assess this intelligence of yours.

But what I decide to post when not in After Hours is nothing got to do with you at all...

Damien is a blogger he writes constant nonsense on a daily basis, the fact national papers or even national tv stations give you air time doesn't have anything to do with they're are plenty of plonker's writing in the papers, plenty of them on RTE and even more with blogs. Taking the psychology forum if they posted something by someone unqualified to answer the question's who had some useless blog which is pretty much non related to psychology I would say the same thing!

You chose to comment on something I said which has nothing to do with you and then question why I posted? pot kettle black and you're doing it constantly and frankly it's getting a bit tiring.

I didn't ask you why i was warned, you're not a mod here, so untill I'm questioning you in AH stop answering for other mods.

Cheers

Dudess

ntlbell wrote: »

Damien is a blogger he writes constant nonsense on a daily basis, the fact national papers or even national tv stations give you air time doesn't have anything to do with they're are plenty of plonker's writing in the papers, plenty of them on RTE and even more with blogs.

If you'd said that instead of "I don't give a **** what he thinks" it would have looked a lot less like trolling.

You chose to comment on something I said which has nothing to do with you and then question why I posted? pot kettle black and you're doing it constantly and frankly it's getting a bit tiring.

Probably because you regularly engage in trolling. And you spend your entire time on Boards commenting on/questioning other people's posts so... pot, kettle, black right back at ya.

ntlbell

Dudess wrote: »

If you'd said that instead of "I don't give a **** what he thinks" it would have looked a lot less like trolling.

Probably because you regularly engage in trolling. And you spend your entire time on Boards commenting on/questioning other people's posts so... pot, kettle, black right back at ya.

eh what?

You think everything I say looks like trolling..

Are you annoyed because he's from Cork?

I might question a post, I don't question why they posted.

you went out of your way to post on a thread to ask someone why they posted in a thread?

That's just bizzare.

kingkane

Dudess wrote: »

Well he writes for a national newspaper and other publications so he is a freelance/part-time one anyway.

He doesn't write for a national newspaper, you could well say he comments on stuff which gets used in the papers but that ain't journalism. He did have an off/on column in the tribune for a while which they thought so much of they didn't bother renewing it. Calling him a journalist is no more accurate than calling him a software engineer neither are correct but folks who know no better think it sounds right.

Cabaal

tbh ntlbell you look like your trolling, Dudess is correct and your post was fair from constructive

In Fairness regarding Mulley, if he wrote for a paper he's a journalist

Dudess

ntlbell wrote: »

you went out of your way to post on a thread to ask someone why they posted in a thread?

That's just bizzare.

Very like something you'd do really... And I didn't go out of my way, I was interested in the thread.

cgarvey

ntlbell wrote: »

Can you explain what I did wrong?

I deem your post to be a troll amount to personal abuse (2 violations of the forum charter).

ntlbell wrote: »

Thankfully I'm intelligent enough not to have to worry about what he thinks..

Certainly not how you come across, so that you know.

Anyway, take the matter to Feedback or somewhere else, because this is not an IO subject.