If I had the time to waste I would sit here and trawl through the forum at all the nasty posts made to her. It wouldn't be too difficult to see why the problems came about.
All along I haven't sat here and said that Phyllis was faultess and wasn't an unusual poster. Can I ask Smurfy do you have access to the IP logs? Other than that how did you know that she was someone else? I would imagine because there was whispering going on behing the scenes.
What do you expect? If people suspect someone is an alter ego, of course it is going to be discussed and people are going to ask mods to check things like IP addresses.
I will respond to the main points that have been raised in her attack
Well yes she might have, but be the adult and either rise above it or just plain ignore it, if she is attacking left right and centre in my mind the posts should be deleted by a mod. Do you ever remember using this 'excuse' at school, do you remember the response it provoked?
It's all very well saying 'rise above it', but does that mean she should get sympathy for trying to cause trouble? You 'decided' in a recent post that Phyllis suggesting 623 had a STD was not offensive - well that is not for you to decide. Had she said it to you, it would have been.
- All she posted was emoticons
I saw coherent on topic posts by her, and to be fair we are all guilty here for making off topic posts, to be fair after the first few posts of any thread everything generally goes off topic anyway.
Off topic is fine, posting emoticons is fine - if they are relevant. If someone thinks something is funny and posts a laughing emoticon in response, fine. What I and several others objected to was Phyllis resurrected threads as much as three months old purely to add a smiling face and make sure hers was the only name you could see on the list of most recent posts.
- This is a chocolate forum
Oh my yes it is, but it has a general area and an adult area. Therefore it also has off topic sections. She isn't the only one to post about things which aren't about chocolate.
No problem with that personally - but I think BK made that point because Phyllis largely posted to annoy, and her only chocolate related posts were endless threads about Bicerin and Vermeer.
- It wasn't bullying, she wasn't real
Okay, lets look at the bigger picture here. You are a new person coming to the site. you see PB on here, posting away seeming quite merry. You see all the posts that were being nasty about her? You see the thread made to ask people to stop making threads about her? ( I still love the irony of that). How would you feel about that forum, would you think it was a nice place to visit? would you look and think woo hoo that looks like fun lets join in.
No
I imagine most of you would sit there and go hmmm, if I join there I would be treated like that. At the end of the day there are a mod and an admin on this forum for a reason, and the reason is if there are problems they deal with them. It was like a lynch mob the way you all ganged up and had a go at her. If you are unhappy with a post there is a report post function. Use that, don't just bitch in the threads about it. This means that the forum will be without the trouble, you will never be accused of bullying and also it means it looks nicer for new people coming in.
If Phyllis has the right to 'post merrily away', surely the rest of us have the right to respond with our own opinion? On the subject of new posters, give them the credit to judge for themselves. Jamsi for example joined not long before Phyllis but sensed immediately she was a troublemaker.
As for me being short sighted, its true, thats why I was in hospital recently.
Very funny. You should be on at the Palladium.
But I am proud I have the courage of my convictions and stand up for what I think.
As I said earlier in the thread, I recognise that unlike certain other people, you stuck to what you believed. But so have I. Just because I think differently to you it doesn't make me wrong.
