Calling Gareth Flynn

H

Homer J

At the Start
Joined
May 2, 2003
Messages
496

Hi, Honest Tom has asked me to post this on his behalf as his posts are being blocked by Gareth.

You were given many opportunities to respond, and with each one you descended into ever more bizarre, incoherent, abusive and embarrassing (for you) rants. In doing so, you rendered the thread effectively useless, hence it's closed.
Click to expand...


Gareth, I posted a reply to this which I found had to be first censored by you. This was ultimately rejected, as was my response to BHA. If you had no intention of allowing me the right to reply then you should have p.m.'d me the above post. You might see the above as "big brother silences upstart" but, to me, in not allowing me to reply it's more like you've rung my doorbell and ran away. I've checked through my posts on that thread and as for the bizarre, incoherent and embarrassing charge, I admit I tend to use some extreme analogies to make my point but they seem perfectly clear to me. No one else has told me they've a problem with my style before now and no one complained on that thread, maybe because you didn't give them a chance to. As for being abusive, as I stated in my censored post, none of my comments were personal as they were directed towards an organisation (the BRA) and a population (Brits - of which I'm reluctantly one) and responses were only confrontational to those who confronted me (the one exception being the post where I tell BHA they're all tits which I apologise for). As far as I can see, the most personal and abusive post on that thread was your own which I've pasted above.

Anyway, I've no real desire to post on a forum where threads are closed at the least sign of disagreement or where someone isn't falling into line with majority view so I'll take my leave of the place. I've been on this forum from the outset and have many acquaintances on here but TBH I've felt of late the place has been hijacked by stuffed shirts and racing apologists. Bye.
 
There are quite a few people on here who, in my opinion, are far more guilty of crimes against politeness and decency than Honest Tom. He doesn't post very often but I look forward to reading what he does post more than many others.
 
I encourage anyone interested to read through the thread and consider Honest Tom's input:

http://www.talkinghorses.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=14818

Precisely two posts of his in that thread were deleted. One of those was direct, personal abuse towards the originator of the thread.

The other one (posted just before the thread was closed) had in my opinion, and the opinion of the other mods, crossed the line of acceptability.

Upon the thread being closed, Honest Tom chose not to PM me or any of the other mods, but instead started a new thread (this is the second last post in the BHA thread, as they were merged). Since he chose to question the decision publicly, he was answered publicly.

In my answer, I specifically addressed his posts in the thread (including the two deleted). I stand by my assertion that:

You were given many opportunities to respond, and with each one you descended into ever more bizarre, incoherent, abusive and embarrassing (for you) rants.
Click to expand...

Again, this is not a characterisation of Honest Tom himself, but specifically addresses his posts in that thread.

He was then put on Mod Control, as I suspected he would start a second new thread to complain. He did precisely this, again choosing not to PM me.

I then spent time last night to PM him directly and answer the points he raised. I received no reply; instead we have the above.

So, to address the above specifically:

Gareth, I posted a reply to this which I found had to be first censored by you. This was ultimately rejected, as was my response to BHA. If you had no intention of allowing me the right to reply then you should have p.m.'d me the above post.
Click to expand...

You are the one who has wanted to have this argument in public, not me. It's a bit rich for you to complain about me not taking this to PM.

I've checked through my posts on that thread and as for the bizarre, incoherent and embarrassing charge, I admit I tend to use some extreme analogies to make my point but they seem perfectly clear to me. No one else has told me they've a problem with my style before now and no one complained on that thread, maybe because you didn't give them a chance to.
Click to expand...

We did receive complaints about some of your comments on the thread.

As for being abusive, as I stated in my censored post, none of my comments were personal as they were directed towards an organisation (the BRA) and a population (Brits - of which I'm reluctantly one) and responses were only confrontational to those who confronted me (the one exception being the post where I tell BHA they're all tits which I apologise for).
Click to expand...

What about the post where you called the poster, and all his colleagues "corrupt inbreds"? Or the first post of yours I deleted? These were not personally abusive? You were given plenty of leeway to make your points, and your "extreme analogies" were left alone until they went beyond the pale. Again, anyone who wants to read the thread can do so and see just how much you were denied your chance to speak your mind.

Anyway, I've no real desire to post on a forum where threads are closed at the least sign of disagreement
Click to expand...

How many threads would you like me to link to which have not been closed at the least sign of disagreement?

Again, I invite anyone who wants to to read through the thread and ask themselves whether Tom's assertion above, that it was closed "at the least sign of disagreement" is accurate.

You're absolutely free to rebut any of the points I've made here either privately or publicly in this thread, with no pre-moderation. I'll leave it up to you.

As usual, however, it's very easy to blame the mods and accuse them of all sorts. Undoubtedly, we don't always get it right, but my intentions, the intentions of the other three current mods, and the intentions of the numerous other members who have generously given their time to help out with moderating since the forum was on the brink of shutting down completely a couple of years ago has always been the same: to try and strike a balance between maintaining robust debate and preventing things from getting out of hand or deteriorating into abuse.
 
Desert Orchid said:
There are quite a few people on here who, in my opinion, are far more guilty of crimes against politeness and decency than Honest Tom. He doesn't post very often but I look forward to reading what he does post more than many others.
Click to expand...

Completely agree.
 
I should also say we received quite a few complaints about his behaviour from a few members, which makes the job of sitting as piggy in the middle no easier
 
Last edited:
Shocking scenes. What is the world coming to when you can't give out a gentle piece of abuse like "corrupt inbred", particularly in the context that it was delivered. :mad:
 
Just some of the quotes. What if everyone discussed their views or opinions in a similar way....do we want the forum to go down this route? Like Gareth said, this place was on it's knees a year ago...still far from perfect but I still enjoy it so I would hope those that do as well then concentrate on the positives rather than simply picking holes from the side lines which will only lead the forum back into more discontent. Something to remember if you are responding to this thread.​

Quote:Corrupt inbreds policing corrupt inbreds.

Quote:Shouldn't you change your name to the BRA (British Racing Association) as the organisation is full of t1ts? Corrupt inbred ones at that.

Quote:PS Get a real job.

Quote:Why would I want to engage with people who have given tacit approval to criminals who have robbed me of hundreds of thousands of pounds over the last decade?

Quote:You sound like a typical Brit. Take it up the @rse without a cross word.

Quote:More typical brit thinking.

Quote:I had no desire to engage in dialogue with people who tacitly supported massive fraud

Quote:If you consider my calling the BRA a shower of corrupt inbreds to be excess bitterness then you're displaying classic Brit thinking.

Quote:In a civilised society some of these jockeys and trainers would've been kicked half to death by racegoers.

Quote:If the Irish republicans had hung on a few centuries the loyalists would soon have realised it was nice to be nice and dismantled the aparthide state they were allowed to set up within civilised Britain.

Quote:You at the BRA should take on board that there is nothing more likely to lead to violence than one group of people being p1shed on by a smug "we can do what we like" other group of people while the governing body gives the setup tacit approval.

Quote:I was attacked by torch wielding racing insiders and I'm not even allowed to respond.
 
Last edited:
I was disgusted with Honest Tom's behaviour who acted like he should be on the Betfair forum rather than here. It is pleasing to see the BHA come and connect with the fans of the sport like this but why should they bother if they got a potty mouth slagging them off every 5 minutes.

Are some of the things he said not libellous;

Adj. 1. libellous - (used of statements) harmful and often untrue; tending to discredit or malign
 
Last edited:
Just a suggestion but..............


Take a deep breath, go & make a cup of tea

Forget it, its not worth getting wound up over

LIFE IS TOO SHORT!
 
Can't we give Honest Tom a reprieve in order that he can provide his definition of the term "typical Brit"?
 
I do find it rather bizarre that people bother to complain to moderators about other peoples posts when they're not even directed at them - what is the point? If you're complaining about abuse being slung at you or something that you find personally offensive then fair enough, but seems a bit petty to me to complain that you don't like the things someone says. No-one is forced to read every post on here - if you don't like a poster's style then put them on ignore rather than waste time bombarding moderators with complaints.

It would be a shame to see Honest Tom not posting on here any more - he's been around since the early days and his posts are often hugely entertaining, even if it seems many people can't understand his dry wit.
 
Gareth Flynn said:
I encourage anyone interested to read through the thread and consider Honest Tom's input:

http://www.talkinghorses.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=14818
Click to expand...
As a layperson i've read the thread (and to be fair) have considered the BHA persons imput as well. I have to say that replying to Tom (with what could be seen as cocky reply's) whilst you were trying to reprimand him does seem like a) the BHA person wasn't too offended so why should the admin be, or b) the BHA person thinks he's is now one of the mods.

Either way these type of posts don't do the BHA man any favours in taking the moral highground.

"In a civilised society some of these jockeys and trainers would've been kicked half to death"

Great shout, brutality as retribution IS a hallmark of civilisation Tom. As is jingoism and mindless vitriol. Impressive. You've really shown us Brits a thing or two! Genius! :)
 
Last edited:
Point taken Martin, but:

a) the BHA person wasn't too offended so why should the admin be
Click to expand...

We would love to be able to moderate this place in such a way that we're only called on to take action when someone who feels that something has been said directly to them has been abusive.

However, in reality this is unworkable given that:

a) third parties often complain about something not said directly to them (often with good reason)

b) if the person it's aimed at doesn't care, it looks like we haven't taken action, which then leaves others with the impression that it's acceptable.

c) some would rather throw abuse back than report the post, meaning we have to try and intervene before whole threads get ruined. If we don't, we get people complaining about our inaction.

b) the BHA person thinks he's is now one of the mods.
Click to expand...

I think the amount of direct criticism that the BHA get on here that goes untouched should disabuse you of that notion. Hamm's posts in that thread, to take just one example, pulled no punches in saying what he thought of them.
 
Tom

I think you may have posted a bit strongly..which I have been guilty of plenty..maybe you weren't in the right frame of mind when you posted..I don't know...I know I have been guilty of that in the past.

I read the thread and wasn't really bothered by the stuff but it certainly came across as pretty angry..i was surprised rather than offended tbh.

looks a difficult one to moderate tbh

carry on posting for goodness sake anyway :cool:
 
I'm so glad I'm not a moderator. These guys have enough on their hands without having to spend time sorting out matters like these and, on the whole, I reckon they do a damn fine job.

For all I can be as thin-skinned as a grape at times, I took Tom's remarks as more of a scattergun attack than directed personally at anyone.
 
Back
Top