Odeon Calls Out Eclair

[odeon]

Eclair,

I've explained my POV re your and Callaway's recent exchanges but for some reason you won't accept it.

To summarise, I have read only a fraction of them, mostly because I think they basically reiterate old stuff. It's clear that you two have a problem with each other, and there have been all kinds of accusations flying around, but who started what or did what is impossible for me to know. I don't pretend to know; I simply stop reading. I usually read the topics that I have participated in but skip posts that don't interest me. I occasionally check new topics but I don't read them all; only those that catch my attention for some reason.

Anyway, some n00b made a remark re my daughter, basically that she's  mongoloid and should be put to sleep. The n00b didn't know me, had no reason to say anything, it was completely out of the blue, so I reacted and blabberized him/her. No ban. It took a day or two, and then an apology came from that person, together with a request to delete his/her account. I tried to talk him/her out of the latter but got no reply.

Pretty soon some people said that I had double standards because I didn't blabberize those who attacked Phlexor's kids. These attacks were supposedly worse than the one on my daughter. My reply was that maybe so, but they are Phlexor's kids, not mine, and if he feels offended enough he can report it and bring the matter to the staff. I also pointed out that I won't pay for the privilege of having some moron attacking my kids; they are off limits and I will act. Yes, that option is not available to every member, not in that form, but all you have to do is to report a post and we *will* act.

And we have in the past. Not long ago, we did just that after receiving a report re another n00b's post that was way out of line.

I was aware of you and Callaway arguing over her supposedly revealing information from a PM re your kids--you think she broke a trust, she says she did not and doesn't want to be called a liar--but I had *not* seen that exchange about you losing a child. I do wish you had reported it when it happened, but you did not.

Now, months later, you say that you tried to sort this out through PM but that she hasn't replied. I don't know why she hasn't and neither do you, in spite of you claiming otherwise. Instead of waiting for an explanation, you now choose to bring up old posts and attack me. You want me to read through all the old posts, to "wake up", but don't bother to check your facts first. WTF, Eclair? Your implication is that if my views remain different from yours (Callaway's beyond reproach, she's an evil bitch who controls me, she hasn't made public her interests in AS, etc) it will *confirm* your views.

I said I wouldn't explain my views again but I did, mostly because when you're not on that anti-Callaway crusade you can be a lot of fun to read and it bothers me that you won't see my side of this. But also, between the lines you say that I'm either lying or completely manipulated, and that just isn't true.

[odeon]

P.S. Why should I send you a bill? Other than the question being a fairly obvious rhetorical device, what would be the point?

[odeon]

Is it enough to attack me as some kind of substitute for Callaway and then leave it at that when she replies?

Fail.

[Eclair]

Is it enough to attack me as some kind of substitute for Callaway and then leave it at that when she replies?

Fail.

To be honest, I've read what you've posted here in your call out to me a few times and I can't exactly see what you are calling me out on.

Me pointing out what I think was a failure on your part to be consistent in the way you apply the rules to members....all members.

Do I expect you to read every post of every thread. No, that would be unrealistic.

But I do think some things slip past you that you DO see and you have acknowledged at times that IS the case.

[odeon]

You are somehow expecting me to (in your case) act on something I have not seen, or, more generally, act on attacks on other people's kids without waiting for them to step in or report it. Phlexor, for example, would probably prefer me to stay out of it unless he said so, and so would many others. And yet I've repeatedly said that all you need to do is report it.

I've explained that I react differently when the attack is about my kids. They are my kids and off limits, and I will never accept such an attack on a site I pay for. Yes, I know, it's *not* the same for the rest of you lot, and it will *never* be the same, because I have the means and you don't, and I am their dad. Cry me a river. I'll do whatever it takes to keep my kids out of any such attack.

But all the rest of you need to do is report it, bring it to the staff's attention. We don't moderate this place but we do act when something is brought to our attention.

I think you jumped on my case because Callaway wasn't available, and I think it pisses you off that I don't subscribe to the Callaway-is-a-manipulative-bitch bullshit that always surfaces whenever someone gets in an argument with her and can't win.

It's the usual cop-out, that Callaway's managed to manipulate anyone agreeing with her into ignoring all those conspiracies.

Anyway, you somehow expect me to read your mind and act when your kid is concerned (or in some other, conveniently unnamed, cases) but don't bother to get YOUR facts straight re that n00b: no, s/he wasn't banned, s/he was blabberized; I have yet to ban anyone on personal grounds. Yet that sort of thing frequently pops up whenever my actions are discussed. It's part of Bint's MO, just as another part of her MO is to always attack Callaway, and it's tiresome at best. And nobody ever backs up those, they are just thrown out there and treated as facts.

I think you were pissed off with Callaway and she wouldn't play your games or simply wasn't available, so you attacked me.

Fail, Eclair. A big fail.

[Eclair]

You are somehow expecting me to (in your case) act on something I have not seen, or, more generally, act on attacks on other people's kids without waiting for them to step in or report it. Phlexor, for example, would probably prefer me to stay out of it unless he said so, and so would many others. And yet I've repeatedly said that all you need to do is report it.

I've explained that I react differently when the attack is about my kids. They are my kids and off limits, and I will never accept such an attack on a site I pay for. Yes, I know, it's *not* the same for the rest of you lot, and it will *never* be the same, because I have the means and you don't, and I am their dad. Cry me a river. I'll do whatever it takes to keep my kids out of any such attack.

But all the rest of you need to do is report it, bring it to the staff's attention. We don't moderate this place but we do act when something is brought to our attention.

I think you jumped on my case because Callaway wasn't available, and I think it pisses you off that I don't subscribe to the Callaway-is-a-manipulative-bitch bullshit that always surfaces whenever someone gets in an argument with her and can't win.

It's the usual cop-out, that Callaway's managed to manipulate anyone agreeing with her into ignoring all those conspiracies.

Anyway, you somehow expect me to read your mind and act when your kid is concerned (or in some other, conveniently unnamed, cases) but don't bother to get YOUR facts straight re that n00b: no, s/he wasn't banned, s/he was blabberized; I have yet to ban anyone on personal grounds. Yet that sort of thing frequently pops up whenever my actions are discussed. It's part of Bint's MO, just as another part of her MO is to always attack Callaway, and it's tiresome at best. And nobody ever backs up those, they are just thrown out there and treated as facts.

I think you were pissed off with Callaway and she wouldn't play your games or simply wasn't available, so you attacked me.

Fail, Eclair. A big fail.

I don't get what you mean about the 'attacking you because Callaway wasn't available'. I already mentioned your inconsistencies for example, when Soph was trying to bring to your attention that you over reacted. You jumped down her throat when she was actually saying she didn't blame you for being upset about your daughter being targeted.

So stop deflecting and trying to use the 'oh Eclair hates Callaway' slant. Because it's incorrect. I think even Callaway knows that I actually thought quite highly of her. I've seen a couple of low blows that made me mistrust my friendship with her, but I'm happy to resolve that with her.

As for you calling me out and trying to cry 'poor Odeon is being dragged into it for no reason'.

Why call me out? I've said every time in the threads I've seen you be inconsistent in your application of how members are treated, so don't start saying it's something new.

Fail, Eclair. A big fail.

There's nothing to win Odeon, so how can it be a fail? The only fail is you fail to see the issues members bring up. Are dismissive about why people have left and pass it off as drama.

Basically, it's your way or the highway. And after a while, if people take the highway, you don't take it as a reflection of how your inertia might actually be contributing to it.

[Eclair]

Anyway, you somehow expect me to read your mind and act when your kid is concerned (or in some other, conveniently unnamed, cases)

I don't. Not anymore. Because obviously, when I asked for the subject to stop, when I tried to say enough is enough in the thread, it kept going.

Maybe Callaway had a brain explosion and thought it was OK. But it wasn't.

I also think what you wrote is dismissive and quite nasty considering it was about my baby who had passed away....even the way you wrote that is completely disrespectful to the situation.

[odeon]

You are somehow expecting me to (in your case) act on something I have not seen, or, more generally, act on attacks on other people's kids without waiting for them to step in or report it. Phlexor, for example, would probably prefer me to stay out of it unless he said so, and so would many others. And yet I've repeatedly said that all you need to do is report it.

I've explained that I react differently when the attack is about my kids. They are my kids and off limits, and I will never accept such an attack on a site I pay for. Yes, I know, it's *not* the same for the rest of you lot, and it will *never* be the same, because I have the means and you don't, and I am their dad. Cry me a river. I'll do whatever it takes to keep my kids out of any such attack.

But all the rest of you need to do is report it, bring it to the staff's attention. We don't moderate this place but we do act when something is brought to our attention.

I think you jumped on my case because Callaway wasn't available, and I think it pisses you off that I don't subscribe to the Callaway-is-a-manipulative-bitch bullshit that always surfaces whenever someone gets in an argument with her and can't win.

It's the usual cop-out, that Callaway's managed to manipulate anyone agreeing with her into ignoring all those conspiracies.

Anyway, you somehow expect me to read your mind and act when your kid is concerned (or in some other, conveniently unnamed, cases) but don't bother to get YOUR facts straight re that n00b: no, s/he wasn't banned, s/he was blabberized; I have yet to ban anyone on personal grounds. Yet that sort of thing frequently pops up whenever my actions are discussed. It's part of Bint's MO, just as another part of her MO is to always attack Callaway, and it's tiresome at best. And nobody ever backs up those, they are just thrown out there and treated as facts.

I think you were pissed off with Callaway and she wouldn't play your games or simply wasn't available, so you attacked me.

Fail, Eclair. A big fail.

I don't get what you mean about the 'attacking you because Callaway wasn't available'. I already mentioned your inconsistencies for example, when Soph was trying to bring to your attention that you over reacted. You jumped down her throat when she was actually saying she didn't blame you for being upset about your daughter being targeted.

You are deflecting the issues yourself. You want me to act on something that I have not seen. You suggest we should ban callaway, with the clear implication that it's what I've already done with others.

So stop deflecting and trying to use the 'oh Eclair hates Callaway' slant. Because it's incorrect. I think even Callaway knows that I actually thought quite highly of her. I've seen a couple of low blows that made me mistrust my friendship with her, but I'm happy to resolve that with her.

That may be but the way you come across publicly, on the board, tells a different story, and I'm not the only one to have noted it. If you actually think highly of her, it doesn't show.

As for trying to resolve things, why not try sending her a PM instead of hijacking a thread that just happened to be about Callaway. Do you believe any of this yourself?

As for you calling me out and trying to cry 'poor Odeon is being dragged into it for no reason'.

Tell me what the reason is, then, and try to be consistent about it. You've already said yourself that I cannot be expected to have read every thread here.

Why call me out? I've said every time in the threads I've seen you be inconsistent in your application of how members are treated, so don't start saying it's something new.

I had enough of it, as simple as that, combined with the fact that you hijacked an older thread where another member attacked Callaway, plus the implication that I've banned someone for personal reasons. You have still to actually back up your shit, Eclair.

Fail, Eclair. A big fail.

There's nothing to win Odeon, so how can it be a fail? The only fail is you fail to see the issues members bring up. Are dismissive about why people have left and pass it off as drama.

If there is nothing to win, why the implications here re people leaving? I'm going to tell you why, Eclair. You are pissed off and lash out.

Basically, it's your way or the highway. And after a while, if people take the highway, you don't take it as a reflection of how your inertia might actually be contributing to it.

Nothing to win, eh?

People leave for all kinds of reasons. Back up your shit, Eclair, for once in your life.

[odeon]

Anyway, you somehow expect me to read your mind and act when your kid is concerned (or in some other, conveniently unnamed, cases)

I don't. Not anymore. Because obviously, when I asked for the subject to stop, when I tried to say enough is enough in the thread, it kept going.

You lost me here. Link, please.

And am I reading this correctly? Are you saying that I actually should have read your mind? What do you expect of me and the other admins? What should we do, and when? How do we know when to interfere and what to do?

Maybe Callaway had a brain explosion and thought it was OK. But it wasn't.

Huh?

I also think what you wrote is dismissive and quite nasty considering it was about my baby who had passed away....even the way you wrote that is completely disrespectful to the situation.

What I wrote where, Eclair? I have still not seen a discussion about your baby, only the one where you claim that Callaway didn't stop, but your quote doesn't even mention your child. I have responded to your attacks on me but I honestly don't know what you are talking about here.

I have explained why I reacted the way I did re my own child, Eclair, but so far you haven't even acknowledged that I as a parent might react in that way. It seems that you either don't understand my view or simply ignore it, which I find very difficult to understand considering how upset you are about the mention of your baby.

I am sorry about your baby passing away, Eclair. It's probably the worst thing that can ever happen to a parent and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.