Walkie, what role did I play in the closure of AFF? None. I was just an observer saddened by how events unfolded.
Sharing previous usernames. Is that a requirement here? Al seems to be doing just fine assigning defunct AFF usernames to current members on here, so perhaps he can give me one.
And I only need to observe current behaviour to see history repeating itself. No need to exhume the corpse of AFF. And, indeed, one of us is very likely wrong.
Gareth and Amy achieved far more for the recognition of neurodiversity than any of us can dream of. They have my utmost respect.
I was asking what role you played in AFF, not in the " closure of AFF.". Small but significant difference. Like, suppose you were a Mod there, then I'd think "Ah! you were privy to info that most people wouldn't be privy to" and your opinion would accrue a bit more weight for that. At the other extereme, suppose you were not even a regular participant, but somebody who came and went erratically, then your opinion would lose weighrt because you might easily have missed some imprtant developments, given that the forum took so long to unravel. Look at it this way: you're asking us to accept your opinion over a bunch of contradictory opinions that have posted on this site already. "just an observer" doesn't quite cut it. That suggests you're impartial, sure (though we only have your word for that) but it doesn't suggest that you know the story any better than anybody else does. You clearly think
you know better, but you really need to back that up, somehow.
Of course, sharing previous usernames is not a requirenent, not here, nor anywhere else, but when people comment on some past situation, like that, they generally disclose such identifying info as a matter of course. And somebody who resists sucvh disclosure is bound to come under suspicion. People wonder: : is this somebody that would denounced as an asshole, if they only knew who it is? You don't
have to disclose a damned thing, but you'd potentially improve your case immensely if you did.
I can't believe that I've been drawn into explaining explaining this. It ought to be flaming obvious. But then i'm a spazz , ofc
and too easily drawn *sigh*
"One of us is likely wrong"? excuse the nitpicking , but i said "one of
would be wrong"
if we leapt to conclusions based on "uncanny similarities" . Can't speak for for you, but I'm still a long way dfrom reaching any firm conlusions, based on
my "uncanny similarities" , I just think they're much better than your uncanny similaries
. That said, i haven't presented them yet, so there;'s literally no competition there. My real point was "Let's not jump to conclusions, eh?"
Gareth and Amy achieved far more for the recognition of neurodiversity than any of us can dream of. They have my utmost respect.
Well I think I've already pretty much agreed with that statement. Although I think it puts the "rest of us" down , when you put it like that. Other people hacve made great achievements in that field. And what Gareth and Amy achieved ibefore they directed their attention to other things, leaving a rudderless forum to look after itself (by all accounts) isn't terribly relevant to what happened next, or who was responsible for that. Don't get me wrong , that's not to blame Gareth and Amy, but to say that it ceased to have much to do with Gareth and Amy or their past achievements. It wasn't a shrine to G&A but a living, breathing, growing community, that went on living and changing in their absence. And given that Al was instrumental in holding that rudderless ship on course, it's not all that surprisding that he (and a whole bubch of others") clashed with Amy when she reappeared and "threw her weight around" . It was bloody delicate situation, by all accounts,; it didn't need a clash betweeen two such personalities ( I think I'll let others mentally fill in the adjectives). Al suddenl;y went from being the right man in the right place, to being the wrong man in wrong place (supposing that tact and diplomacy were required) along with whole a bunch of others. Maybe Amy failed to appreciate that she owned an internet forum, not the community that inhabited that place? That's how it sounds, from some accounts; and heck she's surely a human being being, not an infallible goddess.
Ofc, Al could try the partience of a saint, as we know, but it doesn't follow that the whole debacle was all down to Al. Neither does it follow that I^2's problems are all down to Al, though he surely plays his part in making this board uncomfortable. Let's try to be fair to the man...and not only because it's nice to be fair, but also because
being unfair is bound to make matters worse. Al has a very low tolerance for that sort of thing, you know? As do a lot of people, especially aspies.
Oh! Btw, I haven't noticed Al assigning defunct uisernames from AFF to people. Maybe he does, but I think you might actually be looking at this: a lot of us just carry the same old username from board to board, and then suddenly decide to change it, once everybody's sure that name is set in stone. Sometimes the new name sticks, sometimes it doesn't. eg most of us still call Round Hound Ozy, just because he's been Ozy since before AFF or I^2 even existed, he signed up here as Ozy, so that's how we naturally think of him . A whole bunch of people have changed their usernames, past 2-3 years and some others change usernames more often than they change their underpants; so we've all become increasingly resistant to those changes.
But I digress: it's your name that's the issue here. If you want to leave you past ID behind and swan around vbeing somebody else, that's fine. BUt if your going to criticise people, based on things that your current ava never experienced, then peopkle are going to demand to know who you are , and quite rightly. There are aloads of good reasons why it's bad form to do what you're doing.
For instance: Al suspects you're some old I2 member with a grudge against him , doesn't he? He's not just being paranoid. A lot of us have same suspcions. For example, I (and one or two otheras) thought you were probably a former member called Zegh , initially.
Now Zegh is somebody I'd be really glad to see return to this board, but I hope to God he stays out of this argument, becauuse the feud between him and some other members here was really explosive, and the latterday feud between Al and Odeon pretty much grew out of that. So, much as I liked Zegh, if you turned iout to be Zegh hiding under an "impartial" p[ersona. I would personally feel sick to my stomach , and so would others . That would just be so utterly wrong and contemptible.
I changed my mind about that idea that you're Zegh, you might be glad to learn. That's just an example, to make it clear why people are going to care to know who you are , and not only on AFF, but here too, if you've ever had some other ID here.
I said that one of theis boards problems ATM, is an awful lot of distrust and suspicion setting in. Now you've swanned in and set a whole bunch of alarm bells ringing haven't you? Not good. You could presumably allay those suspicions, and contribute to the heath of this community, just by telling us who you've been . But you don't want to? Why the heck not?
