Page 2 of 3
Re: Derek Botham
Posted: Thu May 23, 2002 10:08 pm
by jj
...just Marcus: get used to it.
Actuall, he seems not have flamed me for about 2 weeks.
I feel quite insulted...........
BTW, the OU is repeating right now the 'Particle Physics' episode.........you will NEVER get an easier intro., and all in 30 mins.
But I could be wrong.........bugger that fool Heisenberg.
Re: Derek Botham
Posted: Thu May 23, 2002 10:18 pm
by Fruitbat
Good point well made Matt.
There seems to be a level of intolerance bordering on elitism in this forum. Unfortunately the "interested amateur" is a second class citizen in the eyes of a certain number of the priveliged few industry insiders.
If the people who run this site only intended it to be for those in the trade, surely they would make that fact very clear.
There has to be room for the "punters" to have a voice! Ultimately, the consumers are the people who give the professionals their living!
I totally agree when trolls, spammers etc are given short shrift - but if a reasonable question is posted then the poster should at least be given the level of respect that the "insiders" have come to require.
Keep on posting Matt.
Re: Derek Botham
Posted: Thu May 23, 2002 11:15 pm
by woodgnome
"If the people who run this site only intended it to be for those in the trade, surely they would make that fact very clear."
in fact quite the opposite point is made very clear in section 2.1 of the faq.
if someone in the industry posts a patronising or unduly dismissive reply in the direction of an 'ordinary' punter, that person is perfectly at liberty to upbraid the offender on those grounds (as long as the response doesn't degenerate into gratuitous and personal abuse). this is what matt has done and it is what everyone is entitled to do, should they feel similarly aggrieved.
the people who use this forum are not restricted by membership or any form of access control and no post has ever been, or ever will be, removed or edited on grounds of some notional hierarchy pertaining to the adult industry.
we pay our own way and consequently make our own decisions on how the forum is managed. if there's something about the way we deal with things you don't like, it's entirely down to us and no one else!
Re: Derek Botham
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 6:30 am
by John Mason
His track record in the industry is not as good as it could be.
He seems to be rather economical when it comes to the truth and it's best to wear wellies when listening to him go on about the industry.......that's as polite as I can be!
Re: Derek Botham
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 7:30 am
by The Stir Fry Master
Perhaps BGAFD has a new meaning???
BE GODLIKE AND FUCK DEMOCARCY
Re: Derek Botham
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 9:00 am
by Phil McC
Good writer, good actor & Richard Desmond likes him.
Phil McC
Re: Derek Botham
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 9:19 am
by jj
He's just playing the System.
We may not like it, but he seems a pussycat compared to some of these guys.
Re: Derek Botham
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 10:13 am
by jj
Brother: see above.
Heh heh.
Drib-Lems, errrmmmm...
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 10:53 am
by The Lib-Derms, sorry,
You must have spent 24 hours thinking that one up.....
.....if you're gonna troll/flame people, at least use your spell-checker.
Or, better still, that pint of grey mush that you laughingly call your brain.
If you can find it.
Re: Drib-Lems, errrmmmm...
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 3:29 pm
by The Stir Fry Master
and your contribution to society is???