Jump to content

Discrimination

andy_youngs

By andy_youngs
in Conservation & Politics

 Share

Recommended Posts

Newt Member

Newt

Posted
Posted

Bob - its hard to tell what you intended with the "Protected characteristics" comment. But then, I have the same problem with quite a few of your comments.

 

The reality here is that the owner of a forum can ban a person whose views he/she does not like.

" My choices in life were either to be a piano player in a whore house or a politician. And to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference!" - Harry Truman, 33rd US President

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Bob Shotter Member

Bob Shotter

Posted
Posted (edited)
Bob - its hard to tell what you intended with the "Protected characteristics" comment. But then, I have the same problem with quite a few of your comments.

 

The reality here is that the owner of a forum can ban a person whose views he/she does not like.

 

Well I have a similar problem with Mike T Jnr and his WSF forum and I sought legal advice the upshot of which was to use the part of the discrimination act that deals with ‘Protected characteristics’ that case is on-going so it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time. I will however let you know how it pans out be it with egg on face or simply a smile.

 

 

Protected characteristics’ definition Religion and belief

 

Religion has the meaning usually given to it but belief includes religious and philosophical beliefs including lack of belief (e.g. Atheism). Generally, a belief should affect your life choices or the way you live for it to be included in the definition.

 

If Andy believes he should be allowed to use the waterways without hindrance then he may well have a case.

Edited by Bob Shotter
Publication2_zpsthmtka6c.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted
Well I have a similar problem with Mike T Jnr and his WSF forum and I sought legal advice the upshot of which was to use the part of the discrimination act that deals with ‘Protected characteristics’ that case is on-going so it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time. I will however let you know how it pans out be it with egg on face or simply a smile.

 

 

If Andy believes he should be allowed to use the waterways without hindrance then he may well have a case.

 

Sums up the disrespect some guys have against forward thinking individuals who afford the public a platform to discuss fishy items. The going gets tough and all that appears to be left is to see how much money can be screwed out of a particular situation.

 

Andys topic or beef has got nothing to do with river access, it's about forum access. Don't bother yourself publicising how you get on, go away and think about the damage you could be doing to internet sites. It was also inappropriate to comment that on this site in any event. What has it got to do with anglers net. A Bl@@dy disgrace.

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bob Shotter Member

Bob Shotter

Posted
Posted (edited)
Sums up the disrespect some guys have against forward thinking individuals who afford the public a platform to discuss fishy items. The going gets tough and all that appears to be left is to see how much money can be screwed out of a particular situation.

 

Andys topic or beef has got nothing to do with river access, it's about forum access. Don't bother yourself publicising how you get on, go away and think about the damage you could be doing to internet sites. It was also inappropriate to comment that on this site in any event. What has it got to do with anglers net. A Bl@@dy disgrace.

 

I have no idea what is meant by your remark ‘how much money can be screwed out of a particular situation’ This has nothing to do with money and in my view neither Andy’s beef or mine for that matter involve anything other than challenging an injustice which in both case’s seems to be denial of access to what has been made an independent public debating platform.

 

Clearly you have a personal beef with me and it now seems wish to pick on my every post, one could call that haresment rather than debate so should you be banned for that?

Edited by Bob Shotter
Publication2_zpsthmtka6c.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted

No clearly you are very wrong, i'm the same as Newt. Quote: I have the same problem with quite a few of your comments.

 

 

They don't do banning here unless you have been very naughty, haven't you noticed that, they,( mods) try and resolve any issues first before wielding the big stick.

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bob Shotter Member

Bob Shotter

Posted
Posted
No clearly you are very wrong, i'm the same as Newt. Quote: I have the same problem with quite a few of your comments.

 

 

They don't do banning here unless you have been very naughty, haven't you noticed that, they,( mods) try and resolve any issues first before wielding the big stick.

 

Again you miss the point I was not looking to get you banned it was a question ie it had a ‘?’ at the end of the sentence, suggesting you might well be miffed if you were banned having not broken any site rules or used any bad language (excluding your veiled explanative which once more has not gone unnoticed)

 

One other point for the record, it was you Mr Luxton who first mentioned another challenge and ‘egg on face’ thus something you might have thought about when saying ‘It was also inappropriate to comment that on this site in any event. What has it got to do with anglers net. A Bl@@dy disgrace.’

Publication2_zpsthmtka6c.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
andy_youngs Member

andy_youngs

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Barry / Bob.

 

Thanks for these posts, entertaining stuff. Not that I'm really any the wiser on what your differences are, but thanks for keeping the thread current.

 

I've had a hard look at the Equality Act, and I to have agree with Snakey1 that I don't appear to have a case for discrimination under that particular piece of legislation.

 

So if I want to keep the dispute live, then I guess I'll have to get my thinking cap on.

 

From a preliminary assessment, it seems that if you are banned from a forum, and feel aggreived at your treatment, then the only form of redress is to go on other forums to explain what has happened.

 

I've certainly vented my spleen on the 'Song of the Paddle' forum for canoeists, and perhaps unsurprisingly, been well received.

 

To date, it's only the FM forum that's kicked back. And if I'm being honest, it was a collision waiting to happen. If it hadn't been FM, then it would of been 'Barbel Fishing World' or some other such forum. In truth, the only reason that I was never banned from the Angling Trust forum is that they wouldn't let me on without payment. I did often toy with the idea of paying the AT fee, just so I could post on their forum, but in the end I decided I would rather burn a £10 note.

 

Thanks AN, for allowing my voice to be heard.

Edited by andy_youngs

never try and teach a pig to sing .... it wastes your time and it annoys the pig

Link to comment
Share on other sites
andy_youngs Member

andy_youngs

Posted
  • Author
Posted
WheW!

 

I like happy endings

 

Phone

It's not quite a happy ending for me mate. The dispute is still unresolved.

never try and teach a pig to sing .... it wastes your time and it annoys the pig

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.

  I accept