Discrimination

[cg74]

hmm.

I completely agree that no one could fathom exactly what my point was, so I was therefore rude and argumentative. And that's why I got a temporary ban.

The permenant ban came for bringing that forum into disrepute on this forum.

Do I have any regrets?

None whatsoever.

 

Andy, reading your response quoted above, it just leads me to wonder what the purpose of this thread is?

 

You admit to being rude etc, you accept that you aired your (negative) thoughts of FM on here; thus bringing the FM name into disrepute.....

 

Really, what outcome did you expect?

 

"Do I have any regrets? None whatsoeve."

I never thought for a minute you would have!

 

 

Regards discussing/debating greater access for more water users (canoeists, kayakers etc); I would but history tells me not to bother engaging with you; as you rant and don't consider anyone elses opinions as having any validity or value!

[Brian Carragher]

Regards discussing/debating greater access for more water users (canoeists, kayakers etc); I would but history tells me not to bother engaging with you; as you rant and don't consider anyone elses opinions as having any validity or value!

 

Exactly the same thoughts as the majority on here have

[lutra]

I think the real issue to be addressed here, is whether rank and file anglers are prepared to allow this man to represent them as part of the 'voice of angling'

They already are Andy.

 

As a bit of a country loving lad who enjoys the great outdoors, many of its sports (inc. kayaking and yes fishing) and its wildlife, I don't think I've ever found someone who represents perfectly how i think it should be. However if i had to pick between you and him, from want i have seen of your views, you would never get my vote Andy.

 

I am sorry to say this Andy, but you just seem to be coming across as a right twit with a big chip on his shoulder to me and i can't see how you are doing the sport of kayaking any favours. In fact i think FM may have done it more by shutting you up (good on FM i say).

 

I'm sure somewhere deep down Andy your hart must be in the right place (or maybe not) Andy, but i can't see it.

[andy_youngs]

Andy, reading your response quoted above, it just leads me to wonder what the purpose of this thread is?

 

You admit to being rude etc, you accept that you aired your (negative) thoughts of FM on here; thus bringing the FM name into disrepute.....

 

Really, what outcome did you expect?

 

"Do I have any regrets? None whatsoeve."

I never thought for a minute you would have!

 

 

Regards discussing/debating greater access for more water users (canoeists, kayakers etc); I would but history tells me not to bother engaging with you; as you rant and don't consider anyone elses opinions as having any validity or value!

The outcome I expected on the Fishing Magic Forum was to get banned. I went into it with attitute because I believe that there is a profound injustice being perpetrated, and I'm therefore going to do everything in my power to prevent that from happenning.

 

Do I really care that I've p$ssed off a load of barbel fishermen on the Hampshire Avon? Not really. That's what I intented all along, and the reality is that I don't give a rats **** about the FM forum or whether or not they choose to admit me. I just don't care.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the best thing they could of done is to ban me. If they'd had any sense at all, they would have done it from the outset. Make no mistake, I've got real issues with people who are trying to close our rivers down to navigation access.

 

And as a result, I'm using best endeavours to place a permanent moritorium on artificial introductions of barbel into the Wensum and the Hampshire Avon because I don't think it's helpful to the common good.

 

You can pretend it's not happenning if you want. You can try and ridicule and mariginalise your political opponents. But that ain't gonna stop the process.

 

I've put a Freedom of Information Request in to reveal the barbel stocking history of the Hampshire Avon.

 

I'll print the reply on here as long I haven't been banned. If I have, then it will just go up on to other internet medium.

[andy_youngs]

Exactly the same thoughts as the majority on here have

That's not the majority on here. That's just you trying to ram your views down everyone elses throats.

[Brian Carragher]

Andy

 

Are you really as stupid as your postings seem to suggest?

 

Read your own posts above and ask the question, do your posts come across as rational or illogical rants with the intention of getting yourself banned?

 

Here's a clue

 

"Do I really care that I've p$ssed off a load of barbel fishermen on the Hampshire Avon? Not really. That's what I intented all along, and the reality is that I don't give a rats **** "

 

And that's patently obvious with your early morning alchohol fueled venom

[Phone]

Brian,

 

Pretty hard to save the world with personal salvos at Andy. The rest of us are big boys and girls.

 

Phone

[Brian Carragher]

Well you've lost me, if that was an attempt at humour, well lets just say it did'nt quite cross the water

 

Jusst for the record, I'm not after saving anything much less the world

[cg74]

The outcome I expected on the Fishing Magic Forum was to get banned. I went into it with attitute because I believe that there is a profound injustice being perpetrated, and I'm therefore going to do everything in my power to prevent that from happenning.

 

Do I really care that I've p$ssed off a load of barbel fishermen on the Hampshire Avon? Not really. That's what I intented all along, and the reality is that I don't give a rats **** about the FM forum or whether or not they choose to admit me. I just don't care.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the best thing they could of done is to ban me. If they'd had any sense at all, they would have done it from the outset. Make no mistake, I've got real issues with people who are trying to close our rivers down to navigation access.

 

And as a result, I'm using best endeavours to place a permanent moritorium on artificial introductions of barbel into the Wensum and the Hampshire Avon because I don't think it's helpful to the common good.

 

You can pretend it's not happenning if you want. You can try and ridicule and mariginalise your political opponents. But that ain't gonna stop the process.

 

I've put a Freedom of Information Request in to reveal the barbel stocking history of the Hampshire Avon.

 

I'll print the reply on here as long I haven't been banned. If I have, then it will just go up on to other internet medium.

 

So you went on FM expecting to get banned, in doing so deliberately courting trouble and yet you talk of a "profound injustice being perpetrated"

Well this may surprise you, few actually care, why? Because of you and your attitude!

 

As for upsetting the Hampshire Avon and Wensum anglers on the FM forum; sorry I think you're deluded; here's said thread:

http://www.fishingmagic.com/forums/fm-news...5-november.html

I think you'll find nobody cared for anything you wrote, except me and that was only as a joke....... Oh yeah; it wasn't the Hamps Avon stockings that we discussed, it was the re-introduction/top-up stockings on the Great Ouse, a river which barbel are indigenous too, perhaps you should consult Izaac Walton (not literally, as he's dead), as he wrote about the Great Ouse's barbel way back in 1653.

Plus a fleeting mention of the Wensum and logic suggests that barbel would've been indigenous to that river and if it wasn't for man's meddling they might be naturally still in the river?

 

As for all this "marginalise your political opponents"

If you knew anything at all about me (which you clearly don't), you'd know I don't agree with any alien stockings into our rivers.

 

At this point I'll leave you to have another pointless rant.

[andy_youngs]

So you went on FM expecting to get banned,

Not exactly,

 

I went on FM intending to tell the truth as I see it, anticipating that it might result in a quarrel, and then being prepared to see the argument through to its natural conclusion. If that means a banning order, then ok, I'll take it.

 

And the truth which I intended to tell is this :

 

1. Barbel are not native to either the Wensum or the Hampshire Avon. The only reason they are present in these rivers is due to a long history of artificial stockings.

 

2. Both rivers are Special Areas of Conservation, and barbel actively predate on all the endangered species for which these rivers recieved this conservation designation.

 

3. On both the Wensum and the Hampshire Avon, anglers (especially barbel fishermen) are widely percieved as trying to deny canoeists access to these rivers.

 

4. When anglers do this, and when the Angling Trust then backs them up, then there is a strong likliehood that it will be counter-productive and reflect badly on all anglers.

 

That is the central truth that I was trying to point out. Problem being that positions have become so entrenched over this matter, that when you try and place the issues in the public domain, then you run the risk of getting vilified. Which is pretty much what has happened.

 

Like you cg74, I'm getting a bit bored with all this. I'll post the results of my Freedom of Information request in due course. I have no idea what the reply will be, or what the public response to this reply will be. I guess we shall see.

Edited April 17, 2012 by andy_youngs