Horseriders Against Hunting FB Group

*humph* I just got banned because of my comment about the C&H...also about the vote being 58% and therefore in a democratic country, the law should not have gone through. Clearly they didn't like being told their halos weren't all that gold and shiny. They are so boring.
 
Grey_Eventer said:
*humph* I just got banned because of my comment about the C&H...also about the vote being 58% and therefore in a democratic country, the law should not have gone through. Clearly they didn't like being told their halos weren't all that gold and shiny. They are so boring.
Click to expand...

'Lights are on but nobody's home', strikes again. The site clearly states it is only for people who are against fox hunting. Why on earth would a hunt supporter expect to post there?! :confused:
 
DawnRay said:
'Lights are on but nobody's home', strikes again. The site clearly states it is only for people who are against fox hunting. Why on earth would a hunt supporter expect to post there?! :confused:
Click to expand...

I actually posted in response to someones inaccuracy on facts. It wasn't clearly stating I supported hunting or didn't support hunting. I was just pointing out that our government failed us.
 
DawnRay said:
....... Why on earth would a hunt supporter expect to post there?! :confused:
Click to expand...

For the very same reason that you are shown the courtesy of being allowed to post on here. You have come onto a, generally, pro-hunting forum, and been allowed to air your views. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to explain to me why the side for whom you bat, refuse to accept open debate, as we do. The reply, that "You'd better ask them", wont be a reply, of any worth, as your team seem unable to accept any opinion but their own.

Others have thought you to be a troll, I suspect you to be one who is in receipt of guidance, as your posts wander from thin and indefensible, to reasonably well argued, as if you are receiving instruction. It would seem that we are talking to several. ;)

Perhaps I'm wrong, but anyway, what on earth is the point of debate, when there is such intransigence? Draft all the accusations that you wish, but I will no longer debate with an ill-informed bigot, and I'd strongly recommend that others follow my rather late example.

Good night.

Alec.
 
DawnRay said:
'Lights are on but nobody's home', strikes again. The site clearly states it is only for people who are against fox hunting. Why on earth would a hunt supporter expect to post there?! :confused:
Click to expand...

DR - the answer is quite simple. Where what is posted is at best questionable and at worst appears to be biased, inaccurate and in many instances completely misleading. The presentation of 'information' in whatever guise without discussion or comment is in effect propaganda. If it is argued that this is not propaganda then there should be no issue with individuals of all opinion commenting on what has been posted

I note that on the HRAH FB page it states that the page has been set up by a single individual, however it's peculiar that this singular becomes the plural of 'Horseriders' with purportedly one individual deciding that no one else outside their belief bias being allowed to make any comment. ....

An example - Lets say I set up a FB page for Hand gliders against Aeroplanes and proceed to post 'facts' about how nasty aeroplanes are and threaten those that chose to fly then I would presume that I would attract at least some negative comment.

This type of propaganda amounts to an incitement to hatred - time FB did a bit of housekeeping imo...

By the way DR - I asked you in a previous post why you chose to disguise your presence here under a 'changed' username, I await an answer to this conundrum.
 
Last edited:
DawnRay said:
'Lights are on but nobody's home', strikes again. The site clearly states it is only for people who are against fox hunting. Why on earth would a hunt supporter expect to post there?! :confused:
Click to expand...

Well it would certainly be of benefit to most of the posters on there, who don't seem to know one end of a horse from another........ You even get banned for pointing out the reasons why horses sweat for goodness sake.......:o
 
Alec Swan said:
For the very same reason that you are shown the courtesy of being allowed to post on here. You have come onto a, generally, pro-hunting forum, and been allowed to air your views. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to explain to me why the side for whom you bat, refuse to accept open debate, as we do. The reply, that "You'd better ask them", wont be a reply, of any worth, as your team seem unable to accept any opinion but their own.

Others have thought you to be a troll, I suspect you to be one who is in receipt of guidance, as your posts wander from thin and indefensible, to reasonably well argued, as if you are receiving instruction. It would seem that we are talking to several. ;)

Perhaps I'm wrong, but anyway, what on earth is the point of debate, when there is such intransigence? Draft all the accusations that you wish, but I will no longer debate with an ill-informed bigot, and I'd strongly recommend that others follow my rather late example.

Good night.

Alec.
Click to expand...

My team, my team etc NOW, lol lol you suggest I may be receiving guidance?? Really. You do have somewhat of a chip on your shoulder at times.
I am very much an individual with my own beliefs thankfully. I do not stereotype and believe each person is entitled to their own opinion.

We are allowed to post here because it is an open forum that accepts and encourages sensible debate but equally offers great advice from other members about many issues. Therefore you are very, very wrong to suggest this forum and HaH on FB are one of the same. There are anti forums I guess were debate is encouraged but they are not on Facebook. Equally the pro hunting sites on Facebook do not allow debate and ban anti's immediately when they appear. Facebook simply leads to a kick in the backside if you oppose the site admin, a lesson being learned rather quickly by some on here.
 
DawnRay said:
'Lights are on but nobody's home', strikes again. The site clearly states it is only for people who are against fox hunting. Why on earth would a hunt supporter expect to post there?! :confused:
Click to expand...

I stated quite clearly when I posted that I was neither for or against hunting, I have no opinion either way. I asked a perfectly reasonable question about a picture which was posted of sweaty horses, and was banned. DawnRay, I agree with you on one thing, you and your mates are definitely "confused"
 
Fiagai said:
DR - the answer is quite simple. Where what is posted is at best questionable and at worst appears to be biased, inaccurate and in many instances completely misleading. The presentation of 'information' in whatever guise without discussion or comment is in effect propaganda. If it is argued that this is not propaganda then there should be no issue with individuals of all opinion commenting on what has been posted

I note that on the HRAH FB page it states that the page has been set up by a single individual, however it's peculiar that this singular becomes the plural of 'Horseriders' with purportedly one individual deciding that no one else outside their belief bias being allowed to make any comment. ....

An example - Lets say I set up a FB page for Hand gliders against Aeroplanes and proceed to post 'facts' about how nasty aeroplanes are and threaten those that chose to fly then I would presume that I would attract at least some negative comment.

This type of propaganda amounts to an incitement to hatred - time FB did a bit of housekeeping imo...

By the way DR - I asked you in a previous post why you chose to disguise your presence here under a 'changed' username, I await an answer to this conundrum.
Click to expand...

Oh no Fiagai that is all far too deep and boring for me to even begin to understand, sorry.

I did explain why at the time I changed my username but I have as you note decided to stick with it for now. I am rather enjoying getting a little more involved in the forum this way. It has encouraged me to be less shy and open.
 
amymay said:
Well it would certainly be of benefit to most of the posters on there, who don't seem to know one end of a horse from another........ You even get banned for pointing out the reasons why horses sweat for goodness sake.......:o
Click to expand...

My guess from knowing facebook is if you join a page to comment immediately in a negative way you tend to get banned. New member, just their to criticise, banned.
 
DawnRay said:
My guess from knowing facebook is if you join a page to comment immediately in a negative way you tend to get banned. New member, just their to criticise, banned.
Click to expand...

I did not make any negative comments. Just pointed out why a horse might sweat.
 
Can I be banned too ? PLEASE ?? Go on, let me be banned. I’ve never been banned for anything.

Is Dawn Ray Over2You in a flimsy disguise ?? ;)
 
amymay said:
A chip on the shoulder is most commonly referred to as someone holding a grudge or having an inferiority complex.

I suspect Alex has or is neither.
Click to expand...

Oh, you were sticking with the common. I was was referring to the original meaning.
 
DawnRay said:
That of someone spoiling for a fight by carrying a chip on his shoulders and daring somebody to knock it off. In a number of posts made to me now Mr Swan has acted in such a manner.
Click to expand...

That has really cheered me up no end. what a giggle

Dawnray, if you are looking for your pot, it is just behind your kettle over there...that`s right, the black kettle....got it? Thought you would. Well done.
 
DawnRay said:
That of someone spoiling for a fight by carrying a chip on his shoulders and daring somebody to knock it off. In a number of posts made to me now Mr Swan has acted in such a manner.
Click to expand...

Touche my dear.

I suspect it could be applied to perhaps another person too, eh?
 
For those who can be bothered to troll through the tedium, you will all see that during the last 2+ years that I've been on this forum, I've yet to fight with anyone, figuratively or otherwise.

I make a point of never bullying the less than fortunate. I would always prefer to withdraw from a discussion, when the narrow minded fail to see reason, and allow them to have a sense of victory. That's the kindest way, I think.

Alec.
 
Dawnray. Despite enjoying your trolling stirring and ramblings, I fear that you should maybe except your time is done. Maybe 6/10 for overall effort.

I suggest you try mumsnet like I did. They only have double figure IQ'S there. Unlike here where the triple figure is more prevalent.
 
Sounds more like your time posting pretty irrelevant posts to me are done guido. Best you step aside then and leave it to those hopefully more able to post something of interest and not the normal boring pro/anti nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top