talkmagic.co.uk

Bananafish locked the thread on Derek Lever by concluding:

"I am locking this thread now before it gets even more out of hand. As Kolm said - he isn't here to defend himself so the views are too one sided" to make a proper discussion.
_________________

I (Mike Danata) would merely like to point out, that Derek Lever himself CHOOSES not to be here to defend himself, so if I hear for the UMPTEENTH time that he doesn't go on Forums, then you only need to go on the magicnewswire forum to be assured THAT HE DOES! (Yes I am shouting, because I find the whole U.K. Magic Scene so full of hypocrisy!).

EVERYONE it seems has an agenda, as to why opinions can or cannot be expressed. By opinions I mean both positive & negative. Some people are negative because they genuinely do have an axe to grind, be it on a personal or professional basis, & they want to draw attention to it, either to be malicious OR because they want to genuinely RESOLVE the issues (after all they cannot be resolved if they are NOT openly discussed!).

Others want no part of that for whatever reasons (I'm not sure really) Some want to lock threads because of weak excuses.........

Perhaps many people want to keep in with "Certain People" connected with both conventions because it benefits them in some way, be it Financial, Prestige, or furtherment of their careers (business's) etc . I guess whatever the reasons they all lead to £££££££ remember "Money is the root to all EVIL" !!!

This whole thing with Blackpool & Fism HAS to be resolved & the sooner the better, because it is going to spiral totally out of control, between now & 2012.

This ain't going to go away by LOCKING the subject on a forum!!

Mike Danata

AND NOR WILL IT GO AWAY BY IMPLYING SOME KIND OF CONSPIRACY.

Threads are locked on this forum when their tone becomes uncivil, not because we decide to pander to any individual, be that Derek Lever or anyone else. Flaring up and ranting about censorship will not help anyone's cause.

If the thread in question had stated nothing but facts then it would not have been locked.

Furthermore, implying that the moderators of this forum are being given financial incentive to lock threads is not just extremely rude it is utterly ridiculous; if you are so paranoid that you truly believe this then TM is not the place for you, and if you are making the statement in order to try to discredit this entire forum then I think you may need to consider whether your methods are any better than those of the people you are so angry at in the first place.

We are all aware of the facts of the matter, but we will not allow TM to be used as a platform for such crazed outbursts as this. If you wish to discuss the Blackpool bans and the reasons stated for them being made, however unjust, do so but be aware that we will not be trying to "keep in" with any people; everyone here must follow the rules (which have not been provided to us by "certain people" in order to keep everyone else quiet).

Finally, negative opinions may be expressed, but don't expect a thread to be allowed to continue when its sole purpose is to express negative opinions on one person, whoever that person may be; we are happy for reasoned debate to be conducted on all subjects, but since no alternative view was voiced it was simply a pointless exercise in venting anger.

If a board is in the UK, Lever threads get stopped. People post saying how stupid the complainers are. And there are several complainers.

If a board is not in the UK the threads carry on, with people posting how outrageous Lever seems to be.

Curious coincidence.

I am getting sick of insinuation.

If you think that we are stopping threads because we are all in league then say it outright and present some form of evidence or logic. If not, then keep your conjecture to yourself.

As I have stated, we have no agenda in closing threads except to keep the tone civil; the opinions people hold on this matter are more or less unanimous, so what possible purpose does rolling them around again and again serve? You will note that the thread that actually discusses the bans and the possibility that they could be extended to FISM has not been closed because it discusses factual matters, not simply attacks on one person or committee.

Since Carl De Rome is one of the main players of this saga it allows me to go slightly off topic. His name is familiar to me but I can't quite place it. Is he the fellow who used to be (and for all I know still is) an escapologist in Blackpool? I recall he got married at the top of Blackpool Tower or somewhere and got a bit of publicity from it.

Or was that a different Carl?

Not surprisingly Carl De Rome, at the time resident in Norway, was also banned from Blackpool this year and had his photo and details passed to the Security guards. He was also the instigator of some very nasty and biased threads on TM which resulted in him being banned. Not for what he said but for making the mistake in thinking that TM can be hijacked for a personal vendetta against another individual. Those who have been members of TM for more than a few posts will know that we only lock threads when they go off topic or breach the rules and this is the same policy which has been carried out since TM first started. Any suggestions to the contrary are complete and utter tripe.

mark lewis wrote:Since Carl De Rome is one of the main players of this saga it allows me to go slightly off topic. His name is familiar to me but I can't quite place it. Is he the fellow who used to be (and for all I know still is) an escapologist in Blackpool? I recall he got married at the top of Blackpool Tower or somewhere and got a bit of publicity from it.

Or was that a different Carl?

I think that was Carl Bartoni.

It was indeed Carl Bartoni. It is all coming back to my aged memory now. It seems the only thing that Carl de Rome manages to escape from is the Blackpool Convention.

Personally I think it would be a good thing for someone who knows both Lever and De Rome to mediate between them. It really is a fuss over nothing when it all boils down to it.

They could both bury the hatchet if they put their minds to it.

Although this thread has died now, I feel I need to clarify an issue.

I spoke with Mike Danata at the weekend and am assured that his post was not intended to refer to any members or moderators at this forum as I had interpreted it when responding. Mike was clear that he had been very careful about his wording and was upset that I had misinterpreted his intent.

I apologise for my post in the light of this; Mike was not being rude, suggesting a conspiracy or implying that the moderators at TM were receiving financial incentive to lock posts regarding Derek Lever.

I would, however, urge all members to carefully read what they post in case a misunderstanding such as this is possible from your post. This is of particular importance when considering an emotive issue such as this as we have received direct accusations of this nature, which tends to bias our views when reading new posts!

Slanderous comments - removed by mods.

mark lewis wrote:Never say I do not have a long memory and a vindictive nature.

that nearly makes you a woman, mr. reverend holy upon holy lewis...

Slanderous comments - removed by mods.

I'd take a smuggler over Derek Lever any day.

Slanderous comments - removed by mods.

mark lewis wrote:Slanderous comments - removed by mods.

So is ******* *********?
I know him (Havent spoke for years) and that just doesnt sound like him!