ArbTalk CENSORSHIP?

[Ian Leach]

Censorship! I quess Steve has censored this argument,by deleting the thread. I would have a gripe Andy if your posts on the subject in question had been deleted or edited and Colins left for all to read or vis versa.Top marks to Steve for running a neutral and independant site. Long live censorship!

 

IMO and i'm sure the majority of members on here think the same,click on to Arbtalk in our own time to chill out and read about the strange proffesion we have some how managed to end up in. We come here we end up making a few friends along the way, and in general have a laugh and whinge etc etc

 

 

This really isn't the place to hangout your dirty laundry, ''personal issues'' ,should be dealt with in a personal and proffesional manner, not here a public forum! i'm sure this site wasn't designed to be a platform to voice personal disagreements.

 

well said

[Dagmar]

Censorship is the deliberate supression of truth or opinion. Surely this is a case of the removal of a post(s) that contain unsubstantiated allegations that are quite serious, as such it should be removed as the allegations cast serious doubts about the integrety of an individual.

 

It is a bit rich that someone who uses his own publication to not only promote his own products and those of associated companies and then uses the same publication to attempt to damage the reputation of others should whine about censorship.

 

Debate should be encouraged and indeed supported by this and any other forum - but this is reckless mudslinging of an unpleasant nature

[Alasdair]

ok can someone fill me in on what this post was that got deleted or removed please. im so confused

[Drella]

I'm certain that most of us could have used a little more couth when sharing our "oppinions" with the thread starter.

 

Right or wrong, some of us needed to show a little more respect.. And not just blast away at someone for sharing their concern with something that they obviously find important...

[Andy Collins]

Unfortunately, as the person who brought the attention of Mr Burgess statement in the "World of Trees" magazine onto the forum, I must share some of the blame. But my reasoning for doing so was not to drag down/defame any individual. It was to ask a relevant question, I have been trying to decide where to spend my money as far as membership of trade organizations go, and if there was an indication of misuse of funds, then obviously this would influence my decision. Its a shame that it had to go down the path that it did, but thats what openness brings out.

As for the censorship issue, well as far as the forum is concerned thats been addressed quite eloquently already, and arent magazines or other publications edited/censored too?

[Steve Bullman]

at the end of the day.....if this forum was left uncensored it would be dead within a month, end of story

[David Lloyd-Jones]

Dagmar said "Surely this is a case of the removal of a post(s) that contain unsubstantiated allegations that are quite serious, as such it should be removed as the allegations cast serious doubts about the integrety of an individual."

 

Well you should be aware that my post from the now removed thread said this.....

 

 

"Mr Bashford, I find myself in the unusual position of supporting you in a sense because I do not believe that Mr Burgess resigned simply because you misled the BoD of the ISA UK+I Chapter (and in doing so cost the Chapter approx £3000).

 

I am of the opinion that a more significant factor in his decision was the way that most of the ISA UK+I Board of Directors apparently accepted being misled (and the costs associated with that), and did nothing (beyond extracting an apology), to censure or otherwise reprimand you.

 

If you succeed in becoming ISA President now the votes are in, you will, in my opinion, have made yourself the New Statesman of Arboriculture, however you will have done so without the benefit of my vote."

 

 

Please understand that I posted that specifically because Mr Bashford suggested that Mr Burgess's post was slanderous but then failed to offer any insights to justify that allegation.

 

Now you all get to decide if you think some things that some may not want to discuss are actually worth talking through.

 

This IS a private forum and the owner and moderators can remove anything that they don't want to see aired. But for those who always want to focus on positives (that certainly do litter this forum and make it so popular), to the exclusion of all else, you might be missing part of the picture. Remember, you can apply personal censorship because you don't actually have to read the thread.

 

[aworldoftrees]

Unfortunately, as the person who brought the attention of Mr Burgess statement in the "World of Trees" magazine onto the forum, I must share some of the blame. But my reasoning for doing so was not to drag down/defame any individual. It was to ask a relevant question, I have been trying to decide where to spend my money as far as membership of trade organizations go, and if there was an indication of misuse of funds, then obviously this would influence my decision. Its a shame that it had to go down the path that it did, but thats what openness brings out.

As for the censorship issue, well as far as the forum is concerned thats been addressed quite eloquently already, and arent magazines or other publications edited/censored too?

 

 

Andy

You had every right to ask questions of Colin, and you were right to have concerns as regards my statement in the magazine. If what I stated was incorrect then maybe those people concerned should deny what I have chosen to share with you. I believe the integrity of the I.S.A. Chapter is paramount to the development of the industry and should be defended at all costs. I find it breathtaking the very people such as yourselves in the industry should not demand better of those elected to represent you and who are responsible for the development of the I.S.A. here in the UK. Some of you see this as a personal attack; I put it to you that the entire board ignored the FACTS, by ignored I mean to do nothing about a wrong doing.

That left those of us who had done so much to assist the chapter speechless, and of course deflated. Where does that leave the future of the Chapter? If, "who gives a toss"! I DO!

The development of the chapter has been painful and costly, spending memberships money unnecessarily on misleading statements and incurring fines due to mismanagement In my opinion is totally unacceptable, if you the industry choose to accept these facts so be it.

I believe an elected body has obligations paid or unpaid, this is what I have issue with! And as I see it the members have a right to know the truth.

Having set of rules is paramount, breaking those basic rules disgraceful. I have had my say, and for those who spoke out and reminded others of respect I thank-you.

 

Those of you who believe my magazine is owned by others “get a life”

 

Andy my magazine is edited, are you seriously suggesting that has a similar meaning to censorship!

[MasterBlaster]

at the end of the day.....if this forum was left uncensored it would be dead within a month, end of story

 

 

Really?

[Dagmar]

Andy my magazine is edited!

 

Really?