Cyprus-Forum.com

[Pyrpolizer]

In addition, were anti Annan posters ridicules as "extremists" on your forum? There is such a fine line between free speech and totalitarianism such as what we see in Turkey and Pootin's Russia!

He said that he personally voted against Annan. With that I assume that he wanted something even more in favor of the TCs than the Annan (i doubt it could be the other way around). Also people can ridicule the position of others in this forum as well so I don't think we are in a position to criticize him on this. But GR did talk about a down-voting system that was in place to silence the minorities.

I've had a few exchanges with Erolz and I think he's a person with principles.I know a lot of TCs who voted "No" to the Anan Plan because it was very unfair for the GCs and they thought it wouldn't work just because of that. Chances are your assumption is far from the truth.
Besides how could he drag GCs to a "No" forum where all TCs who voted "NO" were partitionists??

[Pyrpolizer]

So you made 4671 posts and you have been visiting and posting in the forum for 14 years. Why??? Looking at your opinion about how "this forum is and always has been" it just doesn't add up! I think there must be something personal between you and the admin which we don't know about.

OK let me start, in light of the above, by 'conceding' that my claim 'and always has been' was a 'lazy' expression, and not actually a fair reflection of my personal views or 'reality'. The forum, how it is run, my 'relationship' with it and my views on what it 'is', at any given point in time, have all changed and evolved over time. Saying or giving the impression that these things have been and are all static states that have remained unchanging was not true and I retract them.

Having made that made that correction or amendment or 'u turn' if you prefer to my original post I still stand by that post. It is my opinion of what this forum 'is' at this point in time and has increasingly become over time.

Where as you see my 'posting history' as 'incompatible' or at odds with the above view I would suggest and claim that it is in fact the reverse. To me my pattern of posts, the frequency of them, what 'subjects' they are about and even 'to whom' I reply to or not are all entirely consistent with my (revised) view as to what I think the forum 'is'. At the risk of again expressing myself 'lazily' for brevitie's sake, as the forum and my view as to what it 'is' have evolved increasingly into 'it is on the whole a playground' so too has my frequency (and other aspects) of 'engaging' with it has decreased accordingly. The gaps between posting and not posting have got longer, the length of time that I do post when the 'exit door revolves' (great expression btw RichardB, would that I could express so much so well in such brevity) have decreased. So for me your 'conclusion' that my views as expressed (revised) do not 'add up' with my 'posting history' and thus this must mean there is 'something personal between me and the admin' that I am actively 'hiding', for which there is nothing in the content of my posting history that would support such a conclusion and much which is at odds with it, is a conclusion based on a false premise.

You wouldn't need to go into any "forensic dissection" if you already know the answer. So just tell us what are the views you or any other TC can have on the Cyprus problem or any other issue which would be censored in this forum. Earlier you gave the example of admin removing an ad promoting a GC owned hotel in the north... but that is an ad, not a political view. I am pretty sure that even the most extreme views from both sides on the Cyprus problem are allowed and can be found in this forum. And not only that but in this forum we have views which are pro-American, pro-Russian, pro-Assad, pro-ISIS etc. We aren't newbies here either and if there was some censorship of specific kind of views we would have noticed it.

I will reply to this but not right now. Inevitably my response will be 'long' and no doubt to many who even bother to read it 'tedious' for that is my character and the limits of my abilities, just as no doubt some or many will inevitably read it from a 'starting point' of 'distrust' looking for where and how I am seeking to 'deceive' and 'mislead', but I will, when I get time reply none the less.

Erolz,
all I want to say is that it's clear to me you are not just one of those "nobodies" who degraded the forum to it's present form.
i personally read your posts which usually are an accurate account of events. with great pleasure.
Just repel your disappointment from some people in here, and cheer up.
That's the present level of this forum, what can we do? Nothing...

I personally use the revolving door quite often.

[repulsewarrior]

...indeed, i would hardly call 65% Yes a great success, given the notion of how "Turks" and elections work together.

...like the 75% who voted "No" in the Republic itself, it is an indication of a populace that is neither "Greek", or "Turkish", if you think about it.

...and for the record, you may reply to the Forum (read: news outlet) in the north that still has a comments section, but they won't publish your remarks.

...i'm not complaining, but Cyprus exists, Cypriots exist; for the life of me, why it is necessary to "pick", escapes me. It has been most of my life now, the Problem unabated. If it wasn't for the Ignorance that i witnessed, as a result personally, i would not be the one to write everyday. What are "Greeks", what are "Turks" are the same to me, and it is because of them, that i found myself as a Cypriot having to defend this identity the only way i can.

...thank-you, i say to this Forum's owner, they must be getting something right even if the traffic may be less due to Fakehook, a media platform i don't use, precisely because of the reasons i suspected (and because i don't have the confidence people who have computer savvy do). I have said it before, that this is one of the Freest forums on the internet, when it comes to Cyprus, politically speaking, who else even allows such conversation?

[Sotos]

In addition, were anti Annan posters ridicules as "extremists" on your forum? There is such a fine line between free speech and totalitarianism such as what we see in Turkey and Pootin's Russia!

He said that he personally voted against Annan. With that I assume that he wanted something even more in favor of the TCs than the Annan (i doubt it could be the other way around). Also people can ridicule the position of others in this forum as well so I don't think we are in a position to criticize him on this. But GR did talk about a down-voting system that was in place to silence the minorities.

I've had a few exchanges with Erolz and I think he's a person with principles.I know a lot of TCs who voted "No" to the Anan Plan because it was very unfair for the GCs and they thought it wouldn't work just because of that. Chances are your assumption is far from the truth.

Don't be naive. The main opposition to Annan plan among TCs was the camp of Denktash, somebody with great influence in the TC community. I would bet that the 99% of those who voted "no" among TCs are those who either want 2 state partition or an even better (for themselves) BBF. What you say doesn't even make sense. Imagine if the majority of GCs liked the Annan plan and voted "yes" but the plan had failed to pass because it was rejected by TCs who thought that the plan was too good for their own side!

Besides how could he drag GCs to a "No" forum where all TCs who voted "NO" were partitionists??

Where did I say that it was a "no forum"?

[Get Real!]

Erolz,
all I want to say is that it's clear to me you are not just one of those "nobodies" who degraded the forum to it's present form.
i personally read your posts which usually are an accurate account of events. with great pleasure.
Just repel your disappointment from some people in here, and cheer up.
That's the present level of this forum, what can we do? Nothing...

Are you for real?

The CF has been a bastion of free thought ever since I can remember thanks to its coolheaded native Cypriot admin, and suddenly this Turkish clown bursts in to paint everyone “childish”, our liberal system a “dictatorship”, and then digs up some shitty blocks of text supposedly to “prove” that *he* was the one running a “democratic” forum (or whatever) when all the while it was nothing short of an Ottoman sultanate enforcing an agenda… something I know from personal experience not hearsay!

I personally use the revolving door quite often.

Good idea... why don't you take your "democratic" friend by the hand and piss off out of here!

[Pyrpolizer]

In addition, were anti Annan posters ridicules as "extremists" on your forum? There is such a fine line between free speech and totalitarianism such as what we see in Turkey and Pootin's Russia!

He said that he personally voted against Annan. With that I assume that he wanted something even more in favor of the TCs than the Annan (i doubt it could be the other way around). Also people can ridicule the position of others in this forum as well so I don't think we are in a position to criticize him on this. But GR did talk about a down-voting system that was in place to silence the minorities.

I've had a few exchanges with Erolz and I think he's a person with principles.I know a lot of TCs who voted "No" to the Anan Plan because it was very unfair for the GCs and they thought it wouldn't work just because of that. Chances are your assumption is far from the truth.

Don't be naive. The main opposition to Annan plan among TCs was the camp of Denktash, somebody with great influence in the TC community. I would bet that the 99% of those who voted "no" among TCs are those who either want 2 state partition or an even better (for themselves) BBF. What you say doesn't even make sense. Imagine if the majority of GCs liked the Annan plan and voted "yes" but the plan had failed to pass because it was rejected by TCs who thought that the plan was too good for their own side!

Besides how could he drag GCs to a "No" forum where all TCs who voted "NO" were partitionists??

Where did I say that it was a "no forum"?

You didn't even understand what I said. Just don’t be too lazy and do some search in this forum on what he really is. He is not a Denktash follower, neither a settler nor one who wanted more for the TCs.
You demonstrate total lack common sense thinking he could fool everyone both in this forum as well as to another, considering he’s never hidden his identity.

[Pyrpolizer]

Erolz,
all I want to say is that it's clear to me you are not just one of those "nobodies" who degraded the forum to it's present form.
i personally read your posts which usually are an accurate account of events. with great pleasure.
Just repel your disappointment from some people in here, and cheer up.
That's the present level of this forum, what can we do? Nothing...

Are you for real?

The CF has been a bastion of free thought ever since I can remember thanks to its coolheaded native Cypriot admin, and suddenly this Turkish clown bursts in to paint everyone “childish”, our liberal system a “dictatorship”, and then digs up some shitty blocks of text supposedly to “prove” that *he* was the one running a “democratic” forum (or whatever) when all the while it was nothing short of an Ottoman sultanate enforcing an agenda… something I know from personal experience not hearsay!

I personally use the revolving door quite often.

Good idea... why don't you take your "democratic" friend by the hand and piss off out of here!

I do it when I please, and usually at full moon, to avoid looking at your monthly climax Psychopath

[GreekIslandGirl]

The problem I have with erolz's posts is that they are egocentric. They are about him & his. Consequently, they are so subjective they have no applicability to a world view.

I found his navel-gazing particularly frustrating when trying to have an outward, intellectual discussion on historical perceptions as well as outcomes from critical EU stratagems. He cannot hold two opposing views and weigh them up. Bang! He is in there with his view, which of course is the only right view. Bit erdoganish.

He goes to great lengths to explain his point of view but because it is often lacking in a factual basis, it becomes cumbersome to entertain.

He doesn't often engage equally or bring new information to the table ... he's more about point scoring over words, phrases and down-right bullying other's opinions into a annihilation through spin.

I hate the fact that through his return I have made this post. I'd rather discuss the news than erolz and his designs and endless explanations.

Nothing personal ....

[Sotos]

In addition, were anti Annan posters ridicules as "extremists" on your forum? There is such a fine line between free speech and totalitarianism such as what we see in Turkey and Pootin's Russia!

He said that he personally voted against Annan. With that I assume that he wanted something even more in favor of the TCs than the Annan (i doubt it could be the other way around). Also people can ridicule the position of others in this forum as well so I don't think we are in a position to criticize him on this. But GR did talk about a down-voting system that was in place to silence the minorities.

I've had a few exchanges with Erolz and I think he's a person with principles.I know a lot of TCs who voted "No" to the Anan Plan because it was very unfair for the GCs and they thought it wouldn't work just because of that. Chances are your assumption is far from the truth.

Don't be naive. The main opposition to Annan plan among TCs was the camp of Denktash, somebody with great influence in the TC community. I would bet that the 99% of those who voted "no" among TCs are those who either want 2 state partition or an even better (for themselves) BBF. What you say doesn't even make sense. Imagine if the majority of GCs liked the Annan plan and voted "yes" but the plan had failed to pass because it was rejected by TCs who thought that the plan was too good for their own side!

Besides how could he drag GCs to a "No" forum where all TCs who voted "NO" were partitionists??

Where did I say that it was a "no forum"?

You didn't even understand what I said. Just don’t be too lazy and do some search in this forum on what he really is. He is not a Denktash follower, neither a settler nor one who wanted more for the TCs.
You demonstrate total lack common sense thinking he could fool everyone both in this forum as well as to another, considering he’s never hidden his identity.

I wasn't talking just about him but about your argument that "a lot of TCs who voted "No" to the Anan Plan because it was very unfair for the GCs". And I did exchange views with erol many times and at no point he said that he would have voted "yes" if the plan was better for GCs. From all the TCs that ever posted here that is something only Kikapu could possibly say. And just to clarify: many TCs recognize that the plan was unfair for GCs, but they didn't vote "no" for this reason. They either voted "yes", or they voted "no" because they preferred partition or another BBF plan that would STILL be unfair to the GCs but with stronger guarantees that GCs wouldn't be able to act and undo the injustices.

[Pyrpolizer]

I wasn't talking just about him but about your argument that "a lot of TCs who voted "No" to the Anan Plan because it was very unfair for the GCs". And I did exchange views with erol many times and at no point he said that he would have voted "yes" if the plan was better for GCs. From all the TCs that ever posted here that is something only Kikapu could possibly say. And just to clarify: many TCs recognize that the plan was unfair for GCs, but they didn't vote "no" for this reason. They either voted "yes", or they voted "no" because they preferred partition or another BBF plan that would STILL be unfair to the GCs but with stronger guarantees that GCs wouldn't be able to act and undo the injustices.

Again you are messing things up. I said "a lot of TCs from those who I know". To clarify I know Tcs who are like Kikapu, and others who are pro return to the ROC system.
Similarly you seem to jump into concussions by the fact that he never said he would have voted "yes" if the plan was better for the GCs.
Why don't you spell the whole truth that he never said anything about the plan???
I imply to you that for some people -and I'd bet Erlolz is one of them- voting yes or no had nothing to do on whether the plan was better or worse for the GCs.

I hope I am clear. Furthermore I don't like going round in circles. Next time Erolz appears ask him directly.