 1 2 3 4 5
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1970
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
 | 
|
|
Re: 2nd Officer Charles Herbert Lightoller
Ah, geez, that's to bad. Nothing more can be said.
MA
Last edited by MurdochsAid, Oct/13/2005, 4:09 pm
|
|
Oct/13/2005, 3:56 pm
|
|
Lights
Deck Officer
Location: Anyplace on Water
Posts: 637
Rivets: 17 (+17/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Officer Charles Herbert Lightoller
You mean you can't discuss anything without disrespecting Lill? Yes, that IS truly sad.
You know my mum used to say "If you can't say anything good about someone, then don't say anything about them at all." 
|
|
Oct/13/2005, 4:13 pm
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1970
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Officer Charles Herbert Lightoller
Why are you trying your darndest to push her on me, Lights? I didn't ask for this, when you originally mentioned her name:
Quote:
Wills was going to tell you that, but thought it might be better coming from me.
I was merely reacting the way I did, for which I am holding true to my Will's favorite nickname for me, Aid...which is Gaelic for "Aed" that means fire/fiery one. Which is precisely a name well befitting me.
Then you went and misconstrued my reaction, unduly accusing me of allegedly snipping at her. Like I said before--I was agreeing with her. So, lay off of me. Okay?
MA
Last edited by MurdochsAid, Oct/13/2005, 4:48 pm
|
|
Oct/13/2005, 4:18 pm
|
|
Lights
Deck Officer
Location: Anyplace on Water
Posts: 637
Rivets: 17 (+17/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Officer Charles Herbert Lightoller
Check your PMs, please. I will not discuss this here, as this is a forum for officers of TITANIC, not a place to dispute non-related issues.
|
|
Oct/13/2005, 4:54 pm
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1970
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Officer Charles Herbert Lightoller
Quote:
Lights Wrote:
Check your PMs, please. I will not discuss this here, as this is a forum for officers of TITANIC, not a place to dispute non-related issues.
You started it. :crazy: What PMs? I deleted everything, except a PM Mr. Titanic sent me.
MA
|
|
Oct/13/2005, 5:12 pm
|
|
Lights
Deck Officer
Location: Anyplace on Water
Posts: 637
Rivets: 17 (+17/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Officer Charles Herbert Lightoller
"You started it"? Oh now I expected better than that, MA! Especially from a 58-year old woman who claims to be the wife of William Murdoch.
Now if you wish to discuss Charles Lightoller on this thread, fine. If not, well maybe someone else does.
|
|
Oct/13/2005, 5:26 pm
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1970
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Officer Charles Herbert Lightoller
Quote:
Lights Wrote:
"You started it"? Oh now I expected better than that, MA! Especially from a 58-year old woman who claims to be the wife of William Murdoch.
"That Great Pretender" really has you brainwashed with ALL her lies, doesn't she!?! :roll: Well now, she does not have us fooled. That is the real reason why she does not come around. :nono:
MA
|
|
Oct/13/2005, 7:47 pm
|
|
Lights
Deck Officer
Location: Anyplace on Water
Posts: 637
Rivets: 17 (+17/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Officer Charles Herbert Lightoller
I really think this has gone on long enough. Now where were we? Oh yes, Charles Lightoller....
|
|
Oct/13/2005, 7:52 pm
|
|
wills
Deck Officer
Posts: 62
Rivets: 1 (+1/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Officer Charles Herbert Lightoller
you know as anyone could notice i have chose to stay out of this discussion. however i would just like to say thanks to my lights for comming to bat for me.
and second.. im so glad to know that i can still stirr tammy's tanks .lol.. even without being here.. this thread is about lightoller and at last check i was not lightoller.. lol.. so how bout getting back to topic../.
will
|
|
Oct/13/2005, 7:59 pm
|
|
Mr Titanic
Spirit of the Night
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 1356
Rivets: 13 (+13/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Officer Charles Herbert Lightoller
:nono:
I have read this entire thread and am now prepared to both clairify the situation, and make sure that it no longer is taken this far out of proportion.
I notice the intial post was made by Murdochs Aid requesting an answer from Lights for one of her questions. Lights replied, and mentioned that the member wills would have liked to reply however chose not to do so.
This is where I would like to note the root of the situation. Wills was mentioned, and it was stated that she chose not to reply, when infact Lights stated this forum is for members to discuss Titanic. I believe I have made the impression that I am a fair admin and by setting the rules am prepared to handle any negative situations, Wills always is permitted a say in discussions. Regardless this is what triggered MA's response. It was a reply to what had been stated, not out of the blue. Now from MA's reponse I can see she implied that she was in agreement with Wills about having wanted the question answered by You Lights rather than Wills herself, providing MA had asked you the question. However the post was edited because although MA had asked it of you, Wills always is premitted to reply regardless, and being choosey about comments and answers does not allow a healthy discussion environment. So fault lies in how this all was addressed, because Wills always possesed the right to reply, and opinions should have been withheld.
Now allow me to also take into account the other aspects of these posts I have noticed.
The most obvious would certainly be how the threads subject veered off from being centered around Officer Lightoller to the Member Wills. In this I see that both sides of this discussion have contributed to this. Lights if you know that MA is not fond of Wills (which I am in disagreement with and would like to see this matter resolved, because it is childish) than please refrain from mentioning her in a reply to Murdochs Aid. MA, if you notice her name mentioned than simply ignore or do not react to it, because as we clearly have seen it causes threads to go off topic and triggers negative feelings. I do not comprehend why another member needs to be the primary subject of an already off topic discussion. Especially when it was stated that member was driven off the board, which also has left me perplexed. I now notice that posts are becoming more personal in this thread and I do not appreciate that.
I didn't even want to get involved but I now see I am required to tie together a conclusion. Wills is allowed to post, she is not banned and I do not recall any negative situtions, or at the very least any I have not taken care of. If she chooses to leave the board that is her own personal choice.
Lights I appreciate your reponse and contributions to the thread. I also am quite pleased you decided to take the majority of this discussion to PM and have noted that the thread is going off topic. However I do not like how far this thread has been dragged off topic regardless. I would have rather received a notice so that this matter could have been corrected before it was taken this far out of proportion, by all those involved.
Murdochs Aid I understand your viewpoint on the discussion and the implications of your replies. I would have also expected the same from you as I would have from anyone else involved.
What really is sad is the fact that the need to discuss Lill at all when she clearly was not the subject of the discussion and unless in a positive way, should never be, was taken into consideration. So I would like to quote our member lights: "this is a forum for officers of TITANIC, not a place to dispute non-related issues." So let us refrain from doing so. There is no need to mention who did and did not reply, and who wishes not to. There is no need to agree that one specific member should have replied. There is no need for any of this, period.
|
|
Oct/13/2005, 8:17 pm
|
|
1 2 3 4 5
Link to us
- Blogs
- Hall of Honour
- Chat
 TSOLD's time is: Nov/27/2009, 4:34 pm
|
|
|
Topic 