From Newsgroup: uk.net.news.moderation

The last few lines of the post to which I was replying read:

[Todal:]

Another male MP said they now avoided pubs after being aggressively
cornered while having a drink with his wife. Someone just
launched at me over Gaza, saying that I had taken part in a
genocide,they said.
It's just not a reasonable discussion, it's just an attack.

[JN:]

Uni-directional, I'd say.
I could never imagine myself haranguing anybody in a pub, for any
reason.
But there are local people of whom I am well aware (whose views I do
not share) who would do it in a heartbeat and regard themselves as
heroic for threatening an MP and frightening his or her family.
It seems to come from one side of the political divide only.

[Todal]

Imagine if you will, being on a tube train and noticing that the
person sitting opposite happens to be Tony Blair or Keir Starmer.
Do you ignore him?.

That's how it had gone.

My answer to that pointed question was direct and honest. I said:

"Yes, sir".

And... it was moderated (censored), because:

The post that you submitted to uk.legal.moderated has been rejected by a moderator.

This appears to the moderator to be off-topic for uk.legal.moderated
or has insufficient law-related material.

Odd that the question wasn't off-topic and neither was the fact that I
was asked for a response, but the response was somehow "off-topic", innit?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.net.news.moderation

On 2026-08-09, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:

The last few lines of the post to which I was replying read:

[Todal:]

Another male MP said they now avoided pubs after being aggressively
cornered while having a drink with his wife. Someone just
launched at me over Gaza, saying that I had taken part in a
genocide,they said.
It's just not a reasonable discussion, it's just an attack.

[JN:]

Uni-directional, I'd say.
I could never imagine myself haranguing anybody in a pub, for any
reason.
But there are local people of whom I am well aware (whose views I do
not share) who would do it in a heartbeat and regard themselves as
heroic for threatening an MP and frightening his or her family.
It seems to come from one side of the political divide only.

[Todal]

Imagine if you will, being on a tube train and noticing that the
person sitting opposite happens to be Tony Blair or Keir Starmer.
Do you ignore him?.

That's how it had gone.

My answer to that pointed question was direct and honest. I said:

"Yes, sir".

And... it was moderated (censored), because:

The post that you submitted to uk.legal.moderated has been rejected by a moderator.

This appears to the moderator to be off-topic for uk.legal.moderated
or has insufficient law-related material.

Odd that the question wasn't off-topic and neither was the fact that I
was asked for a response, but the response was somehow "off-topic", innit?

Bit of a weird rejection, but your post was also a bit weird.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.net.news.moderation

On 9 Aug 2026 at 20:10:34 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:

On 2026-08-09, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:

The last few lines of the post to which I was replying read:

[Todal:]

Another male MP said they now avoided pubs after being aggressively >>>>>> cornered while having a drink with his wife. Someone just
launched at me over Gaza, saying that I had taken part in a
genocide,they said.
It's just not a reasonable discussion, it's just an attack.

[JN:]

Uni-directional, I'd say.
I could never imagine myself haranguing anybody in a pub, for any
reason.
But there are local people of whom I am well aware (whose views I do >>>>> not share) who would do it in a heartbeat and regard themselves as
heroic for threatening an MP and frightening his or her family.
It seems to come from one side of the political divide only.

[Todal]

Imagine if you will, being on a tube train and noticing that the
person sitting opposite happens to be Tony Blair or Keir Starmer.
Do you ignore him?.

That's how it had gone.

My answer to that pointed question was direct and honest. I said:

"Yes, sir".

And... it was moderated (censored), because:

The post that you submitted to uk.legal.moderated has been rejected by a
moderator.

This appears to the moderator to be off-topic for uk.legal.moderated
or has insufficient law-related material.

Odd that the question wasn't off-topic and neither was the fact that I
was asked for a response, but the response was somehow "off-topic", innit?

Bit of a weird rejection, but your post was also a bit weird.

I don't think it was in the least weird. I, too, would ignore him. Though probably go and sit somewhere else in the unlikely event there was anywhere else to sit.
--

Roger Hayter
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.net.news.moderation

On 2026-08-09, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:

On 9 Aug 2026 at 20:10:34 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:

On 2026-08-09, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:

The last few lines of the post to which I was replying read:

[Todal:]

Another male MP said they now avoided pubs after being aggressively >>>>>>> cornered while having a drink with his wife. Someone just
launched at me over Gaza, saying that I had taken part in a
genocide,they said.
It's just not a reasonable discussion, it's just an attack.

[JN:]

Uni-directional, I'd say.
I could never imagine myself haranguing anybody in a pub, for any
reason.
But there are local people of whom I am well aware (whose views I do >>>>>> not share) who would do it in a heartbeat and regard themselves as >>>>>> heroic for threatening an MP and frightening his or her family.
It seems to come from one side of the political divide only.

[Todal]

Imagine if you will, being on a tube train and noticing that the
person sitting opposite happens to be Tony Blair or Keir Starmer.
Do you ignore him?.

That's how it had gone.

My answer to that pointed question was direct and honest. I said:

"Yes, sir".

And... it was moderated (censored), because:

The post that you submitted to uk.legal.moderated has been rejected by a >>> moderator.

This appears to the moderator to be off-topic for uk.legal.moderated
or has insufficient law-related material.

Odd that the question wasn't off-topic and neither was the fact that I
was asked for a response, but the response was somehow "off-topic", innit? >>

Bit of a weird rejection, but your post was also a bit weird.

I don't think it was in the least weird. I, too, would ignore him.

The "yes" wasn't the weird bit.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.net.news.moderation

On 9 Aug 2026 at 20:27:19 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:

On 2026-08-09, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:

On 9 Aug 2026 at 20:10:34 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:

On 2026-08-09, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:

The last few lines of the post to which I was replying read:

[Todal:]

Another male MP said they now avoided pubs after being aggressively >>>>>>>> cornered while having a drink with his wife. Someone just
launched at me over Gaza, saying that I had taken part in a
genocide,they said.
It's just not a reasonable discussion, it's just an attack.

[JN:]

Uni-directional, I'd say.
I could never imagine myself haranguing anybody in a pub, for any >>>>>>> reason.
But there are local people of whom I am well aware (whose views I do >>>>>>> not share) who would do it in a heartbeat and regard themselves as >>>>>>> heroic for threatening an MP and frightening his or her family.
It seems to come from one side of the political divide only.

[Todal]

Imagine if you will, being on a tube train and noticing that the
person sitting opposite happens to be Tony Blair or Keir Starmer. >>>>>> Do you ignore him?.

That's how it had gone.

My answer to that pointed question was direct and honest. I said:

"Yes, sir".

And... it was moderated (censored), because:

The post that you submitted to uk.legal.moderated has been rejected by a >>>> moderator.

This appears to the moderator to be off-topic for uk.legal.moderated
or has insufficient law-related material.

Odd that the question wasn't off-topic and neither was the fact that I >>>> was asked for a response, but the response was somehow "off-topic", innit? >>>

Bit of a weird rejection, but your post was also a bit weird.

I don't think it was in the least weird. I, too, would ignore him.

The "yes" wasn't the weird bit.

It could be taken as false respect for a rather dogmatic sounding question, or traditional emphasis (us old people used to speak like that). Neither is particularly weird; or particularly rude.
--

Roger Hayter
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.net.news.moderation

On 09/08/2026 08:12 PM, Roger Hayter wrote:

On 9 Aug 2026 at 20:10:34 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:

On 2026-08-09, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:

The last few lines of the post to which I was replying read:

[Todal:]

Another male MP said they now avoided pubs after being aggressively >>>>>>> cornered while having a drink with his wife. Someone just
launched at me over Gaza, saying that I had taken part in a
genocide,they said.
It's just not a reasonable discussion, it's just an attack.

[JN:]

Uni-directional, I'd say.
I could never imagine myself haranguing anybody in a pub, for any
reason.
But there are local people of whom I am well aware (whose views I do >>>>>> not share) who would do it in a heartbeat and regard themselves as >>>>>> heroic for threatening an MP and frightening his or her family.
It seems to come from one side of the political divide only.

[Todal]

Imagine if you will, being on a tube train and noticing that the
person sitting opposite happens to be Tony Blair or Keir Starmer.
Do you ignore him?.

That's how it had gone.

My answer to that pointed question was direct and honest. I said:

"Yes, sir".

And... it was moderated (censored), because:

The post that you submitted to uk.legal.moderated has been rejected by a >>> moderator.

This appears to the moderator to be off-topic for uk.legal.moderated
or has insufficient law-related material.

Odd that the question wasn't off-topic and neither was the fact that I
was asked for a response, but the response was somehow "off-topic", innit? >>

Bit of a weird rejection, but your post was also a bit weird.

I don't think it was in the least weird. I, too, would ignore him. Though probably go and sit somewhere else in the unlikely event there was anywhere else to sit.

Exactly.

Thank you.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2