Adieu

@fmf said
You should have sent me a PM about it and it could have been solved in 5 minutes. Instead, you chose to do the most malicious thing you could think of.

And if you had sent me a PM asking for consent or simply making me aware of your intent, it would have been solved in 5 minutes.

@fmf said
Nothing false was said about you in the WhatsApp group. Meanwhile, you made no effort to correct the ludicrous things that were said in your club about what had happened.

Again, nonsense. When somebody asked, for example, about financial factors I made crystal clear there was no financial matters involved and it had absolutely nothing to do with money for anyone involved.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
And if you had sent me a PM asking for consent or simply making me aware of your intent, it would have been solved in 5 minutes.

But it was you ~ and not me ~ who was all set to take drastic spiteful action, so the onus was surely on you to contact me before you did. You could have reprimanded me as necessary and suggested a different light-hearted pseudonym. But you didn't. You just went ahead and took the drastic spiteful action without warning.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Again, nonsense. When somebody asked, for example, about financial factors I made crystal clear there was no financial matters involved and it had absolutely nothing to do with money for anyone involved.

People were suggesting I was putting my name to your stories and that I was making money off your writing. You did not divest them of any of these speculations. If it was you exercising your "right of reply" in that private setting, to whom were you replying?

@fmf said
But it was you ~ and not me ~ who was all set to take drastic spiteful action, so the onus was surely on you to contact me before you did. You could have reprimanded me as necessary and suggested a different light-hearted pseudonym. But you didn't. You just went ahead and took the drastic spiteful action without warning.

You had ignored my 2 previous attempts to contact you.

Again, I emailed you after the platform had spliced out my stories, giving you time to plug the gaps. I didn't have to do that.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
You had ignored my 2 previous attempts to contact you.

Again, I emailed you after the platform had spliced out my stories, giving you time to plug the gaps. I didn't have to do that.

You had ignored my 2 previous attempts to contact you.

Was either of them demanding action otherwise you'd take steps that were likely to cause maximum damage to the show?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
You had ignored my 2 previous attempts to contact you.

Again, I emailed you after the platform had spliced out my stories, giving you time to plug the gaps. I didn't have to do that.

I emailed you after the platform had spliced out my stories, giving you time to plug the gaps. I didn't have to do that.

I don't give two hoots about what happened with Mixcloud.

@fmf said
People were suggesting I was putting my name to your stories and that I was making money off your writing. You did not divest them of any of these speculations. If it was you exercising your "right of reply" in that private setting, to whom were you replying?

Nonsense. I made clear it had nothing to do with money.

Edit: There were at least 3 members in both groups.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Nonsense. I made clear it had nothing to do with money.

You did not shoot down any of the wild theories that were swilling about.

@fmf said
I emailed you after the platform had spliced out my stories, giving you time to plug the gaps. I didn't have to do that.

I don't give two hoots about what happened with Mixcloud.

The point is, it demonstrates my intent was not to damage the broadcasts. You get that, right?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Nonsense. I made clear it had nothing to do with money.

Edit: There were at least 3 members in both groups.

There were at least 3 members in both groups.

And they have left your group now. And the radio programme has survived. It goes from strength to strength, despite your attempt to strangle it shortly after birth.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
The point is, it demonstrates my intent was not to damage the broadcasts. You get that, right?

The lack of a PM before sending that hysterical accusatory letter - behind my back - directly to the radio station - demonstrates your intent to cause maximum damage to the show. "Don't mess with the Ghost", right?

@fmf said
There were at least 3 members in both groups.

And they have left your group now. And the radio programme has survived. It goes from strength to strength, despite your attempt to strangle it shortly after birth.

Woosh

@fmf said
The lack of a PM before sending that hysterical accusatory letter - behind my back - directly to the radio station - demonstrates your intent to cause maximum damage to the show. "Don't mess with the Ghost", right?

The lack of PM before changing my name demonstrates your petty intent.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Woosh

No, there's no Whoosh. I had said nothing false in the WhatsApp group and you did not exercise your right to reply to what I'd said. You did not reply to me. You went behind my back, again, and tried to say things while precluding me from my right to reply.