Share this content
1
2031

PNL Banned - Site Issues (part 2)

two points

Didn't find your answer?

Search AccountingWEB

I’ve started a new thread because I don’t think that anyone will read as far as post 77.

Two points:

1) Mrme89 is wrong about point 5).  New entries allow answers that have become wrong, eg because the law has changed, to be flagged-up and it gives Ops an opportunity to report the outcome of their problem, which in the case of a dispute with HMRC could be several years later. Caveat emptor: look at the bl**ding date before clicking. It’s simple.

2) PNL has a girl’s name and uses a female character as her picture. She clearly wishes to be identified as a female. Regardless of the presence or absence of any dangling genitalia, you should respect her wishes. To call transgender women -if tha is what PNL is - by the pronoun of their birth is antediluvian. There is also the possiblity that she was born and remains a female.

Replies

Please login or register to join the discussion.

By mrme89
25th Sep 2017 20:44

1) I’m don’t think I’m wrong. You can always reference back to old threads if you need to.
Old threads seem to only get resurrected by spammers wth links to games and dodgy videos.

2) Portia is not a human and has no gender. She is super-alien sent from planet Z2Y459214 to enlighten us with advanced taxation.

Thanks (2)
avatar
25th Sep 2017 20:55

Dear Duncan
Congratulations on your first question.
Except it isn't a question and the comments are seriously ill thought out. PNL is a car and the picture is a puppet pig. Quite how you interpret that as a transgender woman is probably for you to share with your therapist.

Thanks (0)
to andy.partridge
26th Sep 2017 09:31

andy.partridge wrote:

PNL is a car .....

I kind of assumed it was Profit 'n Loss.

Thanks (0)
to andy.partridge
26th Sep 2017 12:01

Portia Nina Levin is a car as you say, and follows in the grand tradition that I think can be traced back to George Attazder. It took ages for the penny to drop on that one.

Thanks (1)
avatar
25th Sep 2017 21:24

These two discussions between them have already been viewed well over 2,000 times. I know that's still a tiny fraction of the attention posts had five, ten years ago. But not much else comes close in the modern era.

Just saying.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By mabzden
26th Sep 2017 11:03

Thanks Duncan. I'm a bit confused by what you said. But if you say mrme89 is wrong you obviously know what you're talking about.

You should ask Tax Dragon to explain the difference between "anonymous" and "anonymous". His insight is fascinating.

Thanks (0)
By Ruddles
to mabzden
26th Sep 2017 11:07

mabzden wrote:
I'm a bit confused by what you said.

Nothing new there, then.

Thanks (1)
By mrme89
to mabzden
26th Sep 2017 11:11

I love that you are still bitter over being grilled over your stupidity. It means that you're still good to wind up some more.

Thanks (1)
avatar
to mabzden
26th Sep 2017 11:25

mabzden wrote:

You should ask Tax Dragon to explain the difference between "anonymous" and "anonymous". His insight is fascinating.

You know who I am then? And that it's me that's replying - and, thereby, answering.
Thanks (1)
avatar
to Tax Dragon
26th Sep 2017 11:56

He knows you, but clearly not very well.

Thanks (0)
avatar
to andy.partridge
26th Sep 2017 12:28

That's a grey area (possibly many-shaded); before venturing there, let's see whether mabzden can cope with black and white.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By mabzden
to Tax Dragon
26th Sep 2017 13:40

Wait... hang on, I think I get it now.

You're saying if you posted your comments anonymously (which no-one is arguing for by the way) then I wouldn't realise the person behind the username "Tax Dragon" is a member of the intellectual elite generously donating their time to "help" on Aweb.

It's just a shame we don't know who you actually are. Or whether Tax Dragon is the only username you use. Or whether, as a hypothetical example, Ruddles (whoever he/she/it is) is logging in using a different username to back up his/her/its points.

Still, I get your point now.

Thanks (0)
avatar
to mabzden
26th Sep 2017 12:50

Having multiple accounts is against the rules. If you know that someone has them you should report it.

If you are simply engaged in smearing a reputable contributor you should desist or you become the problem.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By mabzden
to andy.partridge
26th Sep 2017 19:28

I'm not trying to smear anyone.

However...

Having had a quick look back through the archives the two usernames seem to appear in the same threads on a regular basis. And, despite both being very regular contributors (usually multiple times a day) they both disappeared completely between the 10th and 14th August.

Maybe they went to Pontins together ;-)

Thanks (1)
avatar
to mabzden
26th Sep 2017 21:20

You've lost me, but what is this about looking back through the archives? You seem to be on a mission that might not end as you hope.

Thanks (0)
avatar
to andy.partridge
26th Sep 2017 21:55

andy.partridge wrote:

You seem to be on a mission that might not end as you hope.


What (do you suppose) is that hope? That I, whoever it was that started the anonymous v pseudonym thing and everyone that has failed to agree with mabzden that there's no difference either acknowledge that he/she/it is right or get banned?

He/she/it is not right, in my view. He/she/it has a point, but it's outweighed by the arguments against.

Thanks (0)
By Ruddles
to mabzden
26th Sep 2017 21:26

If I was going to create a second account anyone that knows me would tell you that the last thing I'd want to call myself would be any sort of Dragon.

Thanks (1)
avatar
to Ruddles
26th Sep 2017 21:41

If I respond now, it'll look as if we are alter egos for (respectively) andypartridge and andy.partridge. [I say that because it sounds as if you know andy from his former incarnation, whereas I have only recently had the pleasure.]

Damn, this is sounding plausible; now I'm not sure whether it's mabzden that's paranoid or me that's schizophrenic.

Thanks (0)
By Ruddles
to Tax Dragon
26th Sep 2017 22:09

Perhaps it's mabzden that's schizophrenic and he is me? What's worrying is that I appear to have lost 5 days of my life. Or should that be 'gained'?

Thanks (0)
avatar
to mabzden
26th Sep 2017 12:58

It wasn't my point. But you seemed to be having some difficulty understanding the way other users were making it, so I thought I'd help you through the fog. (I have no personal issue with you, whoever you are.)

Glad to have been of service.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Mr_awol
to mabzden
26th Sep 2017 14:15

mabzden wrote:

a member of the intellectual elite generously donating their time to "help" on Aweb.

Are you and your inferiority complex going to pop up and have a whine in every thread as soon as someone on your list of 'meanies' posts?

Thanks (0)
Share this content