CHRIS WEBB-STATEMENT

I have had a conversation with Chris Webb this morning where he categorically denies using multi accounts and states he has only ever used the Chris Webb/Mr President account.

We believe we have evidence that proves he has used other accounts. We wouldn't have taken the action we have otherwise.

We do not have any evidence that he used this multi account to make threatening posts and we are not making that link. I would appreciate it if you all kept that in mind. However much some people may dislike Chris, I do not think that any of us think he is capable of such behaviour.

Using proxy servers and having multiple accounts is not against the law. It is however against the rules of this site.

Did he offer to repeat his deleted Pasoti post on here? I'm sure he has the contact details of enough individuals or the mod acconut to get his message across. I'd be very interested to see what he was trying to get across.

Just to add something, this has not been known about by the current mod team for a while and is not something we have sat on waiting to release at a "juicy" time. It is not a coincidence we have done this on the same week Chris Webb calls for peace.

The reason this all came about is because we recently moved all of the posts made by one poster to the archive. This poster had been banned some time ago but we weren't sure if forumotion would automatically delete the member from the database after a certain time so we moved all posts to the archive as we wanted to keep them should any legal matters arise.

After reading back some of the posts a suspicion about the posting styles was raised and a comparison of two posters' IP's was done-hence the three posts/proxies/IP's matching.

An additional multi account was found a while back and that account was banned at the time as well as the IP. This coincides with Chris Webb asking why his home IP had been banned.

I think it's probably worth reproducing The Supreme Leader's post on the issue on pasoti:

Quote :

Apologies for the delay in replying. I have been doing some things which in my life rank higher than petty internet spats – spending time with my Son and my father.

I will deal with the two allegations separately. Firstly on the ATD issue. Last night whilst having a quiet pint with a Trust board representative (remarkably aimed at discussing how to build relations between supporters groups and warring factions) I received a distressed call at 23:30 from my terminally ill father. My Dad, a lifelong, Argyle fan himself has been forced to read abuse about his son from this website for over one year and it is sickening to me to have him worrying about myself rather than trying to be as well as he can be.

I was informed by my Dad that I had been banned from ATD and linked with threatening posts. I was gobsmacked by this and actually left the bar immediately and have suffered a sleepless night because of it. This morning, I immediately contacted the ATD Mods via email and telephone. During the call it was admitted by the ATD representative that I had never made any threatening posts but that there was proof that I had used the account (from some screenprints of both me and the accused account using a proxy IP address in Cheltenham). This is an allegation that I totally refute. I don’t even know what a proxy server is! I have made it absolutely 100% clear to the ATD mods that I have and never will post as anything other than ‘Mr President’.

I have made my position clear to the ATD mods and in fairness to them since contact they have been supportive. I have also contacted the police. Why? Because I have simply had enough. I can take foul language, personal abuse, lies and everything else that the minority on the have thrown at me ever since I put my head above the parapet but I cannot and will not tolerate my family having to go through it as well. I can’t take it anymore.

Onto the accusation from Peggy. Blimey. I guess it is a good job that I have kept those PMs. I have forwarded them to the Mod team. I am not going to stoop to the same level but posters can be safely assured that at no time did I ever ask for Peggy to be removed from the Argyle programme. The PMs totally support that. What did happen those was for 2-3 months, Peggy Prior (a person who until that point I had never met or heard of) attacked seemingly everything I did from FV, to my trade union credentials to my overall involvement in the Club. On this basis I simply asked the Club to ask Peggy to refrain from attacking me as it did not make any sense whatsoever for two people linked to each other (via the Club) to be sniping. I felt (and still do) that this was exactly the right course of action for me to take. The other option would have been me replying to every post that Peggy made relating to me – I was not prepared to stoop to that level.

In summary, I have had a fantastic week off work and Argyle. This episode has however given me a timely reminder that I am far better off the internet and I will not be using this account again. Sometimes I wonder why I bothered stepping forward and why I continue to probably give up 20-30 hours a week of my time to Argyle to help with all sorts of schemes. Then I see the smile on the face of the disabled gent that uses the presidents car parking space that I gave back or buzz the kids in the Devonport get when we score a goal or the smile on James Brents face after a win. Of course it was worth it.

I will continue to live in internet exile for the good of my sanity. I just wanted to set the record straight because some people operate on a policy of if they throw enough mud then some of it may stick.

Many thanks for all the supportive PMs etc. I am absolutely fine. I have spent a lot of time talking to Ian Newell this week about the virtues of not posting online anymore and continuing his amazing and thankless work off it. I now need to take that advice myself.

I will not be responding to anymore posts etc because it will simply give the issue more credence than it deserves. The first issue is in the hands of the police, although as I said the ATD Mods have been helpful so I am sure we can work that through and the Pasoti mods now have copies of my PM exchanges with Peggy so the facts are well established there.

We all support the same team guys. Sometimes I think we forget that.

I am back off to join the 95% that will be asking what team Carl Fletcher is fielding on Sunday and not what petty row a bunch of internet posters will be having next.

Take care.

Chris

So he's denied any involvement with multi accounts, Proxy IPs and threatening PMs sent from one or more of these accounts and has basically called Peggy a liar.

Oh and called the police himself.

Glad that's all settled then

Andy_Symons wrote:

I think it's probably worth reproducing The Supreme Leader's post on the issue on pasoti:

Quote :

Apologies for the delay in replying. I have been doing some things which in my life rank higher than petty internet spats – spending time with my Son and my father.

I will deal with the two allegations separately. Firstly on the ATD issue. Last night whilst having a quiet pint with a Trust board representative (remarkably aimed at discussing how to build relations between supporters groups and warring factions) I received a distressed call at 23:30 from my terminally ill father. My Dad, a lifelong, Argyle fan himself has been forced to read abuse about his son from this website for over one year and it is sickening to me to have him worrying about myself rather than trying to be as well as he can be.

I was informed by my Dad that I had been banned from ATD and linked with threatening posts. I was gobsmacked by this and actually left the bar immediately and have suffered a sleepless night because of it. This morning, I immediately contacted the ATD Mods via email and telephone. During the call it was admitted by the ATD representative that I had never made any threatening posts but that there was proof that I had used the account (from some screenprints of both me and the accused account using a proxy IP address in Cheltenham). This is an allegation that I totally refute. I don’t even know what a proxy server is! I have made it absolutely 100% clear to the ATD mods that I have and never will post as anything other than ‘Mr President’.

I have made my position clear to the ATD mods and in fairness to them since contact they have been supportive. I have also contacted the police. Why? Because I have simply had enough. I can take foul language, personal abuse, lies and everything else that the minority on the have thrown at me ever since I put my head above the parapet but I cannot and will not tolerate my family having to go through it as well. I can’t take it anymore.

Onto the accusation from Peggy. Blimey. I guess it is a good job that I have kept those PMs. I have forwarded them to the Mod team. I am not going to stoop to the same level but posters can be safely assured that at no time did I ever ask for Peggy to be removed from the Argyle programme. The PMs totally support that. What did happen those was for 2-3 months, Peggy Prior (a person who until that point I had never met or heard of) attacked seemingly everything I did from FV, to my trade union credentials to my overall involvement in the Club. On this basis I simply asked the Club to ask Peggy to refrain from attacking me as it did not make any sense whatsoever for two people linked to each other (via the Club) to be sniping. I felt (and still do) that this was exactly the right course of action for me to take. The other option would have been me replying to every post that Peggy made relating to me – I was not prepared to stoop to that level.

In summary, I have had a fantastic week off work and Argyle. This episode has however given me a timely reminder that I am far better off the internet and I will not be using this account again. Sometimes I wonder why I bothered stepping forward and why I continue to probably give up 20-30 hours a week of my time to Argyle to help with all sorts of schemes. Then I see the smile on the face of the disabled gent that uses the presidents car parking space that I gave back or buzz the kids in the Devonport get when we score a goal or the smile on James Brents face after a win. Of course it was worth it.

I will continue to live in internet exile for the good of my sanity. I just wanted to set the record straight because some people operate on a policy of if they throw enough mud then some of it may stick.

Many thanks for all the supportive PMs etc. I am absolutely fine. I have spent a lot of time talking to Ian Newell this week about the virtues of not posting online anymore and continuing his amazing and thankless work off it. I now need to take that advice myself.

I will not be responding to anymore posts etc because it will simply give the issue more credence than it deserves. The first issue is in the hands of the police, although as I said the ATD Mods have been helpful so I am sure we can work that through and the Pasoti mods now have copies of my PM exchanges with Peggy so the facts are well established there.

We all support the same team guys. Sometimes I think we forget that.

I am back off to join the 95% that will be asking what team Carl Fletcher is fielding on Sunday and not what petty row a bunch of internet posters will be having next.

Take care.

Chris

No morals, no honour....this lowlife represents himself not your Club

I wonder if any former mods would agree with that statement about not using other accounts.

His home IP wasn't banned for no reason, it was banned because it had been used to register and post from another account.

And why would Peggy have any reason to lie about the content of the PM's she has?

Give up and admit you've been caught out.

Mike Searle wrote:

So he's denied any involvement with multi accounts, Proxy IPs and threatening PMs sent from one or more of these accounts and has basically called Peggy a liar.

Oh and called the police himself.

Glad that's all settled then

Like I said earlier, we are not linking him with the threatening PMs. I think it is far more likely that the account in question was being used by a number of different people.

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Mike Searle wrote:

So he's denied any involvement with multi accounts, Proxy IPs and threatening PMs sent from one or more of these accounts and has basically called Peggy a liar.

Oh and called the police himself.

Glad that's all settled then

Like I said earlier, we are not linking him with the threatening PMs. I think it is far more likely that the account in question was being used by a number of different people.

If he has used the same multi account that did send threatening PMs how can he not be linked? If he is one of several people who you suspect did use the account he must, by definition, be 'in the frame' - or am i missing something?

Mike Searle wrote:

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Mike Searle wrote:

So he's denied any involvement with multi accounts, Proxy IPs and threatening PMs sent from one or more of these accounts and has basically called Peggy a liar.

Oh and called the police himself.

Glad that's all settled then

Like I said earlier, we are not linking him with the threatening PMs. I think it is far more likely that the account in question was being used by a number of different people.

If he has used the same multi account that did send threatening PMs how can he not be linked? If he is one of several people who you suspect did use the account he must, by definition, be 'in the frame' - or am i missing something?

We have no proof that the threatening PM's were sent by him or that he accessed the account on the day the PM's were sent.

Yea Man wrote:

Mike Searle wrote:

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Mike Searle wrote:

So he's denied any involvement with multi accounts, Proxy IPs and threatening PMs sent from one or more of these accounts and has basically called Peggy a liar.

Oh and called the police himself.

Glad that's all settled then

Like I said earlier, we are not linking him with the threatening PMs. I think it is far more likely that the account in question was being used by a number of different people.

If he has used the same multi account that did send threatening PMs how can he not be linked? If he is one of several people who you suspect did use the account he must, by definition, be 'in the frame' - or am i missing something?

We have no proof that the threatening PM's were sent by him or that he accessed the account on the day the PM's were sent.

So is this just a storm in a tea-cup or what?

Has CW done anything wrong or what?

david_fisher wrote:

Yea Man wrote:

Mike Searle wrote:

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Mike Searle wrote:

So he's denied any involvement with multi accounts, Proxy IPs and threatening PMs sent from one or more of these accounts and has basically called Peggy a liar.

Oh and called the police himself.

Glad that's all settled then

Like I said earlier, we are not linking him with the threatening PMs. I think it is far more likely that the account in question was being used by a number of different people.

If he has used the same multi account that did send threatening PMs how can he not be linked? If he is one of several people who you suspect did use the account he must, by definition, be 'in the frame' - or am i missing something?

We have no proof that the threatening PM's were sent by him or that he accessed the account on the day the PM's were sent.

So is this just a storm in a tea-cup or what?

Has CW done anything wrong or what?

1) Multi-accounts
2) Using a proxy server

Both of which we have evidence linking his account to another.

Both are against the site rules so he has been banned for that.

So he's been banned retrospectively? Bit harsh considering the proxy rules only came in on 15th September 2012, according to the sticky in this section. Did any of the proxy multi accounts post after that date?

Andy_Symons wrote:

I think it's probably worth reproducing The Supreme Leader's post on the issue on pasoti:

Quote :

Onto the accusation from Peggy. Blimey. I guess it is a good job that I have kept those PMs. I have forwarded them to the Mod team. I am not going to stoop to the same level but posters can be safely assured that at no time did I ever ask for Peggy to be removed from the Argyle programme. The PMs totally support that. What did happen those was for 2-3 months, Peggy Prior (a person who until that point I had never met or heard of) attacked seemingly everything I did from FV, to my trade union credentials to my overall involvement in the Club. On this basis I simply asked the Club to ask Peggy to refrain from attacking me as it did not make any sense whatsoever for two people linked to each other (via the Club) to be sniping. I felt (and still do) that this was exactly the right course of action for me to take. The other option would have been me replying to every post that Peggy made relating to me – I was not prepared to stoop to that level.

Chris

Since the president's seen fit to share the content of supposedly private messages with other people, I don't see why I shouldn't do the same: if the mods on here aren't happy I will of course remove this.



As for the rest of it:

1. Some Argyle fan not to have heard of another. I mean, nobody had heard of Chris Webb until about 18 months ago.

2. Along with lots of other people with STs in blocks 3 and 4, I asked a number of times why we hadn't been consulted - or even told - about letting FV take over the area. Those questions were never answered. Also along with a number of other people, I expressed concerns about the use of the word 'ultras' and the imagery, which is a bit reminiscent of the Third Reich.

3. I did not question Chris Webb's trade union credentials. I simply pointed out - and the posts are still on here for anybody to see - that he shouldn't come on here telling people that he's 'forgotten more about trade unionism than we'll ever know' (or words to that effect) without asking how much people do already know. There's more than one longstanding trade unionist on here, and I pointed this out.

4. I'm far from the only person to have questioned Chris Webb's sudden ascendancy to club president.

Most importantly, the president "felt it was the right course of action to take" to start the campaign which led to me being removed. Who advised him? Who was consulted? Why wasn't it raised with me first (any decent trade unionist would hit the roof if somebody was disciplined without being told what they'd done wrong)? Is this what the role of president's meant to be about?

As if there's any point in saying any of this.

Peggy wrote:

Andy_Symons wrote:

I think it's probably worth reproducing The Supreme Leader's post on the issue on pasoti:

Quote :

Onto the accusation from Peggy. Blimey. I guess it is a good job that I have kept those PMs. I have forwarded them to the Mod team. I am not going to stoop to the same level but posters can be safely assured that at no time did I ever ask for Peggy to be removed from the Argyle programme. The PMs totally support that. What did happen those was for 2-3 months, Peggy Prior (a person who until that point I had never met or heard of) attacked seemingly everything I did from FV, to my trade union credentials to my overall involvement in the Club. On this basis I simply asked the Club to ask Peggy to refrain from attacking me as it did not make any sense whatsoever for two people linked to each other (via the Club) to be sniping. I felt (and still do) that this was exactly the right course of action for me to take. The other option would have been me replying to every post that Peggy made relating to me – I was not prepared to stoop to that level.

Chris

Since the president's seen fit to share the content of supposedly private messages with other people, I don't see why I shouldn't do the same: if the mods on here aren't happy I will of course remove this.



As for the rest of it:

1. Some Argyle fan not to have heard of another. I mean, nobody had heard of Chris Webb until about 18 months ago.

2. Along with lots of other people with STs in blocks 3 and 4, I asked a number of times why we hadn't been consulted - or even told - about letting FV take over the area. Those questions were never answered. Also along with a number of other people, I expressed concerns about the use of the word 'ultras' and the imagery, which is a bit reminiscent of the Third Reich.

3. I did not question Chris Webb's trade union credentials. I simply pointed out - and the posts are still on here for anybody to see - that he shouldn't come on here telling people that he's 'forgotten more about trade unionism than we'll ever know' (or words to that effect) without asking how much people do already know. There's more than one longstanding trade unionist on here, and I pointed this out.

4. I'm far from the only person to have questioned Chris Webb's sudden ascendancy to club president.

Most importantly, the president "felt it was the right course of action to take" to start the campaign which led to me being removed. Who advised him? Who was consulted? Why wasn't it raised with me first (any decent trade unionist would hit the roof if somebody was disciplined without being told what they'd done wrong)? Is this what the role of president's meant to be about?

As if there's any point in saying any of this.

I see no reason to remove this Peggy.

I feel it's justified after being called a liar.

Sharing pms is, in my view, entirely the decision of the individual. Others can make up their mind whether that's acceptable or not. Equally, I can't see that this site can have a view about sharing so-called private information from another site.

Equally, in my opinion, to try to differentiate between "making it clear to the club that it makes no sense whatsoever to have somebody so negative ..... writing for the club programme" and the claim of not "asking for Peggy to be removed from the Argyle programme" is sophistry of the highest order.

Happy for someone to suggest otherwise to me on both of the above opinions.

knecht wrote:

Sharing pms is, in my view, entirely the decision of the individual. Others can make up their mind whether that's acceptable or not. Equally, I can't see that this site can have a view about sharing so-called private information from another site.

Equally, in my opinion, to try to differentiate between "making it clear to the club that it makes no sense whatsoever to have somebody so negative ..... writing for the club programme" and the claim of not "asking for Peggy to be removed from the Argyle programme" is sophistry of the highest order.

Happy for someone to suggest otherwise to me on both of the above opinions.

Agree with that totally - he wanted her removed.

Perhaps you might shed some light on this though -

Mike Searle wrote:

So he's been banned retrospectively? Bit harsh considering the proxy rules only came in on 15th September 2012, according to the sticky in this section. Did any of the proxy multi accounts post after that date?

To me what he has said is basically saying "Peggy shouldn't be writing for the club".

I may be being a little thick and I accept that but that's my take on it.

So Mr Webb DID approach the club and say that he felt Peggy shouldn't write in the programme anymore.

Mike Searle wrote:

.....
Perhaps you might shed some light on this though -

Mike Searle wrote:

So he's been banned retrospectively? Bit harsh considering the proxy rules only came in on 15th September 2012, according to the sticky in this section. Did any of the proxy multi accounts post after that date?

I agree, Mike that it wasn't well-worded. Thanks. But you've missed the bit that says he was using multi-accounts.

That's a politicians PM as I've ever seen. It claims he didn't ask for Peggy to be removed from the programme whilst at the same time lobbying the club with the view that it's not possible to hold an opinion or two contrary to his own and write for the club.

If that is what sophistry is I agree with Knecht.

You call it sophistry whilst others may call it spin, I call it bullshit.

I feel quite sorry for the bloke. It's the company he has kept in the past.

hairy j wrote:

I feel quite sorry for the bloke. It's the company he has kept in the past.

Some would say present company

Mike Searle wrote:

hairy j wrote:

I feel quite sorry for the bloke. It's the company he has kept in the past.

Some would say present company

I think those two aren't going to be overly chummy any longer.

Highwayman wrote:

You call it sophistry whilst others may call it spin, I call it bullshit.

And you'd be right.