See, now do you see what a total waste of time your "so PM him" comment would have been, thank god I dont listen to all the advice I'm given eh.
Printable View
See, now do you see what a total waste of time your "so PM him" comment would have been, thank god I dont listen to all the advice I'm given eh.
Yes, thank God.
Quite right. Where's Christian when you actually need him?Quote:
Originally Posted by a447
most funny post in Thread...
have you seen Google's terms?
https://www.google.com/intl/en_ru/po.../regional.htmlQuote:
Google may also stop providing Services to you, or add or create new limits to our Services at any time.
every free service has such terms...
Instagram:
https://help.instagram.com/478745558852511Quote:
We reserve the right to modify or terminate the Service or your access to the Service for any reason, without notice, at any time, and without liability to you.
and so on...
Or in other words....remember your place and shut up.
I'd be careful Moses, as you seem to be on thin ice right now with the membership. Push much more, a decent chance you'll end up with a forum with no membership. Then you just have a ghost town that you're paying the monthly server bill for.
What? You think because only 10 or so have actually bothered to comment publically on the thread being closed, that is the full extent of the disgruntlement regarding the direction the forum is taking if it continues down the censorship path? By they way even at 10 it is more than a 'handful' including 'surprise' from A447 a moderator, that moses took the decision and another moderator 'liking' two of the posts disagreeing with moses decision.
Lets face it , you have absolutely no idea how many members 'thoughts' cdnmatt is echoing, but I do know for certain your estimate/guess of a 'handful at most' ....that's 5 by the way.....to be woefully inaccurate and way off the mark.
10 is only the number on the surface there will be many more below the surface. Even I have had over a dozen 'readers' who rarely post here now make contact, and not a single one agrees with the decision. They are board members.
Your estimate of dissatisfied board members may be correct, but neither you nor I can provide authoritative numbers.
Certainly if the board owner took to arbitrarily closing threads left and right, or banned members indiscriminately, that would be a cause for concern. That has not happened.
One thread was closed, admittedly for a reason that was not substantive. The thread could easily have been left to end naturally. And some deletions by a moderator may also have been contentious.
Should the forum be maintained on an "anything goes" level, without the involvement of the owner or moderators? I would say "yes", but with one exception. Posts which are personally abusive should not, must not be tolerated. The owner or moderators have every right and duty to determine what is personally abusive and remove such posts, as they see fit.
I am sure we will never reach an agreement on this so I don't see any point in prolonging the discussion.
Cheers.
Moses wrote.
" every free service has such terms..."
Exactly. Just as it was with Neal and then Surfcrest. Everyone knows the rules of the game before you come in to play. No different to entering a restaurant, aeroplane, hospital, bar in Thailand or anywhere else. No member (or group of members) including me is particularly important to this board. In fact a clearing out of some of the 'old guard' (perhaps too, including me) might be something to Moses advantage. Especially those who do little other than complain constantly about anything and everything. Just saying like.
You too, unless you can read my Inbox in PM.
Forum is private property. And nobody will "vote" what should I close and what should I open. Point. Anyone can use forum "as it is" within limits established by rules, or... don't use. Members aren't taxpayers, and I'm not elected president. So please stop to dream about democracy and to count "voters"..
Bobsaigon, no! I didn't say I knew the amount or had authoritative numbers, I didn't even say I had an estimate as you claim I did, so please don't put words in my mouth, what I said precisely was that I knew for a fact there were more than your authoritative 'no more than a handful'.
Again I did not say these were dissatisfied board members, what I said was that the more-than-a-handful were disgruntled at the one decision to lock a thread for no good reason and the precedent it set, a precedent you don't seem concerned about. I don't really care what the owner thinks about members who have a concern regarding the forum they contribute to, that of course is entirely up to him, but as with any forum if I have a post to make with an opinion, I'll make it.
Yes one thread was closed, you mention threads being closed right and left and that it 'has not happened'. I did use the term 'thin edge of the wedge' for a reason, so far only one thread "on the right" has been closed, as for "the left" we will just have to wait and see. But closing a thread as you did agree, for no good reason is not a step in the right direction. I stand by that post in that if the owner continues down the path of closing threads for no good reason where members have taken their time to post he will lose a great deal of goodwill. If he doesn't care about that and continues down the path where the opinions of the members who contribute to his forum which in turn attracts the views he values so much, count for nothing, that is up to him.
Your quote "should the forum be maintained on an 'anything goes' without the involvement of owner or moderators I would say yes" I think you will find contrary to the decision made to close the cdnmatt thread. If the owner is prepared to close a thread which contained little or no 'anything goes' content, for no good reason other than 'he didn't like it', I think you should be as concerned as some others here about the possible direction of the forum.
Actually you are quite wrong about never being able to reach an agreement. You want to see the forum maintained on and 'anything goes' basis, so do I, and that's precisely why I made the post in the first place.
OK, newalaan, I guess we're in agreement somewhere / someways in all of this. :)
It's difficult, if not impossible, for members to even bring up allegations of moderator impropriety, let alone "evidence", with the "no discussion of moderator decision in the open forum" rule in place. This rule encourages and has led to abuse of power to settle old scores and personal vendettas. Why not do things the old-fashioned way, through debate and persuasion, wit and repartee, instead of using gestapo-type mechanisms to silence people you disagree with?
"Personally abusive" is too broad and relative a classification to be left in the hands of a single moderator. If something is truly "personally abusive" it should attract sufficient outrage from the membership in which case moderator intervention may be necessary. From my personal experience, rules are being created, interpreted and applied at random. I know the rules are supposed to protect the membership and promote the smooth running of the board, but what's to protect us from a moderator who abuses his power for personal reasons and knows he can get away with it because of the "no discussion of moderator decision in the open forum" rule?
Perhaps but one day you might end up with a very cold kitchen, with only yesterday's leftovers and a rusty can of baked beans on the table, instead of a delicately prepared chicken gently simmering on the stove, the smell of which is so tempting that new neighbours come knocking with their own offerings, hoping to have a delicious potluck where everybody gets to join.
But in a convivial spirit the owner of the house might be interested in what colour his guests thought would work well. And since his guests are doing the painting/posting, it might be thought both worthwhile and motivating if both the colour and the process of painting had some element of consensus.
you still have option to write PM to moderator and to 2 admins: Surfcrest and me...
but I don't want multipage-wars on "open forum" after each moderation act
- "I'm innocent",
- "You are rule-breaker"
- "he is innocent
- "he is rule-breaker"
there are enough other wars...
I was referencing bobsaigon2's remarks (see post #56) where he said, "The owner or moderators have every right and duty to determine what is personally abusive and remove such posts, as they see fit." and a moderator has misused rule 4.7 and rule 3.2.1.4 to justify this and issue red cards.
Agreed. One shouldn't attempt to speak for all or even most members in order to support our own prejudices. Unfortunately, you and a447, who liked your post, have no credibility on this issue whatsoever having done exactly that on at least one occasion ie claiming to speak for the entire membership when you were really speaking for your individual selves. I'll post the relevant links tomorrow. My bf is calling me to come to bed. Night.
Anyway say what you all want Moses has basically said to one and all "tough shit, if you don't like it / my rules then you can simply can fuck off as I don't care" - I guess he can't be much clearer than that. But lets not at least put up any pretence then that it's any other way than that with talk of rules and moderation any longer, Neal is dead, long live Moses ( it seems)
It's certainly the impression that's coming across
:aggressive: