This site is ever increasingly becoming a joke...

[ColinEssex]

Did anyone notice how well everyone got along when Larson was off "finding himself" or whatever he was doing for those months?

Now he's back. . . . . . . . .etc etc

Col

 

[Vassago]

Re: Not a good way to manage a site...

'You've been warned!' <= Arrogant

Unless everyone is given the right to delete others posts based their own rules for the thread I say somebody is way over the line. How about this: "If you disagree with me I'll remove your posts so don't do it. There, you've been warned! As admin/mod I have the power to do so, so live with it..."

Stating that someone has been warned is not arrogance. This is a fair statement in ALL forums online when rules are posted. This rule did not exist for ONE thread, it exists for ALL threads on this forum. Restating a rule is just that, restating a rule. I would think this would be a given and obvious rule.

 

[ColinEssex]

But surely, natural conversation takes all twists and turns into various topics - even to the extent of calling someone a tit for making a certain comment. Come on! we've all done it in a pub or work dozens of times.

Why must it be different here?

Because it's dictatorial, and the thread starter (Larson in this case) is yet again wallowing in the glory of being treated as some sort of god.

Col

 

[dan-cat]

Much as I like him, Bob is known to be a bit volatile sometimes.

He's been worked on quite remorselessly, Doc. The bullying has been nothing short of a disgrace.

In the real world, heads would have been knocked together a long time ago.

 

[Vassago]

But surely, natural conversation takes all twists and turns into various topics - even to the extent of calling someone a tit for making a certain comment. Come on! we've all done it in a pub or work dozens of times.

Why must it be different here?

Because it's dictatorial, and the thread starter (Larson in this case) is yet again wallowing in the glory of being treated as some sort of god.

Col

I think the intention was to keep the thread about restaurants. There was nothing meant to be debated on that thread really and certainly nothing meant to cause someone to be called a "tit" over. I can see if there is a small debate over which restaurant is better, but I don't recall that being a topic of discussion anywhere on that thread.

 

[ColinEssex]

I think the intention was to keep the thread about restaurants. There was nothing meant to be debated on that thread really and certainly nothing meant to cause someone to be called a "tit" over.

I know that - it was just an example of how conversation changes.

Like - (e.g.) Brian says "Liverpool is the greatest football team" - someone else says "don't be a tit, Arsenal are". (Just an example Bri)

Who knows where the conversation may go, that's the joy of conversing - I know English is not your first language in the USA, but that's the way it works, it's not dictatorial.

Col

 

[chergh]

Total nonsense. The site owner and by his permission the moderators have as much right to delete content as Walmart does for kicking me out of their store for campaigning against child labor.

This forum is privately owned. I abide by their rules or get booted, simple as.

The forum is popular because said rules are very relaxed. It's just that a pain in the ass few have taken advantage of this for their own selfish amusement and finally steps seem to be being taken to address it.

Have you even read my posts? If so you might want to work on your comprehension of english a bit if you think what you wrote above is a rebuttal to the points I made.

 

[Banana]

Did anyone notice how well everyone got along when Larson was off "finding himself" or whatever he was doing for those months?

Now he's back. . . . . . . . .etc etc

Col

I would think one can just equally turn the table and make same claim that things were better when you were on a vacation.

As has been said before, it is not required that everyone like each other. However, I do not find it unreasonable to expect people to behave civilly and just have a simple conversation instead of wallowing in old bloodfeud that nobody else gives a damn about. It's actually easy! All you have to do is... talk about anything and resist the urge to slag other members. Are you going to tell me that this requires too much effort and maturity on your part? But I'm sure you'll agree with me that it doesn't and shouldn't.

 

[KenHigg]

A lot of dialog here....

To me it's simple, he say's that if in his opinon your post is inappropriate and off topic he'll delete it. I dare you to find a thread in the cooler of any length that wouldn't be censored under those rules by the original poster...

 

[boblarson]

The warning was for PERSONAL ATTACKS, not even going off topic. Posting replies that personally attack me, or anyone else in that thread, are subject to deletion and sanction based on the rules you agreed to when signing up.

I posted that because I knew that Colin could not resist attacking me. He has shown a blatant disregard for just letting things go. Perhaps he would like another vacation as it was given last time for personal attacks (albeit in the regular forum areas).

So, you have a choice as well. Just avoid personal attacks (you can disagree with what I'm saying all you want, but personal attacks (this is just an EXAMPLE - If I were to call UserC an asshole - of course meaning that he is a hole in which a donkey stands, you would know and I would know that I am not talking about such a hole. It is blatantly obvious, should I post something like that in a thread, that I would be personally attacking that user. That post would be subject to deletion by any of the admins or moderators.

If you can't abide by that, then perhaps you might want to go find some place which you can play where personal attacks are considered okay.

 

[Brianwarnock]

I know that - it was just an example of how conversation changes.

Like - (e.g.) Brian says "Liverpool is the greatest football team" - someone else says "don't be a tit, Arsenal are". (Just an example Bri)

Col

Col that would be a rather mild rebuttal given the way Liverpool play at the moment.

The real problem is on defining abuse and similar, we all have different standards, and levels of tolerance, that what makes it dangerous for power to be in one pair of hands.

Brian

 

[KenHigg]

The warning was for PERSONAL ATTACKS, not even going off topic. Posting replies that personally attack me, or anyone else in that thread, are subject to deletion and sanction based on the rules you agreed to when signing up.

I posted that because I knew that Colin could not resist attacking me. He has shown a blatant disregard for just letting things go. Perhaps he would like another vacation as it was given last time for personal attacks (albeit in the regular forum areas).

So, you have a choice as well. Just avoid personal attacks (you can disagree with what I'm saying all you want, but personal attacks (this is just an EXAMPLE - If I were to call UserC an asshole - of course meaning that he is a hole in which a donkey stands, you would know and I would know that I am not talking about such a hole. It is blatantly obvious, should I post something like that in a thread, that I would be personally attacking that user. That post would be subject to deletion by any of the admins or moderators.

If you can't abide by that, then perhaps you might want to go find some place which you can play where personal attacks are considered okay.

Maybe you should be the one that goes. Where it's ok for you to judge others comments

 

[boblarson]

Maybe you should be the one that goes. Where it's ok for you to judge others comments

But Ken - According to JON ( the OWNER of the site) - as Moderator it IS okay for me to judge comments. That is in the job description. And so it goes for Vassago, David Crake, WAZZ, and Pat Hartman (yes, she is still a mod, even though she has not been here for a long time).

So, your comments are irrelevant. We, as Admins/Moderators ARE entitled (even if you don't think so) to make those judgement calls.

So, take it or leave it, or convince Jon that any of us is not doing the job they were appointed to do and when he removes one of us from our job then we will know that we did not do what HE (the FORUM OWNER) wanted. It is not up to you, but up to HIM. Get it?

 

[KenHigg]

In 6 years and 12k posts I've never seen a mod think they had to micro manage a thread. And stop trying to drag the other mods into this, they've done nothing remotely similar...

 

[Banana]

To me it's simple, he say's that if in his opinon your post is inappropriate and off topic he'll delete it. I dare you to find a thread in the cooler of any length that wouldn't be censored under those rules by the original poster...

That's easy enough. This very thread. In fact, you even said this:

Start your own forum. Or ask for mod rights like Larson and abuse it.

3rd post in the thread.

But I don't think that would have helped at all because I have a sense that you are not actually concerned about abuses but far more interested in belittling other people because you don't like them or because they make for an easy target.

 

[boblarson]

In 6 years and 12k posts I've never seen a mod think they had to micro manage a thread. And stop trying to drag the other mods into this, they've done nothing remotely similar...

Well, they've not been personally attacked like me either. So, get over it Ken, just let it go and move on. It is obvious from this thread that I was not overreacting in posting that in that thread. It would have degenerated into the same conversation as is occuring here.

We, as mods/admins have started discussing how to post the rules and how to enforce them so that they are handled on a consistent basis will be obvious to all. So, we will eventually either ALL live by the rules or DIE by the rules.

 

[KenHigg]

That's easy enough. This very thread. In fact, you even said this:



3rd post in the thread.

But I don't think that would have helped at all because I have a sense that you are not actually concerned about abuses but far more interested in belittling other people because you don't like them or because they make for an easy target.

And you don't find a mod telling you to post by his rules or he'll delete your comments belittling?

 

[boblarson]

And you don't find a mod telling you to post by his rules or he'll delete your comments belittling?

Again, you can't admit that those ARE the rules of the forum but I chose to make it CRYSTAL CLEAR to those who intended to post in that thread that they would be enforced, unlike the wild west area that is normally the WC.

 

[KenHigg]

Well, they've not been personally attacked like me either.

That, to me, speaks volumes.

 

[boblarson]

That, to me, speaks volumes.

Ken -

Yes, I did do things that I have admitted and apologized for. Yet, you and Colin seem to want to keep dragging it up and trying to attack me for everything I do as a mod here because of it.

GET OVER IT. It is in the past.

The reason I posted the warning is that you and he can NOT release the past. If you would just move on, and not continue these pointless attacks upon me, we could all go on very well. It is when you seem to just keep dredging up the old stuff which is history, that then it gets to be where we have to take action.

Colin was banned briefly for the personal attacks. We may have to resort to that for others. Just let it go. Have fun and enjoy the forum.

I am not who I was two years ago. In fact, I will not ban anyone (except spammers) without discussing with the Admins/Mods. I will, however, enforce the no personal attacks rule, as I have been able to do and yet have not really done up to this point after returning to be a mod. I have shown great restraint, but yet the attacks persist.

If ANYONE feels that they are being personally attacked, please report the post and we (meaning the ENTIRE ADMIN/MOD TEAM) will investigate and will most likely remove the offending post or portion of the post and will warn the user who posted the remarks.

Just let things go and let's discuss things without personal attacks. There is no need for that.