- This topic has 255 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 10 months ago by Anonymous.
April 9, 2013 at 11:39 am #90559AnonymousInactive
Ok then I pressed report button – ignoredPM'd admin – ignoredcomplained to internet committe – stop waisting our timeContacted othe forum users – told to fuck off ( you know that one)communication breakdown. My only way of complaining about being called a liar is to do it openly on the forumCan't contact party as I am not a member.You are a member – cant call you a liarSolution = leave me alone and stop the attacks, it does not look good for the partyApril 9, 2013 at 11:47 am #90560
AFAICS the recent post complained of has been removed. I can't see anything further to be done. Your complaints have been heard, and acted on. A bit of patience wouldn't go amiss, the admin isn't there 24hrs a day.April 9, 2013 at 12:04 pm #90561AnonymousInactive
You offend my intelligence as a voter Mr canditate. Are you now telling me that the thread was closed down because someone calle me a liar? Did you ask the moderator why he closed down the theads.If you did, what was he's reply? If you didnt then it is very disingenuous of you to make it up. Admin has mentione in another thread that calling me aa liar will not be tolerated. I note you did not support that view before then. Are you waiting to see what the moderator does before you throw in you unconditional support for him?As the party often asks workers think for yourself for a change.Again the solution is to let alone, stop the attacks, innuendos, snide remarks and over the top moderation and move on. ALL sides have done wrongApril 9, 2013 at 12:08 pm #90562
YMS, are you being deliberately disingenuous? I've tried the report button nowt, nee response. Tried to PM admin, if I got a reply, it did not answer by complaint/query, moreover I was told by admin that he did'nt have time for a longer answer! Did not want a longer answer in the first place, just a relevant one, no luck.So sorry if I'm being blunt but stop talking about incidents you have not a scooby about marra. Stick to claiming black is white, and that the pathetic post re the pipe was "on topic" and was in some otherworld reality, funny. Steve.April 9, 2013 at 12:19 pm #90563
ISTM that a flare up of tempers occured, during which OGW was apparently called a liar, and after which the thread was closed. the accusation was not the sole reason, AFAICS, for closing the thread, but it was certainly part of it. The offending post has been removed. That is my perception of the events, my own honest opinion of what transpired as I recall them now. I am not a moderator, member of the internet dept nor on the EC, my opinion is my own for you to accept or reject as anyone wants.April 9, 2013 at 12:29 pm #90564
OGW was'nt apparently called a liar, he was. Moreover, quite a lot of posts were made between this "ugly" incident and the thread being locked. So many indeed, that only by clutching at the flimsiest of straws, could one imagine this event in any way led to the thread lockdown.By the way, I'm not interested in perceptions of events, nor opinions of the same. I was there when they happened and do not tally with your claims.As I said on another thread, "don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining" SteveApril 9, 2013 at 12:39 pm #90565
I also said it wasn't the sole reason for the thread to be locked down, but it was clearly a part of it (logically, since it was a part of the thread). That the offending post has been deleted means it has been dealt with, and recognised as an infraction.We disagree on the connotations of utterances, something that can happen between honest debaters, without any reflection on the motives or capacities of the disputants. If you can't see rain for what it is, that is, ultimately, up to you.April 9, 2013 at 12:52 pm #90566
Logically you say! well if you want logic, is it logical that so many posts were shown between the time of the incident and thread lockdown and still to try and claim it had "anything at all" to do with "lockdown"? I would suggest it is tenuous at best. I do indeed know what rain is, as I also know when someones pissing down my back.April 9, 2013 at 1:03 pm #90567
Yes, the logic is easy:1: The Moderator is not on the forum 24 hours a day, and only deals with problems when they are present.2: Posters may send messages while the moderator is not present.3: Postsers may reply to undealt with posts in the meanwhile.4: Therefore problem messages may have to wait for the moderator to turn up.Not rocket science, never mind meteorology.April 9, 2013 at 1:27 pm #90568
You must keep dodging the meteors YMS. As I said, I watched events unfold and for much of the time a moderator was online. Once again, when I sent my PM's to the moderator, he was in fact "online" for a significant length of time! Not really quantum mechanics is it?Oh by the way, when the events which occured on the locked thread were happening, the mod was online wearing his "other hat" and actually took part in the so-called discussion.If any part of that is to difficult to understand, I will do a pencil and crayon drawing.April 9, 2013 at 1:38 pm #90569AnonymousInactive
YMS I hope the members who nominated you to stand for election is watching you wriggle your around this one. I was called a liar and I calmly responded that I will not be drawn into it. No big deal. (perhaps admin has proff of this)No tempers. You do realise that it is you and admin that are dragging this on with….well you know what I mean.Admin was wrong on this occassion, admit it and move on, unlock the posts, ease off the agressive moderation and lets get on with the case for socialism.April 9, 2013 at 1:44 pm #90570
Like I said, we disagree on the interpretation of events we both saw. There's no wriggling, just honest disagreement. But I think we've hit the end of dicussion here, and anything further is for third parties to judge.I realise that responding to you does drag this on, but I felt, once again, it would be helpful to you to get an explanation of what happened from a neutral party. I'll just, finally, point out, the forum rules forbid calmly responding to provocation, too.Closing a thread, IMNSHO, is anything but aggressive moderation. People participating in the forum should just abide by the chair's ruling.April 9, 2013 at 2:09 pm #90571AnonymousInactive
The 'moderator has now closed another thread for obvious reason – he has no rational explanation.What happened to the Swansea recommendation?April 9, 2013 at 2:12 pm #90572AnonymousInactiveApril 10, 2013 at 8:34 am #90573AnonymousInactiveYoung Master Smeet wrote:I'll just, finally, point out, the forum rules forbid calmly responding to provocation, too.
In response to TOGWYoung Master Smeet wrote:2) All Yorkshiremen are liars, you must know that.
Calmly responding to provocation?Why no moderation?Why moderation for TOGW for calmly responding?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.