Who is out there?

[Pid_16V]

Who?

[bobster1982]

It was Alan wot dunnit!!! quick get him





evenin matey

[Pid_16V]

What time does the next bus leave?

[Yolon]

My so this is where you've all got to So I see some familiar faces if not sigs, hope you are all well

[cougar571]

Originally Posted by Yolon

My so this is where you've all got to So I see some familiar faces if not sigs, hope you are all well

There's nowhere else to go, as I've been banned from .net without warning or posting!!
Yes, to answer your question Rick, we're fine bud.

[Matty O]

You got banned from .net??
Why man??

[cougar571]

Originally Posted by Matty O

You got banned from .net??
Why man??

I can't answer that Matty, you'll need to ask the people responsible.
I registered as myself, didn't even post & 2 days later....I'm banned!!
This is the message I get:-

. Critical Information

. You have been banned from this forum.
Please contact the webmaster or board administrator for more information.

[Betty Boop]

Originally Posted by cougar571

I can't answer that Matty, you'll need to ask the people responsible.
I registered as myself, didn't even post & 2 days later....I'm banned!!
This is the message I get:-

. Critical Information

. You have been banned from this forum.
Please contact the webmaster or board administrator for more information.

Hi Mike

I banned you.

You condoned it when members abused me on .com. You are not going to sign up on .net and act like you are my buddy after you did that. I complained to you and you did nothing. You voted to have me banned, WITHOUT any warning (no People, I never did get a warning).

If you would like to issue me with an apology, then I will consider removing the ban.

Anyway, after our conversation at Christmas time, I thought you would have set up your own club by now, like you said you was thinking about.

[Yolon]

Originally Posted by Betty Boop

Hi Mike

I banned you.

You condoned it when members abused me on .com. You are not going to sign up on .net and act like you are my buddy after you did that. I complained to you and you did nothing. You voted to have me banned, WITHOUT any warning (no People, I never did get a warning).

If you would like to issue me with an apology, then I will consider removing the ban.

Anyway, after our conversation at Christmas time, I thought you would have set up your own club by now, like you said you was thinking about.

The same goes for Paul Whitelock who incidentally was also a moderator.com who is guilty of the same failing. Not wanting to be rude about it but they both were part of the rot taking place on .com that was only interested in the opinions and views of its oldest members who would not challenge admin about it's policies when they were clearly not in the clubs interests. Policies like using peoples PM's to justify banning members. If two members have a disagreement in private that's where it should stay unless in admins case namely Shagmonkey who used his position as a member of admin to wage a public campaign of insults against members of the forum.

Cougar 571 and Paul Whitelock were 2 of a number of Mods who stood buy and didn't challenge it clearly when it was wrong, and incidently both voted for the banning of members without any dialogue investigation or consultatiton prior to banning them.

We run our forum on different and better principles like Betty says if they can offer an apology then we'll consider the genuiness of it.

[cougar571]

Originally Posted by Yolon

The same goes for Paul Whitelock who incidentally was also a moderator.com who is guilty of the same failing. Not wanting to be rude about it but they both were part of the rot taking place on .com that was only interested in the opinions and views of its oldest members who would not challenge admin about it's policies when they were clearly not in the clubs interests. Policies like using peoples PM's to justify banning members. If two members have a disagreement in private that's where it should stay unless in admins case namely Shagmonkey who used his position as a member of admin to wage a public campaign of insults against members of the forum.

Cougar 571 and Paul Whitelock were 2 of a number of Mods who stood buy and didn't challenge it clearly when it was wrong, and incidently both voted for the banning of members without any dialogue investigation or consultatiton prior to banning them.

We run our forum on different and better principles like Betty says if they can offer an apology then we'll consider the genuiness of it.

How wrong you are Rick.

Is this a better, it's certainly different, principle?:- Ban them because they didn't agree with me!! "Without any dialogue, investigation or consultation prior to banning them" (Me, in this case)
Pot & Kettle spring to mind here.

You will find out, given time, that as a Moderator you can't please everyone, by it's very nature a Moderator is just that, they moderate.
In simple terms, a Mod' has to try & find a way to appease ALL parties in a dispute, not one or the other, although this sometimes can happen.

The thread in question was 'moved' out of the public eye by me, because we couldn't reach an acceptable conclusion by all parties involved, which is what you requested, so where's the problem in that Rick?
You even PM 'd me & said "Thank you!!"