Question for Leeds fans

Jesus, mate. I got eviscerated for asking a few questions. Hate to think what's going to happen to you for offering suggestions!

 

I've voted yes because in this case I think the Mods tried everything they could to try and change the behaviour that was upsetting several people. I think he left them no choice. 60s posts didn't bother me but they seemed to upset quite a few. Why should one person be allowed to upset several people's enjoyment of the site. I know it was obviously a tough decision and if the Mods felt it was the thing to do then I back it. From my view 60 got several opportunities and didn't take them so only his self to blame. Think the Mods do a good job on here and don't think it should change.

 

Sorry if you think it was the questions Jock.
It was the manner of the questions.
Suggesting that the Leeds not606 mods had held a "Kangaroo Court" and "taken the mirrors down in their houses" could only have had the intention to offend SAID Mods IMO.
As they put lots of unpaid hours (Bucks and Elland at least) in moderating this board, I felt it was extremely unfair

I understand your allegiance to Mike - I didn't mind him and did not want him banned, but understand completely why that action was taken.
The reason lots of old BBC posters have stuck with this site is because its not over-moderated.
The 3 mods you have on here have been regular posters for a long long time - I hope they continue to do so

 

Hang the ****er!!!!!

 

Can I take that as a compliment?

 

Oops will I get suspended by a super mod....... Can't help chucking my two penneth in. This could be a major site with a bit more digital strategy. I look at some of the other clubs listed and a lot do not get many posts or frequent ones. Seems to me Leeds are one of the best. Eyeballs equal advertising revenue, equals more investment.

 

My goodness TC, an inoffensive & sensible post. Let me respond accordingly:

The manner of the questions are a matter of regret for me. In mitigation, I had come off the phone from Mike, who told me, as I explained, that he had been banned, but didn't know why. He had not received any communication to inform him of his situation, and to be honest, he sounded every one of his septuagenarian years - lost and almost broken, which was quite a shock to me, as he was not his usual ebullient self (don't think anything will ever actually break him ). I was shocked that anyone could be treated in this way, particularly an old man who was clinging onto the technology by his fingertips. During the course of the day, I found out that there had been a cock-up in that respect, a communication failure between our Mods who send the email, and the Supermod who does the banning. I was assured that this was uncommon, if not indeed unprecented. In the light of this, then you are right that my pointed remearks were indeed extremely unfair, and I thought I had taken back my remarks when I found this out, but I'm now not so sure. Therefore I wish to apologise unreservedly to the Mods for my over the top remarks, and apologise to them once again for not actually apologising at the time (if that is indeed the case). I would implore them to remain in place as they do a fabulous job, as I have said, but 'within the current framework'. This remark is not aimed solely at the Leeds site - I was addressing the whole of NOT606.

The 'Kangaroo Court' remark I will not take back, as the lack of information provided to us plebs makes it so easy for us to take that inference. This lack of information is one of the main planks of my challenge.

I'm not so sure you do understand my allegiance to Mike. He is a personal friend of mine, as is Steve (Glory), and both are afforded the same allegiance by me. I would have reacted similarly if their roles had been reversed.

I'd like to close with one final remark, as I'm not sure if you're hinting at this or not - I am not looking for additional moderation, simply clarity & transparency and consistency of approach.

 

Right I'm off to change my IP address before the lynch mob arrive. Witch, witch....

 

Fair play Jock - takes a good man to apologize like that

So that we can draw a line under this (on my part anyway), I would also like to apologize to your good self!!
I am very very sorry that you found my last post inoffensive ans sensible. It was totally out of character and will not happen again

 

****ing quality
you almost had me there

 

Paddy's ain't biting tonight.............

 

You stalking me or what kim?

 

Ah, it's ok. The shocking spelling was offensive enough.

 

Nah paddy........

 

Not sure if you can read this as I believe I'm the one you used the ignore button on,

No malice,

do you think you hit the nail on head when you chose to exercise your right to use the ignore button?

 

I don't think its as simple as the question asked.

Its a case by case basis imo. and the leeds mods do an excellent job in analysing each one as best they can. Honestly can't remember a decision they have made which I disagreed with including Leeds60. Even if they did make a decision I did disagree with, I'd like to think I'd respect it enough to not challenge it as they do their best for the Leeds board and the Leeds board only.

I think it should just be accepted and move on. I personally don't want to see any change to the board

 

Good constructive points well articulated with no agenda.
If only the O/P that started this needless rumpus had done the same sort of thing instead of using emotive language and perjorative terms that IMO just displayed their lack of ability to see consequences when looking at a big picture.. Pleased to see the poll seems to have put this one to bed.......

 

No it doesnt as 42% are not in agreement with the ban

 

Sorry, wasn't ignoring your question, left work, went home and blinking internet wasn't working until late by which time I had, more or less lost the will to post! In answer to your question, from the limited information I have, yes, I believe there is more than a passing resemblance!