Ackers

You're argument could be used vice versa - do you not agree?

Being heavy handed and OTT would have been to have banned JA, nip this thread in the bud and to ignore posters comments. Maybe I've done the wrong thing by trying to explain our decision, and leaving this thread open - but in fact I'm happy to sit here and try to explain the decision that's been taken. The original banning came after consulting with JA himself, tewkes and fellow moderators. So again, the notion that its some conspiracy to form a clique from our side is way off the mark.

Ultimately - the level of complaints made, whether it by PM or on a thread forced us to make a decision. At the time I was accused of being too lenient with JA, and now I'm accused of bring too hard on JA. It's a lose-lose situation - so I'm taking the call that I don't want the forum to be spammed, like it had been on three(!!!) previous occasions despite promises that we would no longer have that problem.

So again, if its not a popular decision. I'm sorry. But it won't change, I see no reason why things will be different.

 

Thanks, Chingford. I was actually born and raised in a Thamesmead tower block, but I get your point.

I live in Essex (and sometimes Berlin) now.

 

Not that this is relevant here, but I enjoyed being described as a lefty - out of interest, where do you get that impression from? As far as I recall I haven't made much political comment here, and on one of the few occasions I did, regarding Paul Elliott and whether or not racism against black people is still a problem in British football, my views (that it isn't) certainly weren't left-wing. My political views are probably best described by: "Ouch, my arse is full of splinters from this here fence I've been sitting on".

As regards Mr Ackworth - I'm with Super and Tewkes on this. Eastbourne and SVC sum it up very well I think. Nothing against him personally, I just prefer this forum without his constant posts.

We would be worse off without you Ponders - please stay.

 

I was only making the counter argument as a safety mechanism in case you might have been railroaded by a witch hunt by a baying mob.

The only other point I would make is:
This guy is clearly a bit strange but you guys taking away his only outlets isn't going to help his condition. I know that's not your concern but sometimes doing the right thing even if it upsets a few less understanding contributors will have merit.

Not falling out but someone needs to defend the little guy sometimes. It's your forum and if you are happy you have made the right call and can sleep at night with the consequences then you made the right call for you.

 

They made the right call .

 

To coin a phrase, I didn't realise my original post would stir up so much bile n'vitriol

@Captain

I was juxtaposing, using politics as an analogy for the Chris Powell debate. Where that subject is concerned, you are Karl Marx.

 

If you were a member of debating society, would you exclude someone because they suffered from Tourette's or a stutter?

Think about it, eh?

 

Sorry mate. Nothing as deaf as a closed mind, there does appear to be a bit of a self centred I'm alright Jack mentality about this. But those with clout arnt listening.

 

Unfair comparison, not valid at all. Those criticising the mods seem to find it necessary to discredit them by distorting what they are doing. If it were a debating society you would want everyone to be allowed their say, however silly their views. But if they wanted to monopolise the debate you would call them to order. If they kept ignoring the calls to order what would you do?

 

Aren't listening? Can you not see that either way, the decision would not be well received from either party. I've seen what everyone has to say, I went back and forth with JA over private message every. Single. Day. When he was last on here in a bid to keep him integrated (again, being accused of bring too lenient). But it didn't work. As he'd been banned from the other sites we tried hard to keep him around and give him that platform - but between this and carrying out our physical jobs the forum was becoming a mess. So after consulting with the powers that be and tewkes, we made a decision. A decision made with a heavy heart but one that I'm sticking by.

JA is still on not606 - currently starting a thread on this subject on GC, but as it stands he is not back on here.

 

Given the ignore facility is open to anyone who wants to use it I feel I would do nothing unless posts were threatening, harassing or abusive. This is a harmless charlton fanatic who struggles to conform to your view of a normal posting style. I am getting quite grumpy about your lack of compassion. Let him back on and use the ignore facility. You lose nothing, he gains his voice, something it appears he really needs.

 

I have been leaving some less than subtle hints, FHB, but you are missing them completely.

JA is not out to monopolise anything.

 

Still don't make it right. Be a bigger person and show some compassion to someone who needs this place as more than a form of entertainment. The more I read the more you have this one wrong.

 

No, but that's what did happen whether deliberate or not. I think you and Glory Hunter are making well-meaning but misguided attempts to fight Ackers battles for him. It's not the end of his world to be blocked from a particular forum. He has been blocked from others as well. Have you PM'd SuperC yet? I think that would be a wise course of action.

 

GH-Were you on this forum when Ackers was in full flow?

 

Why would it be a wise course of action? If I get banned, that is fine by me.

 

No. But I have done some reading. But given you say when he was in full flow that indicates he isn't in full flow anymore and therefore has made some efforts to sort his head out. As I say even in full flow the ignore facility meant you could ignore him.

Btw I am only an outsider I hope FHB you arnt suggesting I could be banned for having a civilised debate.

 

vov.In the scp debate if Captain is Marx can I be Trotsky.
Right wing[in your analogous world] would presumably make you maggie thatcher .

 

JEESUS!

It's like reading a load of little kids bickering. The Mods gave him plenty of chances. He spammed this forum so so much. I back the mods 100% on this.
We've all tried to ban and ignore his posts but he just came back with a new username!

And Ponders - I enjoy reading your posts too but stop throwing your toys out the pram every time something upsets you. Like you say - you have left or threatened to leave many times now - becomes a bit tedious...

 

As a member of the Master Race, I admit I do get frustrated by some of the lesser beings on here.

I can understand it must be tiresome having to deal with myriad posts that are going nowhere, but an exception must be made for those who are unable to act within the normal parameters of etiquette. Sometimes we do things that are out of our power, but we shouldn't be exiled for them.