Very true.....you're probably right. BTW everyone.......I've personally met both of our mods and I can guarantee that they do not listen to anyone when it comes to moderation. They will not let themselves be influenced by other posters, no matter how established on this board and I'm pretty sure that there isn't a group of posters "ganging up" on others by trying to get them banned. This is something that keeps being alluded to by a couple of posters and I'm telling you, you've got it wrong!
ABITB/Cery/Secret is just a sad,little attention seeker and has been winding people up for years and started on the old 606 site.Ok,some of his posts are mildly amusing,but some are out of order and Im glad he's been banned.Just hope a few of the 'others' go the same way.
It seems pretty obvious on all fronts. Chico was asking for some assistance in calming CB down and not wumming. CB tried to pick the comment that would hurt the most in an inexcusably nasty way. Swords said a comment that was potentially very hurtful but he could have diffused it by backing down and wouldn't for some silly higher reason. It's that simple and the fact that people can't see this just highlights how much we need rules. Some spend far too long trying to probe these rules, proposed by volunteers and agreed by majority, for weakness and inconsistency rather than deriving as much pleasure from the structure of the forum as it is. Says it all really...
Onward and upward we have a football match today ... However I have it on great authority that most of the posters on here who meet up in The Coningham Arms have formed a deep sexual alliance with each other ... Witnesses and survivors say its like a scene from Caligula some weeks I am going in under cover soon to expose all of this malarky and you can be sure I will expose all! As i understand it Cerny has been selected to become the new gimp
So that was you at the window looking in longingly..... Pluck up the courage to dive in next time Dave.
Re the Conningham.....I am sure CB was there last time (Sunday) incognito...and pointed out someone sitting outside our circle watching us....Or maybe I am paranoid........ Anyway as the blessed Saint said, onward and upwards...... we have a footy match to win today (see I am mentally deluded too)
Thanks Rollercoaster Ranger. I don't often take offence, but others thinking that I post under other aliases is just plainly false. I have always used my sku1974 handle since the BBC days and I am not CernyBerny or Secret Ranger. I cannot make it any clearer than that. For others to smear my identity here without any hard facts is speculative. It's unfair, mean spirited, and I am now finding it mildly irritating and offensive. I will reiterate my position, I have always posted with humour and warmth and tried to keep things light. If the moderators wish to undertake the IP checks and present the facts, it will vindicate my position.
Spot on Roller. Cheers mate. After creating threads both complaining about, but at the same time provoking visitors, SR finally PM'd us with one link to a Daiswan post - but that particular reference wasn't strong enough to convince me, let alone the SuperMod, that it was worth a ban. As for the Sku / SR connection. The is he, isn't he thing simply isn't an issue. The only thing that matters from a modding viewpoint, is the conduct of a user name. Fact is Sku's conduct has never been in question, whereas SR's is/was. If, as we all anticipate, SR resurfaces with a different user name but he's compliant and there's no indication of a piss take, then so be it. Job done. If, a new user name emerges with similar conduct issues to CB/SR, that user name will be banned on the grounds of immoderation, and the next one, and the next one etc.. Let's face it, I haven't a clue who's really who, and neither do I care. I'm just the gatekeeper. No interest in playing Sherlock.
Without wishing to go against the grain, and I'm certainly not having a go at the mods, but I very rarely can be bothered to partake in threads any more on here, the reason? It's simply to much hassle. Time and time again we have the same posters causing problems. They get a short ban, come back, behave for a while, start again, get banned, come back, behave for a while, start again, get banned, come back...... Anyone see a pattern? Now while I'm all for freedom of speech, banter and difference of opinions, I really don't understand why we continually give them the rope to hang themselves. The period of time where these boards seem peaceful and centred around the discussion of QPR, seems to get shorter and shorter, all because we let the same people get away with it time and time again. I don't see the logic in banning someone and allowing them to come back under an alter ego? Defies logic. On the old 606 things never got like this because it was the BBC, they had a full time mod team who could pick up on any confrontational post within minutes, wumming was put down in similar fashion, which is why 606 was so popular. This site was started to mirror that ethos, unfortunately it hasn't got the same level of moderation. This leaves us with the poor sods of Brix and (not even sure of the other mod anymore, my apologies) who have put themselves forward, and as they've stated this cannot be a full time job for them, some self moderation is required, but what use is this if we allow the usual suspects to come back time and time again to spoil it for the rest of us? Now this is just my opinion, I've been told before to just ignore threads where there's arguments or have gone off topic, well I've done that which is why I hardly get to voice an opinion because most threads do go off topic or descend into a slagging match. Is no one else sick of the sense of De Ja Vu??? There's the popular American saying 3 strike and you're out, it's been adopted by many countries laws for repeat offenders, if it's popular in countries civil laws, would it be such a bad thing here? I think 3 chances to prove you wont mess up again is enough? Now again, this is just my opinion, but I joined this site because it was where most from 606 were joining for the purpose of being together to talk about football and QPR, alas that seems to happen less and less on here, and while I don't expect the site to be as quick as 606 was at putting down any unwanted threats, wumming or off topic subjects, I can't see why after 3 years we are still suffering the same rubbish on here when it would seem simple to rectify.
Could someone please post one of these showing how to post fullsize images rather than just thumbnails? I've heard something about a mysterious box that needs to be ticked...but i can never find it!
Big difference between BBC606 and this site TLR. Apple and orange in fact. This site's called NOT606 as a direct reaction to what many fans considered to be over-modding at the beeb. Hence the hugely immoderate General Chat forum on here, which was core to not606 before the BBC606 close down and the desired 'invasion' of us ex-606 football fans. So whilst this site wants a level of moderation (the 'isms' etc.), it's very resistant to anything too heavy as the owner believes this puts people off. The site certainly wouldn't even consider the notion of full time mods. It simply relies on 'clubs' to find acceptable volunteers to keep a bit of order about the place. As for banned users, I don't know what powers / control facilities the BBC had to keep 'offenders' away but they have a 'reputation' for propriety to protect, whereas this site gets a certain amount of its kudos from being a bit 'interesting'. Consequently, it's almost inevitable that banned users will return under alternative user names. Not much we can do about that. Then there's that other difference. When the BBC mods banned someone, they didn't have to contend with the reaction of 'cronies' that we do on here. When considering a ban for breaches of agreed rules, we also have to consider the back rush of criticism for 'unjust' mod actions. That in itself threatens to destabilise board harmony - something that's pretty key to the allure for many of our more quality users. Hope that answers some of your concerns TLR.
no MATE..yoU HAVE GOT IT WRONG. I have read the posts and PM's on this subject. you are entitled to pull the wool over your own eyes mate, but don't tell those of us who have read the pm's and posts, that we are wrong. you clearly have no idea and are just basing your comment on your own opinion. I can GAURANTEE you that you are wrong. i'm not the only one who knows this either Im not gonna publicaly name names, but certain posters who who and what they have said. Lets leave it at that mate. Just so you know, alright
Yeah Cheers roller, lets let some wum come on OUR board and wind up one of our own, because we feel sorry for him?! The post is still there for everyone to see mate. I cant be f**ked with quoting numbers & posts that everybody including our mods has read SR tried to complain if you remember but the whole issue was overlooked wasn't it? I believe that thread is still there 7 was obviously read by the mods because it had to be locked. Chico's whole post was a wind up, but I guess its different rules for some eh? I thought brix stated in one of his threads about the new rules etc, that they had become in danger of letting personal views become involved (correct me if im wrong Brix). We are all one family, unless some WUM come on here apparently!
Queens, SR was being a ****er on my board. I asked for calm, but he continued to use vile words and took the piss out of people with disadvantages. I came over here and started a thread that was only meant to be a bit of light heated humour. I was not wumming, and it was aimed at him only.
Re your signature .. "Hot dogs for tea boys ... Fatty does the best hot dogs". Take no notice Chico always welcome here as is anyone in my book ... This stuff can affect people and Biscuit Boy (Cerny) had it coming big time ... Cerny was one of those people that was crying out for one of those little fast controlled jabs ... afterwards the world would have looked a lot simpler for him as inside he is OK
