Joint statement

I dont care anymore because its not my prob but u said it all here...he broke site rules...and his removal was requested.

 

Sticks and stones brb, I KNOW that I'm respected by the people who really matter! I am genuinely sorry that it has come down to this! Nobody wanted this outcome!

 

I must say i'm a bit stunned that so much time has been invested on this issue and now it's really exploded. I agree with Resurgam's viewpoint on all of this.

BrB - I totally respect your actual decision (I agree with it if I'm honest) but, and apologies for saying this as I've always liked your input on the forums I've seen you post on, I do perhaps think the language used could have been slightly more diplomatic or handled with Hornette privately.

Minxy - I was going to post this morning saying that the main issue was that an offer was made with no consultation between the super mods and that could have perhaps been handled better. You beat me to it so thank you for your comments and explanations. Personally I don't think anyone should be blamed for anything - BrB himself mentioned that it was well intentioned and I agree with that.

I'm out of this thread now as i would be surprised if it ended especially happily (go on - prove me wrong please) but apologise if any of my comments have offended anyone.

 

I would like to go back to my original post on this thread by asking what is meant by the expression 'privileged to a lot of private discussions`. Also expressions such as 'revealing of circumstances` or `revealing of full facts months later are somewhat disturbing for me. If there are facts relevant to this case why are they not being released now ? Why are you reserving language for yourself which is more appropriate to a Prime Minister discussing a War ? Are private messages being read by third parties ? All of these questions are now of more concern to me than whether Gimme is banned or not.

 

I understand your concern & will try to clarify. Site admin do not have access to read any PMs between posters. I ask this very same question of the site owner.

Brb was using a previous problem on a different forum as an example. We spent many hours over a period of several months trying to work out who people were in order to ban the correct ones. The info supermods can view are email addresses, DOB (if not with held) all IP addresses that a poster has ever used & who else has also used that address. It is amazing the length some people will go to for their own agendas. ...... wumming, spamming or trying to gain info for their own use ie setting up their own site. I have been on a steep learning curve.

Obviously we have a mod forum where issues can be discussed in private

Anyway I hope this answers your questions ...... Think brb was just as fed up as me when trying to explain that as a supermod we can often identify bigger pictures.

Thank you for your apology NZ ..... but you are right I did not need sarcasm at that moment in time. But in some ways I am grateful because it was the straw that broke the camels back & I will be stepping down as supermod today

 

I am afraid brb you stated that you had created the rule to ease the workload and now that rule has come back to bite you. It was suggested earlier that rules should be looked at and tuned from time to time, but here we have a case where it appears no thought has been given to this, just use it to justify your position. It is a one size fits all rule, and it has been shown to not work in this instance.

I have just had a look to see how many of the 92 club boards are active this morning. I counted 19 when I looked. I also looked to see which clubs had the most active boards and discovered to my surprise that Watford actually is among the top posting sites. As has been said we self regulate our forum and although I don't know, would be very surprised if you told me that our mods had to seek banning orders often, or at all. Surely it is not that difficult to see where the trouble for you does come from, and have a different approach to those sites. I can think of little reason why when there is a board like ours, the power to ban a poster for a short period should not be devolved down to the mods.

You say you have had enough of it. This time it seems that you have tried to defend your rule rather than wonder how you have upset a peaceful, non-aggressive board like ours. Maybe a different approach would have been more suitable.

 

That will be for the new supermod(s) to sort out

I would be grateful if you would stop having a go at brb for my mistake

 

Its all the one , mick is on holidays and theres no tits on show. Im going on holidays soon and mick said he'll make me supermod if I post some beach tits for him.

Take a look at the name guise and get used to a no nonsense regime coming soon.

 

Had considered suggesting you as an ideal replacement Hash

 

Do itll save me time in the cells for photographing boobies for a hard up site owner. I wont even be able to name the site when quizzed. Id get life if I said not606

 

Bless you Hash, good to see you don't change xx

 

I sure Mick said you were top of his list for something

 

Edited


That, if you had read back, is not how this started. Gimme could be my enemy and I would still defend justice. Your snide remarks are beneath you brb, I'm surprised at you. Luckily the watford board have caused you no problems because thankfully we are a friendly board with mutual respect. It's a shame the supermods seem unable to follow that lead when posting on our board.

 

Really brb, you choose to ignore my comments about who made the rule, how that rule has created discord on one of the most peaceful sites going, how a bit more common sense looking at the rule could have avoided this, then tell me that I should open my eyes. Does it really matter who is friends with who? Surely you would not have wanted to moderate that too!

Still the whole sorry affair has shown up that at the 'higher levels' things are far from rosy. Far too much in fighting by the sound of things. It seems as if some good PR is needed.

 

Is it me, or is this thread in danger of turning into the online equivalent of a playground fight?

 

I would say that ship has sailed, not that I even have a clue what you are all arguing about.