** STATEMENT REGARDING GLORY **

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
To be honest I'm really really struggling with all of this.

So our 3 mods and 2 supermods who all believed Glory to be guilty of having multiple accounts and banned him have now stated that Glory has since had further accounts and tried to somehow rejoin the forum under a different identity.

Glory does not...nor ever has had any 2nd accounts.

That possibility seems to be beyond all that are sitting in judgement on our good citizen. It is obvious to anyone one with or without legal training that once false evidence is admitted into any trial then the trial is prejudiced to the point that it must be dismissed.

I really don't understand how we have gone from;

1) Glory had a second account.
2) Glory did not have a second account.
3) Glory has now tried to have multiple accounts and has been caught so we were right all along.

Come on please really ?

bucks_is_leeds said:
A handful of members, both openly and via PM have expressed various concerns over the member account and username Chippy / Glory receiving a ban. The Leeds forum looks a bit of a mess at the moment with fragments of question and answers and repeated questions spilling over into far too many different threads.

We also have a problem with three different mods attempting to answer those questions being thrown at us and if we’re being totally honest we feel some of what has been said has been ignored, overlooked by mistake or slightly twisted.

This thread is an attempt to keep everything in one place, if posts on other threads regarding this subject get deleted or moved into here it is nothing personal, it is just an attempt to not make the entire forum not all about one person.

Bucks, Ristac and Ellandback invited the supermods into a lengthy conversation regarding two issues, first being a user account which was questionable and the second being what we perceived as Glory purposely causing trouble, manipulation, unrest and both abusive behaviour and bullying to an extent that made us feel uncomfortable to witness.

We were asked by @brb how we wanted to proceed in regards to the user account being Glory; Ellandback, Ristac and Bucks all posted the same reply; he deserves a ban, ALL 3 Mods voted to ban Glory but only a Supermod has the ability to actually ban someone, we were told the following morning that Glory has been banned.

How do we define bullying, causing unrest, manipulation, abusive behaviour?

Abusive Behaviour - Remove claims that it was fishing, banter, taking the bait and it is clear for everyone to see that Glory often over stepped the mark, none of us were buying into the claims of if being a fishing trip, it was a get out of jail card used one too many times. This was an opinion shared by other members who have placed complaints against Glory regularly over the past 12 months or more.

Bullying - Fact we have lost members who have previously sent PMs stating that they can’t put up with Glory and his bullying any longer. We have all witnessed what can be perceived as bullying and once again, remove the ‘took the bait’ card and it’s unsavoury to say the least.

Manipulation/Causing Trouble/Unrest - Private messaging members and attempting to manipulate them for his own mischievous cause. We have all witnessed Glory and his attempts to lure Leeds60 into trouble with cleverly worded posts, this is one example, please don’t expect us to start listing them all. In regards to manipulatiion we have a very recent example of this happening...

We have it on hearsay from a valid and respected member that Glory had been in touch with them. Glory told them first hand that a Mod had been in touch with him informing Glory that the vote to ban him was 3-2 in favour with Ristac, Minxy and BRB voting to ban, Bucks and Elland voting to keep.

Nothing could be further from the truth, BRB and Minxy never had a vote and none of the three mods contacted Glory in this manner, it is pure B/S. All three Mods voted to ban Glory

There is only one member of the mod team who contacted him, and that was to wish Steve well health wise.

Glory has attempted to rejoin under different usernames, one account was permitted to continue it was monitored by BRB and he caught a deleted or edited comment stating “Revenge is best served cold” this shows Glory was still up to no good.

Two important questions that need addressing. The length of ban and a very valid point from WJ who has suggested clarification of what defines over stepping the mark, what guidelines or rules are in place.

In regards to the latter and WJs question, we feel it needs discussing with the supermods. One very quick and simple scenario... We implement rules, the member goes into a rival forum, their moderator requests a ban and the member is banned. We don’t feel a set of rules would work unless they were Not606 site wide. It would be for the powers above us to implement, at the moment, we ask for a ban, the supermods agree or disagree.

In regards to the length of ban, nobody is going to be happy, some will scream too long, others too short. There is NO difference of opinion between the mod team, Ristac, Bucks, Elland have NOT discussed any length of time but as the question has been asked today, then in fairness to everyone, those wanting Glory back, those not wanting him back and those not caring we have asked the Supermods to decide.

Doing this means there can be no calls of favouritism, motives or injustice from the three mods. We can also assure everyone that the Supermods have been watching over this forum since the ban so they are fully aware of everyone’s opinions.
Click to expand...
Minxy said:
Chesh .... get your facts straight

brb doesn't try to get people banned .... he either bans them or he doesn't.

You say brb doesn't like Glory .... he doesn't know Glory therefore he doesn't like or dislike him.

Neither brb nor I like Glory's on-line behaviour .... because it causes us both so much hassle .... we only become involved when your mods ask for help
Click to expand...
 
Jammy 07 said:
To be honest I'm really really struggling with all of this.

So our 3 mods and 2 supermods who all believed Glory to be guilty of having multiple accounts and banned him have now stated that Glory has since had further accounts and tried to somehow rejoin the forum under a different identity.

Glory does not...nor ever has had any 2nd accounts.

That possibility seems to be beyond all that are sitting in judgement on our good citizen. It is obvious to anyone one with or without legal training that once false evidence is admitted into any trial then the trial is prejudiced to the point that it must be dismissed.

I really don't understand how we have gone from;

1) Glory had a second account.
2) Glory did not have a second account.
3) Glory has now tried to have multiple accounts and has been caught so we were right all along.

Come on please really ?
Click to expand...
come on fella he ddisrupted the forum too much.take it on the chin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OLOF, bucks_is_leeds, FORZA LEEDS and 2 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back