** 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.
Jammy 07 said:
And again I'm not willing at this stage to reveal my source of the information. Should I ever need to then obviously I would but it seems that won't be necessary as Glory doesn't wish to pursue the matter.

Sorry to be obtuse but it's just the same as people contacting you in confidence.
Click to expand...

FFS stop talking in riddles and just tell Eric to spill the beans <doh>
 
  • Like
Reactions: OLOF and ristac
Jammy 07 said:
And again I'm not willing at this stage to reveal my source of the information. Should I ever need to then obviously I would but it seems that won't be necessary as Glory doesn't wish to pursue the matter.

Sorry to be obtuse but it's just the same as people contacting you in confidence.
Click to expand...

You seem to have a direct line to Glory
 
Jammy 07 said:
Looking at Minxy's post about banning procedure it appears you and our other mods would have to specify temporary or permanent when it comes to banning.

Given that at the time you thought Glory was guilty of having multiple accounts I can see how you might have recommended a permanent ban. Once that was proven to be false however perhaps a temporary ban might have been more appropriate.

The evidence did change and has changed again over the last couple of weeks. No one is denying that Glory was always on thin ice and whether he crossed that line or not is very much your judgement call as the rest of us do not have all the necessary information.

Most of us I think would have been very supportive of a temporary ban given how we are all aware of various issues surrounding current and historical postings where Glory is concerned.
Click to expand...

As part of the argument is how long he is banned for, why are you arguing about it being temporarily or permanent as no one knows. Chances are he'll be back before this thread closes <laugh>
 
Minxy said:
Please post one question at a time & I will do my best the answer them
Click to expand...
OK, here goes. I'll post them all together & you can answer them one at a time with 5 replies .....

Q1a. To pick up on your last point, if you're saying that the process is for our mods to ask supermods to instigate a ban, so how come our mods have
had to fight supermods to prevent certain bans, then?

Q1b. Are you saying that the Leeds mods requested bans then changed their minds, or is there another explanation?

Q2. If you do indeed do this variety of bans, where is the evidence to support it?

Q3. How many bans have we had on the Leeds site in the last year?

Q4. How many of these bans were communicated to the Leeds contributors?

Q5. Apart from the disproportionate sine die bans we worked out for ourselves, we have no idea about any other bans. Is it a secret for some reason? Some might suggest you were making it all up.
 
brb said:
You must log in or register to see images
Click to expand...
Check it out now as I've added a few more guests for camouflage.

Very useful working the nightshift at PC world.

I'm only the cleaner but they leave everything plugged in.
 
Whitejock said:
OK, here goes. I'll post them all together & you can answer them one at a time with 5 replies .....

Q1a. To pick up on your last point, if you're saying that the process is for our mods to ask supermods to instigate a ban, so how come our mods have
had to fight supermods to prevent certain bans, then?

Q1b. Are you saying that the Leeds mods requested bans then changed their minds, or is there another explanation?

Q2. If you do indeed do this variety of bans, where is the evidence to support it?

Q3. How many bans have we had on the Leeds site in the last year?

Q4. How many of these bans were communicated to the Leeds contributors?

Q5. Apart from the disproportionate sine die bans we worked out for ourselves, we have no idea about any other bans. Is it a secret for some reason? Some might suggest you were making it all up.
Click to expand...

You must log in or register to see images
 
  • Like
Reactions: ristac, ellandback and Whitejock
Jammy 07 said:
Part of the statement was incorrect.

Glory did not try to rejoin the forum under another username or post that " revenge is a dish best served cold ".

Some of us baulk at inaccuracies and false accusations.
Click to expand...

But was he warned that what he was posting could lead to a ban? Did he not acknowledge in some of his posts that he was aware that the contents of his posts could lead to his ban? Did he moderate his posts to stop said ban being imposed? If all the answers to that are yes then does he know exactly why he has been banned?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ristac
Leedsoflondon said:
But was he warned that what he was posting could lead to a ban? Did he not acknowledge in some of his posts that he was aware that the contents of his posts could lead to his ban? Did he moderate his posts to stop said ban being imposed? If all the answers to that are yes then does he know exactly why he has been banned?
Click to expand...
Tis true dat.
 
Jammy 07 said:
Check it out now as I've added a few more guests for camouflage.

Very useful working the nightshift at PC world.

I'm only the cleaner but they leave everything plugged in.
Click to expand...

Just deleted moodymum :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back