Swords: Verdict and Poll

Now that has made me laugh Imaz get in there son! ... Kill him with kindness!

 

How about a nice pair of socks? ... everyman has his price x

 

I have no desire to enter into a socks relationship with you...

 

Embroidery? maybe a crest or logo on cool indian cotton? x

 

Magnum of grey goose at Mahiki and you have me in your pocket DT!

 

Penfolds Bin 54 please mate.... Cab Sav....

 

You had me at hello x you had me at hello.... How about a Magnum at the Grey Goose Clapham and a beer mat from Mahiki?.

Grey Goose: another fine French export

 

Bin 54 is that an energy drink?

 

Willy prefers his socks beige, like myself. Going to see Level 42 in November, care to join?

 

Any votes on what willy does for a living? ... I think he has loosened up to be fair and always makes good points

 

The current ban stands.

Those disputing our original decision have not overcome the numbers of people wanting a ban. If you think the poll was flawed / rigged to some extent, I agree - but it wasn't us that rigged it. See the note at the foot of this post.

Split board and implications for mods

The debate and the poll both show a strongly divided board which cannot be ignored.

That in itself has some pretty major implications for the harmony of the board going forward, which we the current mods have clearly failed to control. That's Swords fault, not ours as mods. Well done mate.

As a result of this, whereas I felt I had the confidence of about 95% of the board as mod, I now believe that to be more like maybe 70% or so. Can I continue to make decisions knowing that nigh on a third on here think I go on witch-hunts? I'm not sure I can mod such a divided board. I will talk this over with NUTS and see where we/I go from here.

Question of a flawed / rigged poll

To those like DT, suggesting a spoilt ballot, I agree. The questions were not set by me but by the man who set the poll up (gimmethickerhoops (Andy) who has opposed a ban for Swords throughout). This was against my choice of context and questions as shown at post #69 on page 4 of this thread and copied here below.

This was the scope of the poll I requested since these were the criteria that informed our decision.

Context

Having been banned 3 times over a couple of months or so, and having been allowed to sneak back in under a new user-name on each occasion, Swords sinned again and was given a final warning that said 'next time it's permanent'. Swords acknowledged the forewarning and said 'no hard feelings come what may'. The next time came with complaints about stereotyping Jews, which some considered disrespectful if not plain racist in this day and age.

Question

What were we to do?

Possible Answers

- Carry out our warning and make the ban permanent?
- Give him yet another one week ban?
- Give him a longer ban to justify postponing the permanent one?
- Do nothing and **** those offended or bored by Swords' persistent wumming our own mob?
- Tell him off (again) but otherwise do nothing?
- Something else (details posted below).

Should've included 'Couldn't care less' since that's an opinion already expressed that says leave it to the mods' discretion.

I believe the questions I asked to be put on the poll would have better reflected the true feelings of posters on here. I allowed both further discussion on our decision AND Andy's limited questions, simply to show good faith to those opposing us. Seems from some of the posts above, that that magnanimity was not appreciated.

I'm now closing this thread as the matter has been as aired as it can be.

I can't stop people starting threads still questioning our decision but imo it would be better to get it over with and move on. We'll soon see who doesn't agree.

 

.