Are we all sheep?

[gazza]

Maybe you too should remember it isn't ICI!

I've not seen any questions myself that I see as so crucial they need answering, just a lot of accusations and hot air, with a extremely tiny bit of alleged (and probably true) fact finally turning up after several days which by itself is essentially meaningless.

It's quite difficult to insist on someone answering questions from those with entrenched positions which are phrased to force you into a guilty response - as per the old chestnut of "Have you stopped beating your wife".. It is also frustrating being the questionee when you know well that any answer you give will immediately be either misinterpreted and another row started, or just called into doubt. Sometimes it's just better to shut up, pull up the drawbridge and wait till the besiegers go away and life can go on as normal.

It's my opinion for what it's worth (bearing in mind I have no idea whatsoever of any of the real facts of the matter, but having served on many contentious committees in my time) that by the attitude of the questioners, the questioned have been forced into a position where they are better off simply keeping schtum.

And my final contribution to this thread (I shan't reply to any more postings, either interesting or insulting) is that I do accept that the vast majority of parties on all sides of this discussion believe that they are right in what they are saying and I respect them for it, whether I agree with them or not.

Neatly bringing us back to Matty's original post.

 

Sheep eh? What would you do with em

[RLWP]

I'm sorry, but could you explain.

 

I haven't heard from any of the Mod's or from the site owner either, and I know none of them personally.

 

I have heard from one ex Mod and one ex Tech.

 

Rog

 

I know most of them personally, and have talked with them individually. You are free to do the same, they are also boaters like you, and live in the real world where your boat is

 

My advice is, don't forget there are always two sides to any argument. You have heard one side, and because of their positions as moderators on this forum you are unlikely to hear the other side

 

 

Questions have been repeatedly asked by several of us to the site staff, questions that have gone unanswered.

 

I'm inclined to agree with you on this. The consequence of maintaining this professional silence is that 'The Moderators' are being cast as an all powerful group. In reality, they are the same as the users - a bunch of real people who happen to like canals. Just as flawed and human as anyone else. And some of them have been on the receiving end of some pretty nasty stuff

 

Richard

[BlueStringPudding]

Quoting my earlier post here in another context:

 

...repeatedly guessing at (but stating as if fact), the apparent motivations of {BSP in a comment written months ago, because apparently Nick never got over it} - ...being falsely accused of making self-indulgent or egotistical decisions - which is simply made-up conjecture and is not just unhelpful.... but could be perceived as stirring up bad feeling... Assumptions about egos and motivations adds to the bad feeling that made the forum a right miserable place to be last year or so...

All he's done with his insults and conjecture now targeted at me instead of the mods, is prove my original point beautifully. Funny what happens when you just sit back and let him run the same old subroutine.

 

Give him a rope long enough...

Edited October 18, 2016 by BlueStringPudding

[gazza]

 

I know most of them personally, and have talked with them individually. You are free to do the same, they are also boaters like you, and live in the real world where your boat is

 

My advice is, don't forget there are always two sides to any argument. You have heard one side, and because of their positions as moderators on this forum you are unlikely to hear the other side

 

 

 

I'm inclined to agree with you on this. The consequence of maintaining this professional silence is that 'The Moderators' are being cast as an all powerful group. In reality, they are the same as the users - a bunch of real people who happen to like canals. Just as flawed and human as anyone else. And some of them have been on the receiving end of some pretty nasty stuff

 

Richard

No one is excusing the nasty side of what's gone on.

 

What needs to happen as Matty, CarlT et al have pointed out is some openness and a rethink if this place is not to become Just Canals mk2.

 

It's not exactly lively quality discussion at the moment is it?

[Albion]

No one is excusing the nasty side of what's gone on.

 

What needs to happen as Matty, CarlT et al have pointed out is some openness and a rethink if this place is not to become Just Canals mk2.

 

It's not exactly lively quality discussion at the moment is it?

Gazza, I don't know how many times your advice has to be repeated. Just make some decisions, be open about the results of those decisions (not the detail of course) and then TELL US!

Roger

[RLWP]

No one is excusing the nasty side of what's gone on.

 

What needs to happen as Matty, CarlT et al have pointed out is some openness and a rethink if this place is not to become Just Canals mk2.

 

It's not exactly lively quality discussion at the moment is it?

 

It does depend where you look. There's a whole forum outside of this one thread, and I notice there are people who only post in this thread, never anywhere else, and vice versa

 

I'd like some openness before a rethink, please. The last thing we need is a new set of 'Rules'

 

Richard

[Guest]

Rubbish. I've mentioned it with its full address, Not been banned / warned or anything yet. But according to you I've got cloth ears, so maybe I just haven't heard the warning...

 

So those posts (now removed) where it was mentioned were a figment of people's imagination??

 

Why do you think some of us have never referred to it directly?? despite it being discussed on here.

 

Why do you think I have been asked for a link to it by PM?? (more than once now), the only conclusion I can reach is that you think people are making stuff up and/or lying about the consequences on here of previously referring to it?

[RLWP]

 

So those posts (now removed) where it was mentioned were a figment of people's imagination??

 

Why do you think some of us have never referred to it directly?? despite it being discussed on here.

 

Why do you think I have been asked for a link to it by PM?? (more than once now), the only conclusion I can reach is that you think people are making stuff up and/or lying about the consequences on here of previously referring to it?

 

My post is still there, moderators have seen it

 

Perhaps things are changing

 

Richard

[Naughty Cal]

thunderboat

Intrigue got the better of me and I went and had a look. It will be the last look.

Edited October 18, 2016 by Lady Muck
to remove direct link

[dogless]

I know most of them personally, and have talked with them individually. You are free to do the same, they are also boaters like you, and live in the real world where your boat is

 

My advice is, don't forget there are always two sides to any argument. You have heard one side, and because of their positions as moderators on this forum you are unlikely to hear the other side

 

 

 

 

I'm inclined to agree with you on this. The consequence of maintaining this professional silence is that 'The Moderators' are being cast as an all powerful group. In reality, they are the same as the users - a bunch of real people who happen to like canals. Just as flawed and human as anyone else. And some of them have been on the receiving end of some pretty nasty stuff

 

Richard

Thank you for the response. Having read your posts on the Theresa May thread, I am left to assume that a decision has been taken to let normal service resume, and as long as we all remain polite and respectful, the forum will run as previously.

 

Rog

[Guest]

 

My post is still there, moderators have seen it

 

Perhaps things are changing

 

Richard

 

I was referring to early mentions of 'the other forum' which was I believe what Arthur was referring to. (when it first started)

[RLWP]

Thank you for the response. Having read your posts on the Theresa May thread, I am left to assume that a decision has been taken to let normal service resume, and as long as we all remain polite and respectful, the forum will run as previously.

 

Rog

 

That wouldn't be right. As i understand it, no decision has been made

 

 

 

I was referring to early mentions of 'the other forum' which was I believe what Arthur was referring to. (when it first started)

 

Yes, I understand what you mean, and maybe things are changing

 

Richard

[Guest]

 

 

Yes, I understand what you mean, and maybe things are changing

 

Richard

 

Ah right gotcha.

[dogless]

That wouldn't be right. As i understand it, no decision has been made

 

 

 

 

Yes, I understand what you mean, and maybe things are changing

 

Richard

I do hope you are right.

 

I will be in a position to enjoy any such changes.

 

I remain disappointed that some will be unable to participate.

 

Rog

[RLWP]

I remain disappointed that some will be unable to participate.

 

Rog

 

I agree. I think where we disagree is on who's responsibility that is - the moderators or the posters. Were they banned or did they get themselves banned - I suspect the answer will be slightly different in each individual case

 

Richard

[Mike Todd]

 

Really? You think a single moderator holds views that are not shared by other users here? That the people banned were universally accepted by everyone except a single moderator?

 

Richard

There is quite a lot of space between those with whom I disagree, in varying degrees, and those who I think should be banned (vanishingly few - but then I may not have seen deleted posts that gave rise to the action) I am unlikely to spend time on a forum where all of the views coincide 100% with mine! Just too boring - and unrealistic.

[Neil2]

I just had a look on that forum (for the second time ever) but couldn't find this story. Perhaps it has been deleted. I was surprised to find some familiar names amongst the participants.

 

Look about halfway down this page, I presume that's what folk are referring to. thunderboat

Edited October 18, 2016 by Lady Muck
to remove direct link

[RLWP]

There is quite a lot of space between those with whom I disagree, in varying degrees, and those who I think should be banned (vanishingly few - but then I may not have seen deleted posts that gave rise to the action) I am unlikely to spend time on a forum where all of the views coincide 100% with mine! Just too boring - and unrealistic.

 

Exactly!

 

And this bit:

 

 

 

I may not have seen deleted posts that gave rise to the action

 

means that the evidence that supported a moderators decision is inevitably missing. The problem at the moment is that some of the users no longer trust The Mods (my italics) to act

 

Richard

 

Look about halfway down this page, I presume that's what folk are referring to. thunderboat

 

Would you mind cutting and pasting that. I'm not going to visit a site where I believe I am routinely ridiculed

 

Richard

Edited October 18, 2016 by Lady Muck
to remove direct link

[Geo]

 

Exactly!

 

And this bit:

 

 

means that the evidence that supported a moderators decision is inevitably missing. The problem at the moment is that some of the users no longer trust The Mods (my italics) to act

 

Richard

 

Would you mind cutting and pasting that. I'm not going to visit a site where I believe I am routinely ridiculed

 

Richard

 

I would suggest not and I see a known trap by Richard.

 

Richard, if you want to see the info I would suggest you close your eyes and pinch your nose to avoid the stench and open the eyes when you get to page whatever it is.

[spadefoot]

 

I agree. I think where we disagree is on who's responsibility that is - the moderators or the posters. Were they banned or did they get themselves banned - I suspect the answer will be slightly different in each individual case

 

Richard

My guess, is that they were banned.

Take TD for example, I know he is a bit of a marmite character, got a reputation for "banging on" "axe to grind" etc. But it wasn't without reason that he posted his stuff. He wasn't some opinionated teenager getting all self-righteous about nonsense, was he.

One of the main reasons for his "banging on" was the 2 or 3 majorly nasty snarks on this forum who just goaded & poked, poked & goaded to try and get a rise out of him. These few had no real view of their own, they just didn't like his view of things. Mostly they shut up when NM got involved, which more or less proved that they had no real argument themselves.

I believe that they were trying to get him banned, to close down debate on subjects that they didn't want discussed.

They are still members, pretty much with nothing to say. To some extent they have won, but their victory is empty.

[nicknorman]

 

Would you mind cutting and pasting that. I'm not going to visit a site where I believe I am routinely ridiculed

 

Richard

As far as I'm aware you have never been ridiculed on it or if you have, it was a long time ago when the new forum was invaded with a few CWDF spies intent on destroying it by extreme posting.

[Naughty Cal]

My guess, is that they were banned.

Take TD for example, I know he is a bit of a marmite character, got a reputation for "banging on" "axe to grind" etc. But it wasn't without reason that he posted his stuff. He wasn't some opinionated teenager getting all self-righteous about nonsense, was he.

One of the main reasons for his "banging on" was the 2 or 3 majorly nasty snarks on this forum who just goaded & poked, poked & goaded to try and get a rise out of him. These few had no real view of their own, they just didn't like his view of things. Mostly they shut up when NM got involved, which more or less proved that they had no real argument themselves.

I believe that they were trying to get him banned, to close down debate on subjects that they didn't want discussed.

They are still members, pretty much with nothing to say. To some extent they have won, but their victory is empty.

No he was (and is) an opinionated old man getting all self-righteous about other peoples problems with CRT.

[RLWP]

As far as I'm aware you have never been ridiculed on it or if you have, it was a long time ago when the new forum was invaded with a few CWDF spies intent on destroying it by extreme posting.

My spies suggest otherwise, Nick

 

Richard

I would suggest not and I see a known trap by Richard.

 

Richard, if you want to see the info I would suggest you close your eyes and pinch your nose to avoid the stench and open the eyes when you get to page whatever it is.

I'm afraid I am just not that clever.

 

And I'm not going, I don't like the way my friends are treated over there

 

Richard

[nicknorman]

My spies suggest otherwise, Nick

Richard

 

I'm afraid I am just not that clever.

And I'm not going, I don't like the way my friends are treated over there

Richard

Ok well I haven't been looking out for it but neither have I noticed it.

[gazza]

My spies suggest otherwise, Nick

 

Richard

 

I'm afraid I am just not that clever.

 

And I'm not going, I don't like the way my friends are treated over there

 

Richard

Your first sentence isn't all that healthy Richard.

I put my big boy pants on to deal with accusations I was the poster known as Nutter.

 

I'm sure there is a pair about you could wear for a while