Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
matty40s

Are we all sheep?

Featured Posts

To sum up:

Two threads got locked. A couple of people bent the rules once too often and apparently got banned, though they may not have been. A few others left in a huff, though they may still be here. Things that were supposedly unmentionable weren't. Conspiracies were exposed which turned out to be conversations.

That's it.

Maybe we should get back to discussing boating, CRT and fishermen.

 

And whether there is such a thing as an Amp per hour...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And whether there is such a thing as an Amp per hour...

 

Of course there is lol what would life be without it :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just slogged through thirty odd pages in the other place and nearly fifty here.

 

As somebody who is in neither "in crowd" I just do not have the background to have any certainty about which party are correct (or most nearly correct) in this dispute. I have a suspicion that I am not alone in this position but be that as it may.

 

What seems blindingly clear is that Dan needs to make a decision about how he intends to proceed, to make it quickly and to publish it here.

 

In a past life I was in a senior position in an organisation which, through nobody's particular fault, ran suddenly out of control. A decisive decision from the top (even the wrong one) would have allowed us to regain equilibrium but it didn't come. In the end the consequences were horrible.

 

There again, it is only a boating forum - not Syria - but I would miss it nontheless.

 

Frank.

  • Greenie 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I was not able to keep pace with this thread over the weekend so applogies for the delay in replying, however I would like to clarify a few things as we go along.

 

Firstly; the site is administrated myself, but is run by the whole of the staff team, and all major policy and moderator decision making is openly discussed with the whole team. This includes new moderator selection, and changes to the site rules, or changes to the interpretation of the rules, the site has several thousand active members. Anyone suggesting it is run as a vanity project is very much misguided.

 

Secondly; a lot has been made of the list which was mentioned by Paul in post, however while various options where discussed which included a list of trouble members as a suggestion they be placed on moderator approvel, no action has been take against members of this site for their posts on Thunderboat, and no blanket bans have occurred.

There is a fine line between being too slow of the mark and being overly presumptuous, we do the best we can to right by the members and I stand by the actions taken, which where both fair and reasonable.

 

Thirdly; while here may be areas we can improve on explaning certain moderator actions, however this is not always practicable and it will always be the case that much of reasons for moderator action will never be seen my many members. That's almost the point at times.

 

Its also important that members are aware that what they here from others may not be the full story. In addition to onsite activity they may not be aware of, we have also had significant cases of personal abuse being directed at the site staff, deliberate invasions of the privacy including threatening and abusive phone calls, stalking online and in person, and other malicious acts.

 

If anyone has any specific questions, or wishes to raise a formal complaint as to how the site is run they can do so by contacting me via PM or emailing sitehost@canalworld.net else I will endeavour to follow this thread as best I can.

 

As always we will continue to constantly evolve the running of the site. I would like to move to a slightly more flexable moderation feel, and take onboard the comments about the tone used in some areas. I am also aware that there is a thread running in breach of the 'no poltics or religion' rule which was introduced ealier this year and a review if ongoing on this.

 

 

Thanks

 

Daniel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not able to keep pace with this thread over the weekend so applogies for the delay in replying, however I would like to clarify a few things as we go along.

 

Firstly; the site is administrated myself, but is run by the whole of the staff team, and all major policy and moderator decision making is openly discussed with the whole team. This includes new moderator selection, and changes to the site rules, or changes to the interpretation of the rules, the site has several thousand active members. Anyone suggesting it is run as a vanity project is very much misguided.

 

Recent posts by GoodGurl and PaulC suggest other non admin staff are also involved in this process, a claim that has not been denied.

 

Secondly; a lot has been made of the list which was mentioned by Paul in post, however while various options where discussed which included a list of trouble members as a suggestion they be placed on moderator approvel, no action has been take against members of this site for their posts on Thunderboat, and no blanket bans have occurred.

There is a fine line between being too slow of the mark and being overly presumptuous, we do the best we can to right by the members and I stand by the actions taken, which where both fair and reasonable.

 

It would appear those that have had action taken against them strongly deny this.

 

Thirdly; while here may be areas we can improve on explaning certain moderator actions, however this is not always practicable and it will always be the case that much of reasons for moderator action will never be seen my many members. That's almost the point at times.

 

However, the moderating action that has been visible is what led Matty to start this thread, none of the issues raised seem to have been considered.

 

Its also important that members are aware that what they here from others may not be the full story. In addition to onsite activity they may not be aware of, we have also had significant cases of personal abuse being directed at the site staff, deliberate invasions of the privacy including threatening and abusive phone calls, stalking online and in person, and other malicious acts.

 

 

Its important for the site staff to be aware that also applies to them. No one is seeking to excuse any personal abuse, the fact this has run so long is the forum as a whole has suffered due to what appears to be the desire to single out members for special treatment

 

If anyone has any specific questions, or wishes to raise a formal complaint as to how the site is run they can do so by contacting me via PM or emailing sitehost@canalworld.net else I will endeavour to follow this thread as best I can.

 

Your best policy would be to answer those questions openly in the forum, it would seem too much has gone on in a closed circle for your request to hold any validity.

 

As always we will continue to constantly evolve the running of the site. I would like to move to a slightly more flexable moderation feel, and take onboard the comments about the tone used in some areas. I am also aware that there is a thread running in breach of the 'no poltics or religion' rule which was introduced ealier this year and a review if ongoing on this.

 

Richards post on Theresa May along with all the posts mentioning the place that shall not be mentioned by numerous other members should have been zapped straight away, like so many that have gone before . While your current rules are in place they all should also be facing 'sanctions' for ignoring them.

My suggestion to you is delete the current rules or apply them with equal vigor to all members - no matter who they be.

 

Thanks

 

Daniel

 

 

Daniel,

 

We are not a lot further forward after 7 days of discussion on this subject.

 

Cheers.

Edited by gazza
  • Greenie 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goodgurl,

Thank you for your apologies and the removal.

I have edited my posting in fairness.

 

Perhaps Nick and Allan would like to do the same?

Trouble is you are disliked so intensely that it just seems to fit so nicely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trouble is you are disliked so intensely that it just seems to fit so nicely.

Eh? By whom? I for one have never had reason to think that way about our colleague from the West.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not had time to read the whole thread but was certainly concerned that 2 informative and interesting threads were recently abrubtly locked with the only explanation that the mods were discussing the content, (are they still discussing!!!) other threads of interest have also disapeared in the past with little explanation.

The reasons may or may not have been valid but i feel the members deserve a little more transparency especially where decisions appear to those not in the know unnecessary or peverse.

Anyone who complained used to be told that this is a private forum and if you dont like go elsewhere, it seems there is now somewhere else to go.

Please can we have transparent logical decisions not made in a panic and reallow politics and discussion of crt actions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking through Daniels post there's a section buried in the middle that is most concerning . This relates to activity outside of the site such as personal abuse being directed at site staff.

Stalking on line and in person , abusive threatening phone calls , invasions of privacy , malicious acts . Everything else is just stuff but that list is capable of real world harm to a real live person.

To be honest I think there's a place for a lightly moderated CWDF and an unmoderated Thunderboat . People can choose to belong to both or only one .

  • Greenie 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking through Daniels post there's a section buried in the middle that is most concerning . This relates to activity outside of the site such as personal abuse being directed at site staff.

Stalking on line and in person , abusive threatening phone calls , invasions of privacy , malicious acts . Everything else is just stuff but that list is capable of real world harm to a real live person.

 

 

 

The 'other place' makes similar accusations against the admin here - with 'admin' getting hold of members private telephone numbers and email addresses.

 

I am guessing that evidence from either side will not be forthcoming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan this reads as "nothing is wrong, business as usual" which most of us (well the ones participating in this thread anyway) are likely to see as in denial / head in sand. I don't see how this forum can return to being supported by its members, as opposed to at odds with it, without a major change in attitude which so far is missing. The mods in the thick of the list of undesirables (which included me) no longer have the respect of the membership and thus there will continue to be an antagonistic reaction to their input. The forum will never become a cohesive place where we are all on the same side, until that is changed and mods who are respected by the membership are in place.

As I said, might as well keep schtum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, might as well keep schtum.

 

You may find that the 'conventional' door to the left of the revolving door (which you appear to be using) may mean you can exit without continually returning, and achieve what you have said, several times, is your intent to achieve.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not able to keep pace with this thread over the weekend so applogies for the delay in replying, however I would like to clarify a few things as we go along.

 

Firstly; the site is administrated myself, but is run by the whole of the staff team, and all major policy and moderator decision making is openly discussed with the whole team. This includes new moderator selection, and changes to the site rules, or changes to the interpretation of the rules, the site has several thousand active members. Anyone suggesting it is run as a vanity project is very much misguided.

 

Secondly; a lot has been made of the list which was mentioned by Paul in post, however while various options where discussed which included a list of trouble members as a suggestion they be placed on moderator approvel, no action has been take against members of this site for their posts on Thunderboat, and no blanket bans have occurred.

There is a fine line between being too slow of the mark and being overly presumptuous, we do the best we can to right by the members and I stand by the actions taken, which where both fair and reasonable.

 

Thirdly; while here may be areas we can improve on explaning certain moderator actions, however this is not always practicable and it will always be the case that much of reasons for moderator action will never be seen my many members. That's almost the point at times.

 

Its also important that members are aware that what they here from others may not be the full story. In addition to onsite activity they may not be aware of, we have also had significant cases of personal abuse being directed at the site staff, deliberate invasions of the privacy including threatening and abusive phone calls, stalking online and in person, and other malicious acts.

 

If anyone has any specific questions, or wishes to raise a formal complaint as to how the site is run they can do so by contacting me via PM or emailing sitehost@canalworld.net else I will endeavour to follow this thread as best I can.

 

As always we will continue to constantly evolve the running of the site. I would like to move to a slightly more flexable moderation feel, and take onboard the comments about the tone used in some areas. I am also aware that there is a thread running in breach of the 'no poltics or religion' rule which was introduced ealier this year and a review if ongoing on this.

 

 

Thanks

 

Daniel

 

 

Daniel,

 

Thank you for taking the time to post.

 

I can't help thinking though, instead of all the waffle your time would have been better spent explaining why the two legal threads have been locked.

 

A post saying the threads are permanently locked for reasons you cannot give is badly needed, if you can't re-open them.

 

Leaving threads locked 'pending discussion' indefinitely is frankly, insulting.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may find that the 'conventional' door to the left of the revolving door (which you appear to be using) may mean you can exit without continually returning, and achieve what you have said, several times, is your intent to achieve.

Hear hear - Sorry no "greenies" left

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not able to keep pace with this thread over the weekend so applogies for the delay in replying, however I would like to clarify a few things as we go along.

 

I appreciate that it is a long thread and that it has been fast moving at time. However you do not seem to have got the basic point the members are very very unhappy.

 

Firstly; the site is administrated myself, but is run by the whole of the staff team, and all major policy and moderator decision making is openly discussed with the whole team. This includes new moderator selection, and changes to the site rules, or changes to the interpretation of the rules, the site has several thousand active members. Anyone suggesting it is run as a vanity project is very much misguided.

 

I am sorry but what is the meaning of several thousand active members? How many and what defines an active member?

Yestersday, extrapolating from the site top posters list, there were 808 posts, of those 345 posts were made by 20 members, 42.7% of the posts. Now how many other members actually posted actually posted, taking an educated guess probably a 100. Please could you define what is meant by several thousand active members?

 

Secondly; a lot has been made of the list which was mentioned by Paul in post, however while various options where discussed which included a list of trouble members as a suggestion they be placed on moderator approvel, no action has been take against members of this site for their posts on Thunderboat, and no blanket bans have occurred.

There is a fine line between being too slow of the mark and being overly presumptuous, we do the best we can to right by the members and I stand by the actions taken, which where both fair and reasonable.

 

Thank you for confirmation of the list, exactly who were these discussions with?

Could you please tell us how many members were banned during the two months previous to the startup of Thunderboat and the month after?

 

Thirdly; while here may be areas we can improve on explaning certain moderator actions, however this is not always practicable and it will always be the case that much of reasons for moderator action will never be seen my many members. That's almost the point at times.

 

If you want people to learn from their errors then they need to know what those errors are. Thus if you moderate a post or thread in my opinion the people concerned have to be told what was perceived to be wrong and why.

 

Particularly the legal threads, Legally in my opinion there was no reason to close them, they did not break the statute and any queries should have as required by the regulations been referred to the poster. So why were they closed and posts deleted?

 

Its also important that members are aware that what they here from others may not be the full story. In addition to onsite activity they may not be aware of, we have also had significant cases of personal abuse being directed at the site staff, deliberate invasions of the privacy including threatening and abusive phone calls, stalking online and in person, and other malicious acts.

 

May I suggest that it is good practice that the moderators are anonymous and do not use their Mod ID to post using their personal ID. That nips in the bud the problems of harassment etc and protects the staff.

 

If anyone has any specific questions, or wishes to raise a formal complaint as to how the site is run they can do so by contacting me via PM or emailing sitehost@canalworld.net else I will endeavour to follow this thread as best I can.

 

I think you have a formal complaint in this thread, regrettably maybe it needs addressing.

 

As always we will continue to constantly evolve the running of the site. I would like to move to a slightly more flexable moderation feel, and take onboard the comments about the tone used in some areas. I am also aware that there is a thread running in breach of the 'no poltics or religion' rule which was introduced ealier this year and a review if ongoing on this.

 

 

Thanks

 

Daniel

 

As has been written elsewhere Daniel your post say business as usual. If the forum has become a heavy load which together with your new job etc, maybe it would be better to allow others to take over and take the load.

Edited by Geo
  • Greenie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You may find that the 'conventional' door to the left of the revolving door (which you appear to be using) may mean you can exit without continually returning, and achieve what you have said, several times, is your intent to achieve.

The point of a discussion forum is that a discussion can change someone's mind. So I can about leaving, should I want.

Unlike a stack of people on this thread who are sitting in their entrenched positions, bolstered up by rumour, conspiracy theories, unfounded allegations and unevidenced accusations. As there is no point whatsoever in arguing with such closed minds, my advice to Dan and the mods (which, of course, is as valid as yours or any other of the so-helpful antagonistic parties) would be to lock this thread due to its now total pointlessness and just let the rest of the forum get on happily, as, in fact, it is doing.

 

Of course, one of the points that disproves most of the accusations of heavy modding is the fact that it hasn't been locked or modded, but no doubt that in itself will be used as evidence that petulance has been accepted as argument. You see, you can't win in this kind of thing, because to achieve anything you have to have compromise, and that's what there isn't a willingness for among the discontented. You can't argue rationally with the unreasonable, and it's pointless trying.

 

Exits again through the revolving door, pursued by a bear.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniel,

 

It appears that you confirm there was a 'list'.

 

Are we to take it that the other allegations (that friends of yours and Mod's were involved in discussing action to be taken against members) is also accurate, even if on an informal basis?

 

Not being a personal friend of any Mod, I am left with only these pages from which to form a view.

 

Rog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got to say I'm disappointed in Daniel's response, I think we would all condemn any actions that involve serious personal abuse, invasion of privacy etc but it does seem to me that - to borrow the late Alan Clark's style, - the infant has been dispatched with the contents of the washing container.

 

The crux of the issue for me is do we want a forum where all we can discuss is toilets, reverse layouts etc and comment on the latest person who seems to think a life on the canals is the answer to all their problems.

 

I remember way back when I was at Sheffield Poly our sociology lecturer found it highly amusing there was a club in the city proudly displaying the moniker "Attercliffe Non - Political club" he said it must be the dullest place on earth. Try and take politics out of life and there isn't much left.

 

It's not just the loss of a voice such as Nigel Moore, it's the fact that from now on there will be no more Nigel Moores, or anyone else who brings similar the expertise and insight.

 

I hope it's not the end of the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking through Daniels post there's a section buried in the middle that is most concerning . This relates to activity outside of the site such as personal abuse being directed at site staff.

Stalking on line and in person , abusive threatening phone calls , invasions of privacy , malicious acts . Everything else is just stuff but that list is capable of real world harm to a real live person.

 

To be honest I think there's a place for a lightly moderated CWDF and an unmoderated Thunderboat . People can choose to belong to both or only one .

I do find this hard to believe. It is, when all is said an done, an internet forum not real life.

The point of a discussion forum is that a discussion can change someone's mind. So I can about leaving, should I want.

Unlike a stack of people on this thread who are sitting in their entrenched positions, bolstered up by rumour, conspiracy theories, unfounded allegations and unevidenced accusations. As there is no point whatsoever in arguing with such closed minds, my advice to Dan and the mods (which, of course, is as valid as yours or any other of the so-helpful antagonistic parties) would be to lock this thread due to its now total pointlessness and just let the rest of the forum get on happily, as, in fact, it is doing.

 

Of course, one of the points that disproves most of the accusations of heavy modding is the fact that it hasn't been locked or modded, but no doubt that in itself will be used as evidence that petulance has been accepted as argument. You see, you can't win in this kind of thing, because to achieve anything you have to have compromise, and that's what there isn't a willingness for among the discontented. You can't argue rationally with the unreasonable, and it's pointless trying.

 

Exits again through the revolving door, pursued by a bear.

Where is your position of compromise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Of course, one of the points that disproves most of the accusations of heavy modding is the fact that it hasn't been locked or modded, but no doubt that in itself will be used as evidence that petulance has been accepted as argument.

 

If the lack of moderation on this thread is proof that the forum is lightly modded as a whole why does it stand out so much?

 

Like the Brexit thread this is the exception that proves the rule.

 

Also if you are correct why would Daniel acknowledge that he is looking at returning to lighter moderation?

 

Even the website owner is disagreeing with you now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You see, you can't win in this kind of thing, because to achieve anything you have to have compromise, and that's what there isn't a willingness for among the discontented. You can't argue rationally with the unreasonable, and it's pointless trying.

 

The whole point of this thread is compromise and asking for a return to the lightly moderated, free flowing discussion forum it once was.

 

Nobody wants an unmoderated forum...Thunderboat serves that need, and if you want to be on an overmoderated, stifled site that squashes entertaining discussion then Just Canals is always looking for contributors.

 

CWDF was a compromise between the two extremes but, for a while, it swung towards the TB model and has now swung completely the other way to copy JC.

 

What the folk you are sneering at want is compromise...It is you who is being unreasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.