Jump to content

Clarification of a "rule"?

Jim Riley

By Jim Riley
in Suggestions & Feedback

 Share

Featured Posts

mayalld Veteran II

mayalld

Posted
Posted

I have no idea...nor do I think it important any more.

 

If Daniel is willing to review the bans fairly then I think that should be enough.

 

What seems to be happening is that there are those who wish to humiliate the mods and Daniel and I don't think that is any better than those who wanted to "cleanse" the forum of folk they felt were unsavoury.

Hmm!

 

If Daniel is prepared to review bans, and hold his hand up where the team got it wrong (and that means on behalf of the team, without the need today WHO got it wrong), and can commit to not making the same mistakes again. It SHOULD indeed be enough.

 

However, with every hour that passes with continued ostrich impressions, the chances of that actually being enough diminish.

 

I don't want to humiliate Dan or the mods, but the longer they hold back from a wholehearted engagement with fixing this the more untenable their positions must become.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jerra Veteran II

Jerra

Posted
Posted

However, with every hour that passes with continued ostrich impressions, the chances of that actually being enough diminish.

To me a part of the problem is that people are looking for instant results. I don't think change can be so rapid. The team need to discuss things and decide on ways forward and what level triggers what action. This takes time it isn't as if they are meeting together in a room, they are communicating by posts (which as people with lives to live and not doing it as a job) may not/will not be answered immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
max campbell Contributor

max campbell

Posted
Posted

Hmm!

 

If Daniel is prepared to review bans, and hold his hand up where the team got it wrong (and that means on behalf of the team, without the need today WHO got it wrong), and can commit to not making the same mistakes again. It SHOULD indeed be enough.

 

However, with every hour that passes with continued ostrich impressions, the chances of that actually being enough diminish.

 

I don't want to humiliate Dan or the mods, but the longer they hold back from a wholehearted engagement with fixing this the more untenable their positions must become.

I think Dan's sticky at the top of the forums list answers all these points, and any similar foreseeable ones.

 

These inward-spiralling threads about who was right & wrong, dependant on tiny details of history, are energy-sapping of the rest of the forum. I know I could ignore, but that's not the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MtB Veteran II

MtBDonate to Canal World

Posted
Posted

To me a part of the problem is that people are looking for instant results. I don't think change can be so rapid. The team need to discuss things and decide on ways forward and what level triggers what action. This takes time it isn't as if they are meeting together in a room, they are communicating by posts (which as people with lives to live and not doing it as a job) may not/will not be answered immediately.

 

 

^^^This^^^

 

I'd like to remind everyone we reached a sort of consensus last weekend that a 'week to a fortnight' would be about right. I think a fortnight is more reasonable.

 

If we say two weeks is reasonable for Dan to come carry out his promised review and come up with a new way forward, we are being a bit premature to be asking for an announcement.

 

Mind you personally, I think Dan has decided there is nothing wrong so come next weekend, all we will get is a deafening silence. I do hope I'm wrong about that though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carlt Veteran II

carlt

Posted
Posted

I know I could ignore, but that's not the point.

 

Well it is the point really.

 

If the discussion is not in breach of the rules then if you don't like it then you either ignore it or get annoyed by it.

 

I would rather the discussion concentrated on the future but it is not for me to dictate what others want to talk about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim Riley Experienced

Jim Riley

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hmm, there was a veiled implication by her ladyship that I have been asked by a friend elsewhere to post this. This isn't the case. I have been following threads with interest, someone who is raising pertinent issues about site management, in a polite but assertive manner, no longer posts. I then see, elsewhere, that the ban hammer has fallen, seemingly for asking pertinent questions and discussing the current site management situation in a forthright and considered manner. He certainly wasn't flying by the seat of his pants, gliding over forum rules.

I hope it's not against the rules to discuss issues without naming names, afaik I would have my legs smacked for that if I did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoodGurl Experienced

GoodGurl

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

 

^^^This^^^

 

I'd like to remind everyone we reached a sort of consensus last weekend that a 'week to a fortnight' would be about right. I think a fortnight is more reasonable.

 

If we say two weeks is reasonable for Dan to come carry out his promised review and come up with a new way forward, we are being a bit premature to be asking for an announcement.

 

Mind you personally, I think Dan has decided there is nothing wrong so come next weekend, all we will get is a deafening silence. I do hope I'm wrong about that though.

so whats changed mike? are there new rules no, has there been an announcement about whats changed no, is everyone here happy no.

you said this 6 days ago.

 

Posted by Mike the Boilerman on 21 October 2016 - 09:57 PM in The Virtual Pub

DHutch, on 21 Oct 2016 - 10:42 PM, said:snapback.png

Myself and the staff has said we will work to improve, and talked with memeber about this will happen, but this has to stop now.

 

 

 

Getting specific, this 'working to improve' you keep banging on about but never achieving, has to be done NOW.

so why 2 weeks when you demanded NOW back then? i think you were right the first time it does need sorting now, sooner than later.

Edited by GoodGurl
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mayalld Veteran II

mayalld

Posted
Posted

To me a part of the problem is that people are looking for instant results. I don't think change can be so rapid. The team need to discuss things and decide on ways forward and what level triggers what action. This takes time it isn't as if they are meeting together in a room, they are communicating by posts (which as people with lives to live and not doing it as a job) may not/will not be answered immediately.

Are people asking for instant results?

 

It is now Thursday evening, and this had been running for some days when I got back to the UK on Monday morning.

 

There has been time to consider a way forward, and come up with more than we have seen to date.

 

"We will review the bans" without a hint of acceptance that they may have got it wrong in the first place and a continuation of the same punitive bans for criticism of the management doesn't suggest that they are getting anywhere near a way forward.

 

Yes some time is needed, because people have lives, but the plain truth is that time is of the essence, because the way things are going Dan will announce the way forward but there will be nobody left to hear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alan de Enfield Veteran II

Alan de Enfield

Posted
Posted

"We will review the bans" without a hint of acceptance that they may have got it wrong in the first place and a continuation of the same punitive bans for criticism of the management doesn't suggest that they are getting anywhere near a way forward.

 

 

 

Very similar to "we will learn from this", it 'buys you some time' and you hope that by the time comes that 'they' realise that you have in fact learnt nothing - the original concerns have all 'blown over'

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil. Gongoozler

Phil.

Posted
Posted

It's quite clear to me that the admin team are simply battening down the hatches and hoping this whole situation blows over, without the need to actually change anything. The tinkering by the site owner so far, could be described as fiddling while Rome burns.

When this all kicked off, the initial reaction was to post a denial of the problem, together with a slightly threatening message implying what would happen if members did not toe the line. Due to the fact a large number of members refused to roll over, the next message was slightly more conciliatory, with a suggestion to give the team time to address the issues.

A few pointless threads have been unlocked, not so the main ones that concerned most members.

Then we had the revelations of a group of sneaky members who thought they could influence the direction the forum should take. There were apologies issued followed by copious amounts of back slapping by certain mods who should remain impartial.

Then today we had another banning, NickNorman. I don't believe for a second that he would have posted anything that warrants this action. He is someone who has supported this forum and from his posts was clearly concerned that it was on a path to self destruction. We then have another mod who although did not directly accuse Nick, did post statements about wrong doing which could be wrongly interpreted as having been committed by him. The fact is Daniel, two probably three of your mods are not fit for purpose. That is not to say they are not nice people, I don't know them. The site has haemorrhaged members to thunderboat since the weekend and your actions today have only reinforced that situation. So, you asked for time and you got some, but IMO you have run out of time now and this site is disintegrating with each hour that passes and bad decision made.

 

For me you need to do three things

1. Sack three of your mod team, thanking them for their efforts

2. Allow all banned members back, save those that have committed criminal offences, if indeed there are any.

3. Bring back the CA section.

 

In the mean time I'm off to the other place for a bit of fun.

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Woodsy Collaborator

Woodsy

Posted
Posted

What's the reason behind Nick " the electric guru on all matters " being banned from cwdf for a period of 2 weeks ?? Are the POWERS THAT BE this petty they are wiling to lose such a valuable member on such petty crimes ( if any )

Darren

It would seem so, and are more to be pitied than spanked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • 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.