This is so very true.... - Page 2

The cartoon is just that a cartoon. BUT if you fall on the wrong side of the RULES not OPINIONS, don't complain about being banned or edited. I don't think the cartoon says any more than that. I think you are reading why more into than is actually there.

Oli,

As long as it is actually people and not just one or two individuals showing someone the door.

And to be governed equally and fairly by law, with rules that apply to all without needless oppression based on personalities.

Codes of conduct should be observed on both sides of the issue and these codes should be known to all so there is no abuse or misunderstanding.

Freedoms aren't guaranteed, they must be earned, fought for, no one just hands them out.

You mentioned (when we delete), including edits sometimes falls outside the reasons you state and this is where certain codes of conduct could be investigated.

You can't allow only the fox to watch the hen house, sometimes you need to check them yourself and see what the hens have to say.

Not so much freedom, but fairness would go a long way, without personality entering into it.

 

Brent.

 

 

 

I wasn't going to respond to this but I have a few things to say and it isn't up for debate and I will not be answering you back beyond this post.

 

"As long as it is actually people and not just one or two individuals showing someone the door."

So, there are 3 active admin right now and a majority is 2, we according to your above sentence can't make a move unless we all 3 agree. What you really fail to see is some admin (past and present) would have already banned some members long before they were actually banned. I have been begged by plenty of admin to be much tougher and that is the truth. I feel we have always been very fair and have given members chance after chance to stop bad behaviors and members just keep running over us and doing as they please because they think they are untouchable and as Oli has pointed out think they can say and do whatever they want. We as a group have already discussed what we will ban for and pretty much are all on the same page except I am much more likely to give way more chances than I really need to. BTW, according to your sentence above we may have to wait 2 or 3 days for all admin to show up to ban someone, this is unreasonable and childish to say the least. If it was just one admin making all the decisions, then what? Would you still be having issues? We have tried to add other admin in the past and they say no way - number one reason given is having to deal with some of the members here - it just isn't worth it to a lot of members we ask. Try putting yourself in our shoes and honestly ask yourself what you would do.

 

"You mentioned (when we delete), including edits sometimes falls outside the reasons you state and this is where certain codes of conduct could be investigated."

Most of what is deleted in your case has been F words, posting crude sexual videos, slamming this site, slamming Oli and the admin. You can try and say different all you want but we save everything we do in the admin forum and it is all there to read. Oli can at anytime read it and search it. You have also been caught using multiple user names and have also posted how your playground has been taken away. You have called Oli names and said some really messed up things about this site. We aren't going to take it and we don't have to. You have also been banned in the past and we aren't as likely to take it the next time around especially with the things you have said and done.

 

"You can't allow only the fox to watch the hen house, sometimes you need to check them yourself and see what the hens have to say."

Do you honestly believe Oli has never read the admin forum or checked up on things? Again, every move we make and the reasons behind the move are all posted in the admin forum for all admin to read and either agree or disagree with.

 

"Freedoms aren't guaranteed, they must be earned, fought for, no one just hands them out."

What are you talking about this is a privately owned website with a set of rules that we expect you to follow and if you can't be prepared to be edited and eventually removed if you can't do as we ask. There is nothing to fight over. The rules are the rules are the rules.

 

"Not so much freedom, but fairness would go a long way, without personality entering into it."

Again what the heck you talking about, we are very fair and have been extremely tolerant of past indiscretions and misdeeds but we aren't going to keep allowing the same people to get away with the same things over and over. Personality has very little to do with breaking the rules. It is our right to remove the personalities that keep breaking the rules.

 

"And to be governed equally and fairly by law, with rules that apply to all without needless oppression based on personalities."

Moons it sounds to me like you don't like our personalities we aren't out there saying how bad you are and trying to get you in trouble, we aren't forcing you to say and do the things you do and have done. Why are you blaming your problems on us? You want a playground well head on up to the park and swing on the swingset or slide on the slide. Oppressed, give me a break.

 

"Codes of conduct should be observed on both sides of the issue and these codes should be known to all so there is no abuse or misunderstanding."

See the OT rules? We follow those rules. See the TOS? We follow those rules as well. Or are you suggesting that admin should have a different set of rules than members? Who governs and enforces your code of conduct? Oli owns the site and is here more than you know and probably more than I know. You act as if he never comes around. You are sadly wrong and you have tried to get me in trouble numerous times it is silly and a little bit like grade school and again like the playground. You think you are snitching me out, very sad and somewhat tiring.

Hi Oli. hope this question is ok here. I'm a long time board member who because of the pressure of life only gets to visit now and then. This week I saw two threads that I wanted to respond to. On the first the last post had been 9 or 10 days before on the 2nd 14 days. Neither would allow me to post to thread saying it was too old and to start a new thread. Yes I could and did send a PM but the primary purpose of a forum to me is the public sharing of information. The problem w/ start a new thread is several fold - 1. mulitiple disjointed threads on what should be one conversation ( does this affect management of db or storage also?) 2. the unlikely hood one will bother  because its a pia thus denying the community the possibility of good knowledge or info 3. In this busy wolrd I can't be the only one whose life takes them a way for extended periods. I know its true for several of the oldtimers who have always added good measured knowledge to the threads they respond too. 4. While on some issues a prompt reply is necessary that is far from true on others especially when dealing w general knowledge about the breed. While a prompt reply to the op is nice many of these threads act as a resource to folks who have never or hardly ever posted. 

Surely you would be able to see on a long resurrected post how much recent viewing traffic it gets - perhaps that could then be used to close a thread. I do not know what the current process is - one week, 10 days? and whether it is automated or not but I would appreciate it if you seriously looked at adjesting it. Perhaps I'm not understanding the problem with someone posting a new answer OR question to a conversation that started6 months or even a year or two ago.

Since you have a separate moderators board as stated above that functions to track and decide TOS problems , instead of having an absolute closing of a thread , if it's being responded to more than 4 months after the last answer to it you could route it to a moderator who could decide whether to keep the thread active or lock it.

I would appreciate hearing your perspective on this problem. 

( I wasn't going to respond to this but I have a few things to say and it isn't up for debate )

This is so very true.

 

( Most of what is deleted in your case has been F words, posting crude sexual videos, slamming this site, slamming Oli and the admin)

This is incomplete and inaccurate, but of course, not up for debate.

 

( Or are you suggesting that admin should have a different set of rules than members? )

Yes.

 

And since my post was directed at Oli, I really have nothing further to say to you.

You have already made it quite clear that it is not up for debate, and I could be banned for doing so which I have already experienced first hand.

 

If this has become a (grade school playground) it is obvious who made it so.

 

TIG posted to Oli,

(I would appreciate hearing your perspective on this problem)

As would many.

 

And this,

(hope this question is ok here)

Hope this question is ok?

 

This speaks volumes in it's direct simplicity.

I hope so too TIG.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TIG,

"hope this question is ok here."

Of course it is okay here, might have gotten a response from Oli had you started another thread, though. I can see why you asked if it was okay because you didn't want to take this thread off topic and I appreciate your thoughtfulness.

I looked back and threads do not become to old to post to until they are about 6 months old so not sure what happen when you tried a couple threads. If you know which threads can you please PM me or start another thread with links to the threads in question?

 

GSD Admin,

I have run into several threads that have "timed out" so to speak and it was only 2 weeks since the last post. When I have time I will try and find a few of them and PM one of the admins. One of them was the one I started on my dog Ice... it said the "post was to old to post to" when I hadnt posted to it for about 3-4 weeks, it was no where near the 6 months that was mentioned. Maybe there was a glitch in the system... DAMN COMPUTERS!! lol.

I also feel that is would be nice to have it where a member can go back and post to older threads.... ones that are 6 months or even a year prior. 

Happens to me too Jyl

The policly of threads 'timing out' was started because sometimes old threads were being revived to stirr up controversy and trouble. I forget the exact threads, but I remember one that involved Shiloh shepherds. Even though I was a fan of Shilohs, I remember groaning, and saying to myself, "Not THIS again!" 

The policy started about that time.