# I'm Gone



## 9fingers (29 Sep 2011)

After unreasonable moderator action without the even the courtesy of a PM, this is my last post here and the end of my help to members via this forum.

I'm quite easy to find around in other places and will offer help via other routes.

Bye

Bob

[email protected]


----------



## woodbloke (29 Sep 2011)

...and if the mods don't pull their collective fingers out and get round to some concerted action over a certain individual, I won't be very far behind you Bob. Many thanks for your extremely valuable inputs =D> and I'll catch up with you at the other place :wink: and on the 9th Nov - Rob


----------



## Jensmith (29 Sep 2011)

Oh no! Sorry to see you go.


----------



## loz (29 Sep 2011)

Whats go-in on ???


----------



## Paul Chapman (29 Sep 2011)

Blimey :shock: Don't go, Bob - the forum needs good people like you. Hope you can resolve whatever dispute you have with the mods.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Karl (29 Sep 2011)

Sorry to hear that Bob. I hadn't read your missing post, but I guess it was the same as the one posted on TWH and WWUK. If so, I think it's pretty petty to delete it.

Mods deleting posts without explanation is something i've raised as an issue before, but they don't seem to think it's a problem. :roll: 

Cheers

Karl


----------



## tomatwark (29 Sep 2011)

If it is the one about the display stand that's on TWH

The MODS have been very heavy handed I think.

Bob

Your input on here is very important to alot of people.

I hope you can sort this out without leaving.

Tom


----------



## CHJ (29 Sep 2011)

Can I at least try and take some heat out of this thread. All moderators can not be on line 24-7 and it takes time to co-ordinate actions.

If a certain post is seen by the moderator on line at the time to break Global Forum Rules, especially section 8.


> (8.) Advertising:-
> Advertising in threads & private messages is strictly prohibited unless permission is given beforehand by the moderating team.
> 
> If you wish to advertise on UKW we offer banner space for companies to advertise their products and services. Please contact a moderator for more information.
> ...



He has only one action available.

Further more Rules notes do have the following:


> Any individual who feels aggrieved by the actions of a moderator should pursue the matter privately with that moderator. Questions or comments concerning warnings and bans will be conveyed through e-mail or private massaging.
> 
> Likewise, discussions regarding moderator actions are not permitted on the forum.
> 
> If you have questions regarding an issue on UKW, please contact a moderator.



Making posts in the heat of the moment before mods have had time to check out circumstances, amend a post to take out those portions that break the rules etc. and re-instate threads that are being worked on does nobody any favors.


----------



## Blister (29 Sep 2011)

Bob

Please reconsider [-o< 

We want and need members like yourself with a wealth of knowledge gained over year 

You are always willing to help others and are a benefit to this forum =D> 

Allen


----------



## Noel (29 Sep 2011)

Karl":3ucyh3r3 said:


> Sorry to hear that Bob. I hadn't read your missing post, but I guess it was the same as the one posted on TWH and WWUK. If so, I think it's pretty petty to delete it.
> 
> Mods deleting posts without explanation is something i've raised as an issue before, but they don't seem to think it's a problem. :roll:
> 
> ...



Yes Karl, you have raised the point in the past and I took time to address your post and explain matters, don't know if you read it or not as you did not respond to it.

Further to Chas's post.

As for Bob (9fingers) he started a thread at 9.30 or so last night which the moderating team felt promoted a company and a product. The post was removed at 1.04 this morning. As can be seen Bob made his post above at 11.56 and as has been said so many times there will be little if any notification from the mod team over deleted posts. As we've continually said if somebody has a problem with a moderating decision simply contact a mod. Furthermore the removed post was being discussed on the Moderating board.

Finally onto Rob (Woodbloke). In a nut shell, he and Jacob are not best buddys. As he has mentioned on open forum in the past he has said if Jacob isn't banned he will move on.

Everybody's contributions here are valued but there must be a framework to ensure that most, if not all, aspects run smoothly. In reality it's very difficult at times and not all decisions or actions will please everybody.
As for Bob and Rob, assuming you read this, I'd rather you did not leave but I won't and can't force you to stay.


----------



## Hudson Carpentry (29 Sep 2011)

CHJ":2b1cqkb3 said:


> Further more Rules notes do have the following:
> 
> 
> > Any individual who feels aggrieved by the actions of a moderator should pursue the matter privately with that moderator. Questions or comments concerning warnings and bans will be conveyed through e-mail or private massaging.
> ...



I know nothing of the matter but as a forum owner understand moding, rules and how to enforce.

If bob wasn't informed his post had been removed, how can he take up the issue with the mod in private. If he don't get an explanation from the mod then he will be unaware of which mod to take up the issues with.

I like Bob and he gives a great deal of help to other on here on a subject that could cost to the member a great deal to hire an expert like Bob to do. If his section 8 breach was a small advertisement to a service he offers within someone else's thread then why shouldn't a valued long serving member like Bob get something back for his efforts (as it brakes the rules just a friendly warning is all a member like Bob should get). I have no interest in the other woodworking forums but I would use them to follow Bob as his knowledge in the motor area is far greater than mine and I wish his input on a project regarding a DOL and remote start.

As a forum owner, I wouldn't dream of removing a regulars post without an explanation. Even if I was to put the thread back on in a few hours I would PM the member and explain.

No reflection on you CHJ. You have removed one of my threads before and explained in a PM and put it back on when you said you would.

By the way, in a thread regarding setting up a website im indirectly in breach of section 8.


----------



## woodbloke (29 Sep 2011)

Noel":25zmaky2 said:


> Finally onto Rob (Woodbloke). In a nut shell, he and Jacob are not best buddys. As he has mentioned on open forum in the past he has said if Jacob isn't banned he will move on.


...and I'm very happy to acknowlege that there are some things that I agree with Jacob about and have said so on the forum(s) more than once, but on some issues there is simply a clash where he refuses to acknowledge ](*,) ](*,) mine (and sometimes others, views) and it's this that causes the antagonism. If he were to say for example, that _'a'_ is equally as valid as _'b',_ gets the same, or similar result and that we all do things differently that would be fine...but it don't seem to happen  - Rob


----------



## tomatwark (29 Sep 2011)

Hudson Carpentry":16gva1qr said:


> By the way, in a thread regarding setting up a website im indirectly in breach of section 8.



There is at least one other current thread that is in breach as well.

I agree that there has to be some control to stop the site being taken over completely with spam, but in the case of Bob and other long standing members how have fallen foul of this rule, a friendly reminder would have been better.

Tom


----------



## Noel (29 Sep 2011)

tomatwark":1g00ddom said:


> Hudson Carpentry":1g00ddom said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, in a thread regarding setting up a website im indirectly in breach of section 8.
> ...




Or a friendly enquiry to the nearest mod as mentioned?


----------



## Karl (29 Sep 2011)

Noel":2h3qnihm said:


> Karl":2h3qnihm said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry to hear that Bob. I hadn't read your missing post, but I guess it was the same as the one posted on TWH and WWUK. If so, I think it's pretty petty to delete it.
> ...



I didn't see the need to respond - it was quite self explanatory.

One regularly sees "Mod Edit" on items posted in the For Sale section from Newbies, yet don't see the need for a common courtesy approach of letting established members know why their posts have been deleted.

In Bobs case, all it would have taken is a 20second PM along the lines of "your post might be in contravention of forum rules - we're discussing it but for the time being i've removed it". I'm sure that would have saved any bad feeling on Bobs part.

Much as HC says in his post above.


----------



## Noel (29 Sep 2011)

woodbloke":363oimvv said:


> Noel":363oimvv said:
> 
> 
> > Finally onto Rob (Woodbloke). In a nut shell, he and Jacob are not best buddys. As he has mentioned on open forum in the past he has said if Jacob isn't banned he will move on.
> ...



I actually hadn't noticed that Rob. But good to know.


----------



## Hudson Carpentry (29 Sep 2011)

Noel":1060hp92 said:


> tomatwark":1060hp92 said:
> 
> 
> > Hudson Carpentry":1060hp92 said:
> ...



As some of us do. However sometimes (ill use my indirectly advertising post as an example) We forget rules or don't even know of the rules and just post something unaware. It wasn't until I read this thread did I see my informative example of what I charge as an advertisement and breach of rules. In which cases, asking a mod wouldn't enter our heads as we don't realise it would break the rules.

I haven't seen the thread but I suggest that Bob may have thought the "advert" was of benefit to members. He like most of us may have not read the rules therefor unaware its a breach. He may have done it as a favor to another. Long serving members are unlikely to "spam".

May I suggest that when a thread is removed (ill assume it goes to an archive hidden, rather then deleted) that an addon is made to the move thread screen. A drop menu that has titles of pre written messages that if selected sends the OP that default message via PM. Takes half a second longer for the mods to select the correct message and the members will feel far better from it.


----------



## Digit (29 Sep 2011)

I would like to take this opportunity and appeal to Bob to change his mind. His contribution to this forum has been immense and the money and time he has saved members must also have been immense.
All those in favour, say AYE!

Roy.


----------



## Hudson Carpentry (29 Sep 2011)

Aye


----------



## Blister (29 Sep 2011)

Digit":3hy0btpd said:


> I would like to take this opportunity and appeal to Bob to change his mind. His contribution to this forum has been immense and the money and time he has saved members must also have been immense.
> All those in favour, say AYE!
> 
> Roy.



Already asked him to reconsider [-o<


----------



## tomatwark (29 Sep 2011)

Noel

I am not going to name the thread I am referring to as it will only cause another unnecessary argument as I am sure that it was not intended to break any rules.


If however I thought something was a obivious marketing ploy I would.

Tom

PS

AYE


----------



## powertools (29 Sep 2011)

I'm new round here and I accept that my opinion will not count for much.
I have learnt alot from other members and have enjoyed reading much of the pointless banter
I accept that there rules that the site owners can and will apply as they see fit but without contriversal members and members who maybe even without thinking push the rules to the limit this place could become quite boring.
For Bob to feel strongly enough to say he is gone and for others to say they feel strongly enough that unless another member is banned they will also go is not the best way for things to go.


----------



## CHJ (29 Sep 2011)

Hudson Carpentry":1ba4lqn5 said:


> By the way, in a thread regarding setting up a website im indirectly in breach of section 8.




Yes it had already been noted by the mod team as have several others, as has been mentioned in rules notes etc. it's down to individual posts and perceived intent, judgement calls are never black and white.


----------



## Doug B (29 Sep 2011)

You will be missed round here Bob  Reconsider.


----------



## Jacob (29 Sep 2011)

Yes Bob. I haven't personally followed your stuff but others seem to rate it, so don't go off in a huff!
NB It's a recurrent problem, the difference between trade and personal, and there's no clear dividing line.


----------



## monkeybiter (29 Sep 2011)

I don't think any member should be given special privileges and the same rules should be applied, to the same degree, to all. 

The forum relies on the unpaid work of the mods and their efforts will always be under-appreciated.

However I think if someone can spend enough time to make a decision to remove a post, and then do so, it is wrong to then not spend sixty more seconds to send a pm to the OP with at least a basic and brief explanation.


----------



## gardenshed (29 Sep 2011)

Bob's been around on this forum long enough to know the rules. He broke them, the mods correctly sorted it.
Bob's thrown his toys out the pram, we've all done it at some time or other in our lives...........inc me  

Lets move on :lol:


----------



## doorframe (29 Sep 2011)

Bob, your membership 'level' is stated as _*Valued Contributor*_, and that couldn't be more right. As far as I can see, you've given more good, helpful AND hands-on help to the members here than anybody else. This forum and it's members will be the loser if you really go. I hope you reconsider.

I do have sympathy with regards to over zealous modding. I found myself on Warning Level DEFCON 1 for not observing a rule specifically for the For Sale section when I was actually posting on the Chit-Chat section! A rule, incidently, that others (including a Mod) are 'breaking' in this actual thread! 

However, I do also have some sympathy for the mods, as, having modded a (music) forum a few years ago, I know what a pain it can be. I had to delete spam/porn almost every time I logged on and some of the posts I deleted did meet with an unfavorable response (not the porn ones!!). Some of my co-mods did tend to act like Car-Park-Attendents on steroids, but most acted fairly. 

As others have stated, a quick explanation when a post is deleted would go a long way to keeping harmony.

My 2 penneth worth. DEFCON 2, here we come!!! (hammer) 

Roy


----------



## Noel (29 Sep 2011)

monkeybiter":2frfe5wq said:


> I don't think any member should be given special privileges and the same rules should be applied, to the same degree, to all.
> 
> The forum relies on the unpaid work of the mods and their efforts will always be under-appreciated.
> 
> However I think if someone can spend enough time to make a decision to remove a post, and then do so, it is wrong to then not spend sixty more seconds to send a pm to the OP with at least a basic and brief explanation.



Mike, it's not a question of having to take 60 secs or so or whatever to send a PM. The sheer volume of time and effort that would entail across all boards on a daily basis isn't realistic . That would effectively double the workload. I don't think any of the posters, especially the OP, has any idea what's needed to run this place and run it in the manner that will, hopefully, be acceptable to the majority of members. I personally have encouraged this approach where members can come to us with a problem or an issue over a mod decision rather have to send out numerous PMs every day. It's not difficult to do and frankly it balances up the effort and time that the mod team put it. Most people who contact us over something like this don't have a problem taking that approach. Don't forget there's plenty of other "housework" that adds to the daily workload. The rules and guidelines are there for a reason and it's in every member's interests to read them. If they fail to do that there's little than can be done.

Bob, I'm sure you've read all the responses so far, any comments?


----------



## Modernist (29 Sep 2011)

I think for a forum such as this to end up losing such a "Valued Contributor" as 9 clearly points to a breakdown in or absence of suitable procedures. After all, unlike some of us (being a previous unrepentant bannee myself ) he is not normally contentious or anything other than incredibly knowledgeable and helpful. 

Baby and bathwater spring to mind and mods should not lose sight of the fact that what they are moderating is a discussion forum not a Sunday School. Without animated and sometimes heated discussion, forums die and it is notable that since moderation got heavier elsewhere, having been set up to be the opposite, posts have dwindled to a trickle. 

When these situations arise rules, such as discussing the mods decision are banned, only inflame the situation and smack of authoritarianism - the opposite of a good forum.

Time for some maturing of the rules me-thinks.


----------



## stoatyboy (29 Sep 2011)

Sad when people go but lets remember how much value the mods give to the forum - without them there isn't one here or anywhere else.

I'd put a clappy smilie in for them at this point if I knew how!

we're none of us perfect and I'm not in a position to comment on the post that caused upset but feel the mods do a difficult job pretty well on the whole - so there

Cheers


----------



## Noel (29 Sep 2011)

Modernist":2y5opx8r said:


> I think for a forum such as this to end up losing such a "Valued Contributor" as 9 clearly points to a breakdown in or absence of suitable procedures. After all, unlike some of us (being a previous unrepentant bannee myself ) he is not normally contentious or anything other than incredibly knowledgeable and helpful.
> 
> Baby and bathwater spring to mind and mods should not lose sight of the fact that what they are moderating is a discussion forum not a Sunday School. Without animated and sometimes heated discussion, forums die and it is notable that since moderation got heavier elsewhere, having been set up to be the opposite, posts have dwindled to a trickle.
> 
> ...



Brian, ref bold text in your quote. I said some time ago that the forum should become more inclusive and try and move away from the way it was run by some previous mods and this thread clearly demonstrates that. As for "discussing the mods decision are banned" etc isn't that what we are doing here? It doesn't happen all the time but it does happen.


----------



## Lons (29 Sep 2011)

I sincerely hope you don't leave Bob. You have masses of support on this forum and you are without doubt the calibre of member this forum needs.

If you do go, I'll make a point of keeping up with your "antics" on 'tother side.

Bob


----------



## Modernist (29 Sep 2011)

Noel":xotbxkt7 said:


> Brian, ref bold text in your quote. I said some time ago that the forum should become more inclusive and try and move away from the way it was run by some previous mods and this thread clearly demonstrates that. As for "discussing the mods decision are banned" etc isn't that what we are doing here? It doesn't happen all the time but it does happen.



First point - good, very welcome.

Second point yes but would you be prepared to see us discussing it amongst ourselves i.e not with a mod. After all the mods could make their points in such discussions and it might show up useful ways of resolving problems. It's the draconian nature of the "Ban" which inflames me. In fact it is what got me banned myself


----------



## Noel (29 Sep 2011)

Modernist":32iw7slp said:


> Noel":32iw7slp said:
> 
> 
> > Brian, ref bold text in your quote. I said some time ago that the forum should become more inclusive and try and move away from the way it was run by some previous mods and this thread clearly demonstrates that. As for "discussing the mods decision are banned" etc isn't that what we are doing here? It doesn't happen all the time but it does happen.
> ...



And who banned you? And when? Don't answer that Times have moved on. I don't believe there's anything draconian about the forum these days.
Sure, we can try that sort of discussion on an experimental basis. Start a thread about it. It might work, it might not.


----------



## Modernist (29 Sep 2011)

Noel":1ubigbad said:


> Modernist":1ubigbad said:
> 
> 
> > Noel":1ubigbad said:
> ...



Fine by me but lets not lose the electo-wizard for an apparently unintentional breach of the rules on a subject which clearly interests many.


----------



## Chems (29 Sep 2011)

I think the thing of not enough time to send pm's is true, but moderators are free, there are countless old hat forum members who could be doing the rounds amongst their normal browsing, there's only 3 of you to 8000 of us of which at least 5% of us post!


----------



## Hudson Carpentry (29 Sep 2011)

Solutions.

More mods

More mods with specific roles like removing posts/threads and PMing. While waiting for a higher mod to make a decision.

A coded mod that sends out a courtesy PM when you remove a thread / post using a drop down menu in the same screen as the move thread/post screen


----------



## CHJ (29 Sep 2011)

Hudson Carpentry":1ieaqe4l said:


> Solutions.
> 
> A coded mod that sends out a courtesy PM when you remove a thread / post using a drop down menu in the same screen as the move thread/post screen



Will look into that HC.


----------



## Hudson Carpentry (29 Sep 2011)

If there isn't one ill be happy to make one!


----------



## Dibs-h (30 Sep 2011)

Yeah - I vote for Jacob to be a mod! :shock: 

:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## monkeybiter (30 Sep 2011)

Dibs-h":ncqh2e7e said:


> Yeah - I vote for Jacob to be a mod! :shock:
> 
> :lol: :lol: :lol:



I'm gone!


----------



## studders (30 Sep 2011)

This thread would have been removed ages ago under the old Mod team. Good to see things have changed to a more sensible approach.
For my tuppence worth.. for a Forum of this size I don't feel three Mods is enough, as witnessed by the fact that they don't appear to have much time to enjoy the forum and participate as much they may perhaps like to? Don't think that's fair on them really.
Another pennies worth... what's so hard about PM'ing a mod asking for an explanation on posts that get deleted? Posts that are edited are a different matter, in that situation I think it's important that it is made obvious in the message that's been altered.


----------



## misterfish (30 Sep 2011)

Oh dear. So as a result of what may be considered by some as an impulsive and stringent moderating decision the forum now loses the expertise of one of the long serving and most helpful members. It is so unfortunate that we will lose access to the huge knowledge and practical skill that Bob has freely given.

'Own goal', 'baby/batwater', 'shooting yourself in the foot' comes to mind. The forum will be a much poorer place because of this and I can fully understand Bob's annoyance.

Misterfish


----------



## devonwoody (30 Sep 2011)

Do places like facebook,etc.etc. have mods?

Why not progress to something on those lines or does an owner of ukworkshop want to control because of an income involved?


----------



## Noel (30 Sep 2011)

devonwoody":uq6wcbkz said:


> Do places like facebook,etc.etc. have mods?
> 
> Why not progress to something on those lines or does an owner of ukworkshop want to control because of an income involved?



John, don't understand your point. 
Are you suggesting we have no moderation? Like Facebook? We'd be in court on a daily basis if that was the case. There would be no UKWW.


----------



## bugbear (30 Sep 2011)

devonwoody":23ls8pbm said:


> Do places like facebook,etc.etc. have mods?
> 
> Why not progress to something on those lines or does an owner of ukworkshop want to control because of an income involved?



You do know that some parts of Facebook are an open sewer, right?

BugBear


----------



## Alf (30 Sep 2011)

Hudson Carpentry":uhff1jwa said:


> Solutions.
> 
> More mods


That would seem to be the obvious one.

Personally I can't see the time saving in not sending a quick PM to a long-standing member to let them know why their thread's been pulled when you then have to spend an hour or two reading and responding to the subsequent fallout thread. But then it's been many years since I was a mod.

Hope Bob reconsiders (and that Rob tries putting his bête noir on "ignore" first, before he finally makes good on his threat to leave.)


----------



## bugbear (30 Sep 2011)

Alf":g6vbo1x2 said:


> bête noir



There's fancy!

BugBear


----------



## Hudson Carpentry (30 Sep 2011)

Facebook has mods but its only when someone reports something and most of the time its left on as its down to the poster to take responsibility on anything written. Facebook isn't a forum and you're allowed to post just about what ever which is why many regard it as what I call it "The nations playground" There is more falling out and b****hing on there then in an old womans hair dressers.

I can't stand facebook and use it only as a business tool. If this place was to become like facebook, ill be off following a long line of members.

We need mods regardless otherwise spam would fill up the boards and arguments would get out of hand.

The way we tackle it on our forum (although no where near the size of this forum) There are 2 Admins which have total control, 2 Super mods which can ban, delete etc etc then around 10 mods which cannot ban but can edit posts, move threads and do then general housekeeping. It works well currently but we only have around 20 regular members. We also have mods assigned to boards so there not having to trail through all the posts only posts on the boards there assigned to.

I know this place is 100x bigger but maybe a structured mod team like this would work. The current top mods would have time to enjoy the forum and not have to trail through 100's of posts a day between the 3. There would be time to stop this type of outbreak by sending out them personal PM's to members etc.


----------



## YorkshireDave (30 Sep 2011)

Oh dear.

I've seen this stuff happen many times and, I have to say, its always been about HOW something is done/said rather than the fact it's done/said. Having modded previously we did have a tiered and narrow ranging setup which meant one wasn't simply trawling through all day and getting bored witless and it was a golden rule to talk to people when modding their post. To reiterate what has already been said, in this day and age mods are a necessity due to porn etc so we have to accept them and the rules. That said, what makes theses types of forums popular and worth visiting is the simply fact that it is interactive and occasionally challenging so if things become too prescriptive the whole place loses it appeal and declines. 

Perhaps one way of keeping people who have a deep knowledge and recognising the positive contribution they make is to allow them some limited advertising as a thank you. Perhaps in their signature. That way only those who 'deserve' such things get it and everyone can remain happy.

For me the answer is simple (but then I'm dumb)... Reward contributions. Increase mods. TALK TO PEOPLE. Simples... (if only I could do the sound!)


----------



## CHJ (30 Sep 2011)

Mod decisions are not only based on what is declared or entered on UKW but on statements of involvement and associations declared elsewhere, that is part of the normal background checks that are done wherever possible before taking any particular action. 
Speculation in threads such as this do not have the benefit of the information being communicated off public forum with member/s involved, the fact that a valued member has, possibly inadvertently, fallen foul of a moderating policy and been aggrieved enough to post on open forum before communicating with the mod team is unfortunate. 
As I have said before uninformed speculation can lead to 2+2 equalling 5
If all the facts were public then 2+2+2 would equal 6.
I intend to re-instate the post in question, as requested by 9fingers but in the edited form that was prepared for re-instatement prior to this thread, without the content that the UKW team were not happy with, and which the mod team have endeavoured to explain off forum.


----------



## barkwindjammer (30 Sep 2011)

What would the non-gobble-de-gook-version of that be ?


----------



## Mike.C (30 Sep 2011)

barkwindjammer":18b0ualj said:


> What would the non-gobble-de-gook-version of that be ?



Why oh why oh why

Cheers

Mike


----------



## YorkshireDave (30 Sep 2011)

Mike.C":1ef49fv7 said:


> barkwindjammer":1ef49fv7 said:
> 
> 
> > What would the non-gobble-de-gook-version of that be ?
> ...



It's nice to know contributions are valued...


----------



## CHJ (1 Oct 2011)

YorkshireDave":9x0bmvwl said:


> .....
> Perhaps one way of keeping people who have a deep knowledge and recognising the positive contribution they make is to allow them some limited advertising as a thank you. Perhaps in their signature. That way only those who 'deserve' such things get it and everyone can remain happy.




Those members that observe the signatures will notice that there is already a considerable amount of advertising within established members signatures relating to their personal webb sites and associated business.

What is not allowed in a signature is reference to a commercial enterprise that is not owned or the declared employer of a member.


----------



## Anonymous (1 Oct 2011)

but what i don't get is the fact that lots of members refer to certain web links asking for opinions on certain products, therefore indirectly advertising the likes of screwfix, axminster, rutlands etc etc etc, but when an extremely valued member who has most probably helped everyone single contributer on here directly and to the point in one way or another, decides to show a simple display stand (ALBEIT referring to a supplier) it gets removed for breach of rules?!!! now that bob has decided to leave here i think the mods should remove his extremely helpful sticky about power and really pineapple it up for everyone else...........................................Bob if you do read this you were a wonderful help to me when i was first starting out and for that i am very grateful. see you on the other side.


----------



## CHJ (1 Oct 2011)

Mark I have done my best to point out to members that there is more to the mod decisions than is declared on open forum. I do not intend to wash all dirty linen in public just to forestall posts such as yours.

Indeed Bob is a valued contributor to the forum*, or was if he decides to stay away, and has been informed as to the reasoning behind actions taken.

There is a big difference between asking for supplier advice or commenting on good service etc. than directly promoting a business enterprise. The choice of wording or presentation can easily swing a posting from one to the other.

*and to me in person.


----------



## wobblycogs (2 Oct 2011)

While I completely agree that Bobs post was a breach of the forum rules as they current stand this has got to be the most ridiculous enforcement I've ever seen. A simple mod edit of the post (leaving in just the pictures for example) and a few words as to why would have been more than enough. Bob could then have come back and put in more appropriate wordage. Instead we are losing one of the best contributors the site has. Fair enough the rule is there so that the site can make money through advertising but without contributors like Bob there won't be much of a site left, it will just end up populated by newbies giving each other bad advice hanging around for a dozen posts.

Bob, I hope you decide to stay but if you do go I understand why.


----------



## CHJ (2 Oct 2011)

wobblycogs":pmis1lyu said:


> ...... A simple mod edit of the post (leaving in just the pictures for example) and a few words as to why would have been more than enough. .....




Please Note:


CHJ":pmis1lyu said:


> ...I intend to re-instate the post in question, as requested by 9fingers but *in the edited form that was prepared for re-instatement prior to this thread,* without the content that the UKW team were not happy with, .......


----------



## wobblycogs (2 Oct 2011)

Sorry, I should have made myself clearer. I feel that editing should have been the first response not the follow up in this case. If Bob was some 10 post unknown fair enough remove the post and wait to see what happens but we talking about a post from a really valued member who, no doubt unintentionally, slightly broke the rules. I would hate to see the situation arise where long standing members can just do whatever they like because of their reputation but at the same time giving someone like Bob the chance to edit the post before pulling it wouldn't have hurt.


----------



## barkwindjammer (2 Oct 2011)

Mike.C":2l00epof said:


> barkwindjammer":2l00epof said:
> 
> 
> > What would the non-gobble-de-gook-version of that be ?
> ...



Well, I'm a member, and entitled to my opinion for what its worth, or do you see it differently Mike, please explain.


----------



## Blister (2 Oct 2011)

Up until now I have kept out of this 

But my 2p worth coming up 

UK Workshop is a Forum 

As A forum , It has Rules 

As a forum it has moderators 

We do not pay a membership fee to sign up 

The mods do not get paid but GIVE up lots of time to oversee what goes on 

If a mod thinks a post is in breach of the rules it gets pulled while all the mods decide if it going to be pulled permanently or reinstated with alterations 

I had one of my posts pulled ?( cant remember what one it was :roll: ) though it strange ? later on it was put back up , was I upset , NO 

If it had stayed pulled it will be for a reason , Breach of forum rules 

I suggest people read the rules before posting that way no breaches should occur and that will make the mods jobs easier 

If you want to post things that are in breach of the forum rules , maybe use another forum 

I have enjoyed my time on UKW and find it very informative , I look forward to reading all the latest posts , don't personally comment on anything other than turning as I don't consider myself an authority on general wood work 


SO Please [-o< can we let the mods moderate ,not the members , that's what they are here for


----------



## Travis (2 Oct 2011)

Blister":2vxaub3m said:


> Up until now I have kept out of this
> 
> But my 2p worth coming up
> 
> ...



A view from afar--Well said Sir. Commom sense is not so common anymore.


----------



## gardenshed (2 Oct 2011)

Blister":2ojlsz5q said:


> Up until now I have kept out of this
> 
> But my 2p worth coming up
> 
> ...





=D> =D> =D> 
=D> =D> =D>


----------



## Dibs-h (2 Oct 2011)

Travis":2eif8bcb said:


> Commom sense is not so common anymore.



Generally speaking - that is so true!


----------



## misterfish (3 Oct 2011)

If you look back at Bob's original post he states ..._ without the even the courtesy of a PM_ ... and it is this that clearly upsets him.

Misterfish


----------



## Mike.C (3 Oct 2011)

barkwindjammer":b1urhzl2 said:


> Mike.C":b1urhzl2 said:
> 
> 
> > barkwindjammer":b1urhzl2 said:
> ...



Hi BWJ, of course you are entitled to your opinion, and no I do not see it differently. Reading my post again I can see why you may think that, but in reality I was tounge in cheek while thinking is'nt it bad enough already without adding some gobble-de-gook to the pot :roll: 

Cheers

Mike


----------



## woodstainwilly (3 Oct 2011)

AS a newby on here, may I just say that I have been on many forums
over the years and in most cases the mods do a wonderful job.
There are exceptions, I have been on sites where things get very personal
and is done with malice in mind. Good moderation keeps this at bay.
Three cheers for the moderators of this forum.
Willy.


----------



## kmcleod (4 Oct 2011)

I'm with Blister, good sensible common sense approach


----------

