Bye bye

[Dibs-h]

I think it's a shame - whilst some may not have liked Jacob - I honestly would struggle to recall anything Jacob has written since he came back that could have upset anyone.

He has his opinions and they certainly weren't baseless - I don't think this place will be any better off for banning him.

My tuppence worth.

Dibs

 

[big soft moose]

I think it's a shame - whilst some may not have liked Jacob - I honestly would struggle to recall anything Jacob has written since he came back that could have upset anyone.

He has his opinions and they certainly weren't baseless - I don't think this place will be any better off for banning him.

My tuppence worth.

Dibs

true but we are only speculating on why he was banned - i cant see philly, noel, chris etc banning him for no reason, so he might have done something that none of us know about

 

[Dibs-h]

true but we are only speculating on why he was banned - i cant see philly, noel, chris etc banning him for no reason, so he might have done something that none of us know about

That's the whole point - if none of us know - then it can hardly be a post that he's replied to or started - otherwise someone would know.

It will come out in the end - either this side or on the other! I suppose it's just more incentive to visit the other side.

 

[woodbloke]

But then again anyone who is banned and then allowed back on any forum is going to be on a "watch list" so i guess its not really reasonable to expect a warning first.

I would quite agree, but we do seem to be witnessing some double standard mod-ing.

The mods do have their own board though, where they can natter amongst themselves. As I understand it Mr. Grim has departed again and I'm sure that there was a sound and valid reason...it's just that we aren't party to it - Rob

 

[big soft moose]

true but we are only speculating on why he was banned - i cant see philly, noel, chris etc banning him for no reason, so he might have done something that none of us know about

That's the whole point - if none of us know - then it can hardly be a post that he's replied to or started - otherwise someone would know.

It will come out in the end - either this side or on the other! I suppose it's just more incentive to visit the other side.

but there are other things that get you banned - if there was a falling out by pm , or if he had a pop at the mods by pm , or if he was operating two accounts , etc - any infarction of the rules could result in a banning and only the mods would know.

frankly i'm not that bothered - i have faith that the mods here wouldnt have banned him without good reason, and beyond that i really couldnt care less - i'm certainly not going to start lurking over there so that i can find out what happened, life is really too short.

 

[Doctor]

but there are other things that get you banned - if there was a falling out by pm , or if he had a pop at the mods by pm , or if he was operating two accounts , etc - any infarction of the rules could result in a banning and only the mods would know.

Rules are rules, but some rules apply more to some people :?

 

[JonnyD]

Imho i think the forum has lost it`s way a little, with too may over opinionated posters, which has been the reason for my lack of activity on here, though i wont be posting an "I`m leaving thread"................... well not just yet. :lol:

My thoughts exactly Doug. I think I know who you mean but I wont say as I believe he is a bit handy.

cheers

Jon

 

[Doug B]

but there are other things that get you banned - if there was a falling out by pm , or if he had a pop at the mods by pm , or if he was operating two accounts , etc - any infarction of the rules could result in a banning and only the mods would know.

Rules are rules, but some rules apply more to some people :?

Exactly my point Dr, a level playing field for all, with the mods applying the rules equally to eveyone.


The really annoying bit is once again being in agreement with you Bob #-o #-o

 

[RogerM]

but there are other things that get you banned - if there was a falling out by pm , or if he had a pop at the mods by pm , or if he was operating two accounts , etc - any infarction of the rules could result in a banning and only the mods would know.

Rules are rules, but some rules apply more to some people :?

I remember when they eventually allowed Kenny Everitt back on BBC TV, on his first appearance he beamed at the camera and said something along the lines of "Well it's jolly nice to be back on the dear old Beeb, and the producer has said that I'll be fine so long as I don't say the word "pubes"" upon which 2 heavies came on and dragged him off screen. Wouldn't have happened to anyone else!

 

[Ironballs]

Didn't know Grim had been banned, he's been opinionated but not doing anything worthy of banning from what I'd seen - not that I read every post.

Back to the original topic and Rog starting a political poll thread, what did he expect, it was bound to end up being locked. He did post a lot of useful stuff but also chucked in a load of semi political stuff and his Duff Gov rants.

Of all the hissy fit "I'm off" threads I think he and Dick are tied for the lead with hissy-ist

 

[big soft moose]

heres a thing , if you click on grims profile its doesnt say anything about him being banned, and its still giving his status as "furniture maker" rather than "banned"

so before we all get our frilly bits in a knot and start kicking the **** out of the mod team, are we really sure hes been banned at all ?

particularly when you consider that according to doug, grim hasnt been told why , which is also a bit irregular

perhaps he isnt banned but just cant log on because of a technical error ?

maybe a mod could give a view ? and finally put this thread to bed

 

[wizer]

 

[big soft moose]

 

[Mattty]

true but we are only speculating on why he was banned - i cant see philly, noel, chris etc banning him for no reason, so he might have done something that none of us know about

That's the whole point - if none of us know - then it can hardly be a post that he's replied to or started - otherwise someone would know.

It will come out in the end - either this side or on the other! I suppose it's just more incentive to visit the other side.

i'm certainly not going to start lurking over there so that i can find out what happened, life is really too short.

Why do you keep having a pop at wwuk? You make snide comments quite casually and with obvious intent and yet you have no reason as you also state your not a member. WWUK is a great forum just like here. It's more liberal and has a different slant but i'm sure everyone is welcome. Please either back up your comments or refrain.

 

[laird]

Jacob enjoys being banned.
It gives him something else to twitter on about. That's why he keeps (at least) 4 alter egos so he can lurk, and comment.
In so many ways it's a shame,' cos he has ability and knowledge.
IMHO

 

[wizer]

I think Pete just meant that he doesn't want to lurk on there trying to work out what's gone one. To be fair Matty, the amount of abuse that flies our way from over there is astonishing and yet we very rarely are insulting (if ever) to them. It's all a bit obsessive I find. They are their own forum now. Surely they have better things to do than use an internet forum to abuse another internet forum. Quite why Jacob is so **** bent on creating ripples over here with his many accounts that he's forgot the passwords to.

 

[big soft moose]

true but we are only speculating on why he was banned - i cant see philly, noel, chris etc banning him for no reason, so he might have done something that none of us know about

That's the whole point - if none of us know - then it can hardly be a post that he's replied to or started - otherwise someone would know.

It will come out in the end - either this side or on the other! I suppose it's just more incentive to visit the other side.

i'm certainly not going to start lurking over there so that i can find out what happened, life is really too short.

Why do you keep having a pop at wwuk? You make snide comments quite casually and with obvious intent and yet you have no reason as you also state your not a member. WWUK is a great forum just like here. It's more liberal and has a different slant but i'm sure everyone is welcome. Please either back up your comments or refrain.

not taken your paranoia meds today matty ? :lol:

all i meant, as tom righty surmised, is that I'm not going to start lurking on WWUK in order to get to the bottom of the "great grim mystery" because I have a life and dont give that much of a toss why he's been banned, or if he actually has

I dont particullarly have a problem with WWUK , its just not my sort of place which is why i havent joined it, (this is equally true of lumber jocks and numerous other sites) I'm quite happy with UKW, and would be happier still if all this conspiracy rubbish, good bye threads, criticisim of the mod team etc could stop and we'd all go back to talking about woodwork

 

[Mattty]

No problem, your use of :roll: says it all.

Edit- What happened to Matt's comment- it seemed very sensible to me.

 

[matt]

Edit- What happened to Matt's comment- it seemed very sensible to me.

Thank you. I deleted it because, in hindsight, it dawned on me that what I was describing made it a comment that would trigger subsequent posts from some that would simply perpetuate the very observation I was making - if you see what I mean... I really could not be bothered with it :?

 

[Mattty]

ahhh yes sensible point. I'll take the cue.