So whats happening then ?

[JFC]

Thats the problem Kevin, you didn't help you supported something that doesn't really matter to you . You spoke or typed before you thought about it .

 

[Woodmagnet]

 

[Gill]

[-X

Rule 2, guys. It's all very well demanding a lighter touch from the mod team, but don't forget you're supposed to abide by Rule 2.

Gill

 

[JFC]

Point taken Gill , I'll spank my botty and go to bed :lol:

 

[Mike.C]

Martin,

Mike.C wrote:
Quote:
JFC,

Maybe its you and Mike C that need to think....


Why all because I said wait until Charley makes the new changes?

Quote:
JFC,

I notice its people with very little input that are trying to question my reasons here


So my 1200+ posts have been very little input. Well thank you very much, I will remember that.

I may have asked more questions then I have given advice but I thought the forum was all about give and take.

Thanks JFC now I know how some of you think.

Mike


Mike I have had more help from you Than most of the profesional woody's on this forum, I for one am very grateful of your valuable input.

Thanks
_________________
Martin

Thanks for your support Martin it's very much appriciated.

Cheers

Mike

 

[Karl]

Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:08 pm Post subject:

No i am not antagonising the mods , i want to know what is happening to the site that i have alot of my work shown on . The points where covered but nothing has happened just like the last time .
Maybe its you and Mike C that need to think.... i have alot of work shown here and i don't like the idea of untrained people giving advice on my work . Id like to reply myself thankyou !
I notice its people with very little input that are trying to question my reasons here .

JFC - like I said, just my thoughts - take them or leave them.

As has already been pointed out to you, Mike C is hardly somebody with "very little input".

As for myself, yes. I have very little input. Because I only joined recently. Problem???? I am not questioning your "reasons" - just suggesting a little more time be given to Charley to answer the questions/sort the problems.

Cheers

Karl

 

[Anonymous]

Sawdust wrote

And there has still been no explanation at all as to why Jacob was banned.

This is factually incorrect. Charley has explained why he took the decision to ban Jacob in the previous thread that covered this ground.


JFC wrote

When posters that put so much into this forum get banned for little or no reason it makes me wonder why i am posting here and i'm sure others feel that way

Judging by the number of healthy discussions ongoing, and the number of new threads in the past few days, you might find less people feel this way than you think.


JFC wrote

i have alot of work shown here and i don't like the idea of untrained people giving advice on my work

So, you regard the forum membership's knowledge and skills quite highly then.


Jake wrote

I don't know, all he's asking for is some accountability. It depends how you the view the forum really - as someone's possession or as a community. It's only if its the former, that asking such questions could be seen as intrusive and asking for a ban or whatever.

How much did you or JFC or Sawdust pay to join Charley's forum? How much does Charley pay out of his own pocket every month for servers, maintenance, bandwidth? (more than you might think).
We are all here as guests of Charley and although the members make the community, the forum itself is Charley's and he is the person who determines how it is to be run.

JFC wrote

no one will speak to me one to one ! So i have to ask here !

Whom did you try to speak to about the problem? the moderation team would be happy to disucss your concerns offline. If you care to read Charley's forum rules, you will see that such matters should be discussed offline.


Kardley wrote

From your opening post it is clear you are trying to antagonise the mods.

JFC, you have started up a new forum and many of the posts there discuss ways to disrupt UKWS (hidden within the 'pub' section now).

Most of your members are professional woodworkers, whereas most of ours are amateurs. It seems to me that there is room for both forums to co-exist and flourish and cater for a different market and style of operation.

I for one really do wish you well with your new venture

 

[Adam]

And also, recently, a certain moderator said they couldn't read PMs anyway.

Mike,

If you are going to quote me, please note the whole statement. I said that we cannot read PM's, unless people forward by cutting and pasting the text, and creating a new PM which can then be sent to a mod/admin. That way, we can see the original email. Just like forwarding an email effectively.

Adam

 

[beejay]

Has he gone now,,,,, for good I mean. :roll:
What a T****R !
beejay

 

[motownmartin]

Has he gone now,,,,, for good I mean. :roll:
What a T****R !
beejay

He's gone to the Pub with his mates ccasion5:

 

[Jake]

Has he gone now,,,,, for good I mean. :roll:
What a T****R !
beejay

Ummm, rule 2?

 

[Jake]

How much did you or JFC or Sawdust pay to join Charley's forum? How much does Charley pay out of his own pocket every month for servers, maintenance, bandwidth? (more than you might think).
We are all here as guests of Charley and although the members make the community, the forum itself is Charley's and he is the person who determines how it is to be run.

OK possession/rule of dictat it is. Shame, I thought this was more of a community, with a generous host.

 

[Anonymous]

Charley/Mods

I'm sorry to interfere, but I think members would find it helpful if they were given a date when, come what may, your announcements will be made.

Thanks,
Neil

 

[JFC]

beejay wrote:
Has he gone now,,,,, for good I mean.
What a T****R !
beejay

Been called worse by better men :lol:

 

[wizer]

On another forum that I frequent a system is used for banning members. It works much like a disciplinary procedure in a place of work. A member has 2 or 3 verbal warnings followed by a 7 day ban. If when the member returns he breaks the rules again then a 30 day ban is implemented. The next step is the perm ban.

Maybe this is what Charley has in store for the site. At least this system gives the member a chance to make a mends.

 

[Anonymous]

On another forum that I frequent a system is used for banning members. It works much like a disciplinary procedure in a place of work. A member has 2 or 3 verbal warnings followed by a 7 day ban. If when the member returns he breaks the rules again then a 30 day ban is implemented. The next step is the perm ban.

Maybe this is what Charley has in store for the site. At least this system gives the member a chance to make a mends.

This is basically what has been operating, without the 7 day ban.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Jake]

That's why the issue isn't technical or rule based, it's about how it is administrated, and in particular whether the moderating team is neutral enough to be able to look at the actions of its own in a critical way when assessing what to do with a poster who has reacted to a personal attack from a moderator.

 

[Sawdust]

There is a threat of a 1 month ban which is a good idea and for all I know, Jacob may have had one. I was threatened with one previously when i discussed moderation on the forum. I subsequently apologised and asked privately for a reason why a thread was locked as I couldn't see anything in it which broke any rules at all. No such explanation was ever received.

In this recent carry on with Jacob, It seems to me (and anyone who is still concerned about this) that it really doesn't appear that Jacob did anything wrong, according to the published rules of the forum. He did send an PM to a few people saying he thought he was about to be banned and that he was joining another forum in case anyone wanted to keep in touch.

My concern is how that particular PM could be classed as spam and used as a reason for banning someone.

Now I do appreciate that this is Charley's forum and depsite what people seem to think, I do appreciate the efforts he puts in, and I also realise that it is well within his rights to ban anyone he wants for whatever reason he wants. I just thought the forum was a little more democratic than that.

I will look forward to seeing what changes are coming.

Cheers
Mike

 

[mr]

beejay wrote:
Has he gone now,,,,, for good I mean.
What a T****R !
beejay

Been called worse by better men :lol:

Regularly?

I just thought the forum was a little more democratic than that.

Forums are not and should not be a democracy. The rules exist in what ever fashion they exist in, state whatever they state etc and should be enforced to the letter without conversation.
Threads discussing moderation should be closed without discussion. Conversations like this one should be conducted in private. If you don't like the way a forum is managed do the other thing. Set up another forum where like minded people can gather. That's all any forum is about.

 

[wizer]

I'm, personally, not going to keep on about the specifics of the whole Jacob saga. I think its all been said and no one is going to change their mind on either side.

But I hope these improvements make the whole system a bit fairer and more transparent.

Ultimately I will miss our fallen members but want to get on with talking about woodworking. The good will and generosity of members on this forum is breathtaking and the fact that Charley gives us a place to exchange woodworking information, for free, is extremely kind.