Moderator personers

[Ixion]

Which begs the point that even those with no intention of attending the meeting in question might have valid and on topic comment

"mod told me (cant quote cos its in a p/m and that would be bad) that they wernt racing in the event so they basicly didnt need to post."

[Joni]

Which begs the point that even those with no intention of attending the meeting in question might have valid and on topic comment

"mod told me (cant quote cos its in a p/m and that would be bad) that they wernt racing in the event so they basicly didnt need to post."

Straight up Ixion, yes in most circumstances you would be 100% correct...

But the user in question has misconstrued many messages/conversations in the past, so pm content cannot be taken at face value from him.

You should know better than to only take one side of the story and make a decision... unless you are just looking at the grand standing side of things, like some so often do?

[Swoop]

...that says that anyone who is not actively participating in a racing event is prohibited from posting in a thread about it,and will be infracted for doing so ?

I am quite impressed with the very subtle method of moving a thread into a different area (with different rules, naturally) and then another mod goes through the thread and hands out infringements for off-topic posts.

Quite clever really.

[Forest]

I have my own theories. The following article is a good place to start:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

I have to say though, that the moderation here is (thankfully) more restrained than some other sites I belong to.

[The Lone Rider]

I have my own theories. The following article is a good place to start:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

I have to say though, that the moderation here is (thankfully) more restrained than some other sites I belong to.

I don't think deindividuation has much to do with moderation on a internet forum.

Considering a lot of people treat online forums like they can say whatever they like without consequences, you'd be hard pressed to find people falling into roles such as prisoner and prison guard.

[Joni]

For the record... I am backing Gav blindly, I have no idea what he said in the pm and don’t really care, because I know he is doing his very best, and that is all I would ever ask of any moderator. I know what it’s like to have things twisted and turned to meet someone else’s agenda....Mods give up their personal time to try and keep this site running as well as possible. They don’t deserve to be bullied, bashed, threatened etc...

I woke up one day and realised I had become an angry, unhappy person due to all of the abuse I faced... and have had to work hard to get the old Jo back...

For the record: Thank you to all the mods who had the courage to keep doing it, even when I could not anymore, especially Hitcher, who has now been doing it as long as I was.

[Kickaha]

You snack too much babe

And it shows

[SPman]

[dangerous]

He will never see the real problem. I agree it is very sad.

No where did the Mod in question say “Anyone who is not involved in the BOB cannot post here.” All he asked was that the thread stays on topic and that is his right as a mod of this site and in accordance with the site rules...

... Then please explain what the "REAL PROBLEM" is?
The thread was very VERY... on topic, can a group of friends not have a thread of there own to discuss a w/e racing and the FRIENDLY banter that goes with it? this isent a arpatheid country or forum.

So what is the purpose of this thread? To find the answer to the question asked? Or to just grand stand and take a few shots at the latest moderator who does not agree with you and your ideals dangerous?

Well I believe in standing up for ones self... its a right we all have, this IS NOT SA

You snack too much babe

You crawling for friends again?

The moderator in question asked for the thread to be kept on topic, and you know as well as I do there is a rule for that

Again... the Mods own opion vrsus, ohhh thousands I spose, he did cos he could cos he has the power.

The moderator in question asked for the thread to be kept on topic, and you know as well as I do there is a rule for that

Because in his OWN PERSONAL opion he thought it was off topic... maybe I should ask him if there was just one single complaint, if so then maybe he had a job to do.

Now off you go little man... get back on your box, stomp your foot some more, scream a little louder... I’m sure someone on KB has not yet been hit by the toys flying out your cot, and Im sure the anti mod brigade will stroke that already large ego of yours and make you feel better very soon!

edit: oh sorry I forgot the vital wink that makes everything you say ok

LMFAO... Joni sweet heart... That could be considered ABUSE did no one ever tell you sarcasm is the lowest form of wit

... sorry no wink from me

[merv]

I've said it before many a time, why the frig does anyone get upset if something goes slightly off topic anyway, that always happens in normal conversations so why do we have rules that try to make this an abnormal and oh so perfect world? - sheesh

[98tls]

I've said it before many a time, why the frig does anyone get upset if something goes slightly off topic anyway, that always happens in normal conversations so why do we have rules that try to make this an abnormal and oh so perfect world? - sheesh

This is the interweb Merv,commonsense goes out the window and if need be the rest of the world can be made to pay the price of an over dominant father or even the price paid for having buck teeth and glasses in the 3rd form.

[Ixion]

So who decides what is , or is not, 'on topic'? Surely the person who started the thread is the one best qualified to know what the topic of his thread was intended to be?

[gav]

Yeah well, it was me, for the record it was the first infraction I've handed out and basically I cocked it up, it was meant to be a warning, oh well, shit happens ..... get over it.
I asked for the thread to be kept on topic, and it was ignored.
You could easily start another thread for the banter and bs
Dangerous, if you are going to quote me, get it right, you said both people were coming down, I mentioned that I didnt think one of the posters was coming and think I am still correct in that regard. I never said they couldnt post!? If we had your way, Dangerous we would only need one thread titled Buckets as "ïts all bucket and bucket peeps" as you said. Clearly thats not workable, is it. Pull your head in and stop shit stirring, as it only seems to be you that has a problem.
You started the thread, but I got the bucket forum started and have modded it since the beginning, has it really been that badly handled? If you don't like it Dangerous, move along ......

[Joni]

Aaaw come on D… its all done in jest (isn’t that what you have always told me when you are being a cock?)

Besides, surely you can do better than that post? You have been way more abusive and way more nasty to me before… come on, go for it, show people your true colours some more.

Ta ta lovey…

[dangerous]

So who decides what is , or is not, 'on topic'? Surely the person who started the thread is the one best qualified to know what the topic of his thread was intended to be?

That was me.. and I am perfectly happy with all the on goings on that thread, its 100% bucket racers and their buckets.