Open letter (open post?) to Simon re permanent bannings.

[minneapolis]

I thought it was harsh - too bloody harsh.

Previous bans should drop off if you have been good for a year.

Lett him back. He wasn't a spiteful poster.

[Sanctorum]

The problem for the administrator of this site is that if Big Brother sees someone on this forum threatening to kill a public figure, even though everyone knows TB was only joking and has no intention to carry out such a threat, it is he who has to answer the knock on the door by the thought police and answer for the post.

This is therefore not a laughing matter because if nothing else it would cause the administrator stress and a waste of his valuable time.

Nonetheless perhaps there could some sort of process whereby someone who has done the wrong thing can be offered to unreservedly retract and apologise for such offensive remarks and to delete the post forthwith.

Unfortunately whether we like it or not, we are now in the age of total wokeness, where even thought bubbles can land the unwitting in trouble with the authorities. Not that this should really bother anyone because we can still engage in healthy and robust debate about all things Saintly on this forum, and we all ought to be grateful that Simon has been good enough to pay for, and provide, this forum to enable us to do so!

[CQ SAINT]

Who threatened to kill anyone?

[saynta]

diplomatic



but i think we all know
who signed off the banning with ... bye bye

almost like he enjoys his little power trip

Not necessarily mate. Could have been KFT or BFUSA coz both would probably be enabled to implement the ban.

More than a bit out of touch there.

[st.byron]

diplomatic



but i think we all know
who signed off the banning with ... bye bye

almost like he enjoys his little power trip

Not necessarily mate. Could have been KFT or BFUSA coz both would probably be enabled to implement the ban.

I haven’t been a moderator since the start of the season.

Thanks for clarifying

[st.byron]

The problem for the administrator of this site is that if Big Brother sees someone on this forum threatening to kill a public figure, even though everyone knows TB was only joking and has no intention to carry out such a threat, it is he who has to answer the knock on the door by the thought police and answer for the post.

This is therefore not a laughing matter because if nothing else it would cause the administrator stress and a waste of his valuable time.

Nonetheless perhaps there could some sort of process whereby someone who has done the wrong thing can be offered to unreservedly retract and apologise for such offensive remarks and to delete the post forthwith.

Unfortunately whether we like it or not, we are now in the age of total wokeness, where even thought bubbles can land the unwitting in trouble with the authorities. Not that this should really bother anyone because we can still engage in healthy and robust debate about all things Saintly on this forum, and we all ought to be grateful that Simon has been good enough to pay for, and provide, this forum to enable us to do so!

Indeed. Pretty thankless task is being a mod on this forum. It’s all voluntary. In this case I disagree with the decision but perhaps reasons unknown to most. Forum is miles better than it used to be.

[st.byron]

diplomatic



but i think we all know
who signed off the banning with ... bye bye

almost like he enjoys his little power trip

Not necessarily mate. Could have been KFT or BFUSA coz both would probably be enabled to implement the ban.

More than a bit out of touch there.

You’re an abrasive f***** Mr. Rolly Eyes. All you needed to say is that KFT isn’t a mod any longer.

<1 day ban from commenting negatively on another poster>

[asiu]

thats the inner toby
shouldering the (ex) ump coming out

[asiu]

nor do i think much of this

Forum is miles better than it used to be.

she's a shadow looking for a shadow maker

[Sainter_Dad]

The problem for the administrator of this site is that if Big Brother sees someone on this forum threatening to kill a public figure, even though everyone knows TB was only joking and has no intention to carry out such a threat, it is he who has to answer the knock on the door by the thought police and answer for the post.

This is therefore not a laughing matter because if nothing else it would cause the administrator stress and a waste of his valuable time.

Nonetheless perhaps there could some sort of process whereby someone who has done the wrong thing can be offered to unreservedly retract and apologise for such offensive remarks and to delete the post forthwith.

Unfortunately whether we like it or not, we are now in the age of total wokeness, where even thought bubbles can land the unwitting in trouble with the authorities. Not that this should really bother anyone because we can still engage in healthy and robust debate about all things Saintly on this forum, and we all ought to be grateful that Simon has been good enough to pay for, and provide, this forum to enable us to do so!

LOL - that particular joke originated in 1958. Maybe we should uphold the ban until TB gets some newer material.

[st.byron]

thats the inner toby
shouldering the (ex) ump coming out

[st.byron]

nor do i think much of this

Forum is miles better than it used to be.

she's a shadow looking for a shadow maker

Tis heaps better in my book. It use to just a keyboard warrior, cyber bully free for all. Every thread pretty much went off into abuse and insults much uglier than what’s permitted now.

[CQ SAINT]

nor do i think much of this

Forum is miles better than it used to be.

she's a shadow looking for a shadow maker

Tis heaps better in my book. It use to just a keyboard warrior, cyber bully free for all. Every thread pretty much went off into abuse and insults much uglier than what’s permitted now.

That's nice (r). At least.

[CQ SAINT]

diplomatic



but i think we all know
who signed off the banning with ... bye bye

almost like he enjoys his little power trip

Not necessarily mate. Could have been KFT or BFUSA coz both would probably be enabled to implement the ban.

More than a bit out of touch there.

You’re an abrasive f***** Mr. Rolly Eyes. All you needed to say is that KFT isn’t a mod any longer.

That , may be construed as hypocrisy.

[st.byron]

diplomatic



but i think we all know
who signed off the banning with ... bye bye

almost like he enjoys his little power trip

Not necessarily mate. Could have been KFT or BFUSA coz both would probably be enabled to implement the ban.

More than a bit out of touch there.

You’re an abrasive f***** Mr. Rolly Eyes. All you needed to say is that KFT isn’t a mod any longer.

That , may be construed as hypocrisy.

What my comment that he’s an abrasive bugger is hypocrisy?

[CQ SAINT]

diplomatic



but i think we all know
who signed off the banning with ... bye bye

almost like he enjoys his little power trip

Not necessarily mate. Could have been KFT or BFUSA coz both would probably be enabled to implement the ban.

More than a bit out of touch there.

You’re an abrasive f***** Mr. Rolly Eyes. All you needed to say is that KFT isn’t a mod any longer.

That , may be construed as hypocrisy.

What my comment that he’s an abrasive bugger is hypocrisy?

Nah. The decline into abuse. The the f....... dots are lovely. Much better than the old days.

Ok. The eyes were too much.

[asiu]

i like you

[asiu]

i like him too

but you're good

[CQ SAINT]

Now, I'm not sure if DMac overlooked this, but to be effective, this thread might need to be moved to the administration thread.
I'm guessing TB might not actually give a s***, but I'd like to test the appeal system.

[CQ SAINT]

I like him too. He's a good dude and a bit clever.

[The Fireman]

it appears that a major portion of members want this overturned...so be it.

(While i'm here maybe a week off for plonkers who don't like each each and fill the forum with tit for tat vitriol )

[Sainter_Dad]

(While i'm here maybe a week off for plonkers who don't like each each and fill the forum with tit for tat vitriol )

Oooyyyy - I don't have either - where does that leave me - I want to participate in the Vitriol?

[perfectionist]

it appears that a major portion of members want this overturned...so be it.

There's little evidence of that. My guess, and that is all it is, would be that the major portion of members would be appalled at the comment that led to the ban. There is no "it was only a joke" defence. It's one of those things for which there should be zero tolerance. Threatening or suggesting physical violence is enough to get the boot from most organisations.

The "silent majority" rightly don't get involved in endless flame wars which used to be a feature of this Forum. They do what they have been advised to do - report any offending post, then stay out of it and leave it to the mods. There are still thousands of members but only about half a dozen have been talking about it.

[saynta]

diplomatic



but i think we all know
who signed off the banning with ... bye bye

almost like he enjoys his little power trip

Not necessarily mate. Could have been KFT or BFUSA coz both would probably be enabled to implement the ban.

More than a bit out of touch there.

You’re an abrasive f***** Mr. Rolly Eyes. All you needed to say is that KFT isn’t a mod any longer.

That , may be construed as hypocrisy.

What my comment that he’s an abrasive bugger is hypocrisy?

Not what you said at all.

[saynta]

diplomatic



but i think we all know
who signed off the banning with ... bye bye

almost like he enjoys his little power trip

Not necessarily mate. Could have been KFT or BFUSA coz both would probably be enabled to implement the ban.

More than a bit out of touch there.

You’re an abrasive f***** Mr. Rolly Eyes. All you needed to say is that KFT isn’t a mod any longer.

That , may be construed as hypocrisy.

What my comment that he’s an abrasive bugger is hypocrisy?

Nah. The decline into abuse. The the f....... dots are lovely. Much better than the old days.

Ok. The eyes were too much.

In accordance with the rules I reported his post anyway. I will wait and see what happens. Better to do that than respond.