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

[The_Dud]

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>

This is what’s wrong with the site.

Constant little digs and disrespect (usually by a certain poster) go ignored, and when someone (rightly) bites back THEY cop a ban.

And it’s claimed there are no ‘untouchables’

Don't breach the rules and you won't cop a ban.
Easy to understand.

“Any post that negatively relates to or references, or baits (directly or indirectly) another poster, or posters, or group of posters in the Saintsational Fan Forum or leads to bickering to the level of an ongoing dispute, will be deemed a breach of rules and the penalty will be either a 1 DAY BAN or 1 WEEK BAN.”

You unnecessarily posted a smartass comment that had nothing to do with this topic but was just trying to get another little dig in at a poster you’ve clashed with (baiting) which then lead to bickering back and forth, and him getting banned for a perfectly understandable response (after you dobbed on him).

Seems like a pretty clear breach of the above rule to me.

But ‘untouchables’ are called that for a reason I guess.

[roskilde]

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>

This is what’s wrong with the site.

Constant little digs and disrespect (usually by a certain poster) go ignored, and when someone (rightly) bites back THEY cop a ban.

And it’s claimed there are no ‘untouchables’

Don't breach the rules and you won't cop a ban.
Easy to understand.

“Any post that negatively relates to or references, or baits (directly or indirectly) another poster, or posters, or group of posters in the Saintsational Fan Forum or leads to bickering to the level of an ongoing dispute, will be deemed a breach of rules and the penalty will be either a 1 DAY BAN or 1 WEEK BAN.”

You unnecessarily posted a smartass comment that had nothing to do with this topic but was just trying to get another little dig in at a poster you’ve clashed with (baiting) which then lead to bickering back and forth, and him getting banned for a perfectly understandable response (after you dobbed on him).

Seems like a pretty clear breach of the above rule to me.

But ‘untouchables’ are called that for a reason I guess.

You do this constantly. You're an 'untouchable' if such a thing exists. Half of your comments are baiting, bickering or berating other posters. As reliable and compulsive as Curly when it comes to your behaviour. Just own it but don't be a hypocrite.

[The_Dud]

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>

This is what’s wrong with the site.

Constant little digs and disrespect (usually by a certain poster) go ignored, and when someone (rightly) bites back THEY cop a ban.

And it’s claimed there are no ‘untouchables’

Don't breach the rules and you won't cop a ban.
Easy to understand.

“Any post that negatively relates to or references, or baits (directly or indirectly) another poster, or posters, or group of posters in the Saintsational Fan Forum or leads to bickering to the level of an ongoing dispute, will be deemed a breach of rules and the penalty will be either a 1 DAY BAN or 1 WEEK BAN.”

You unnecessarily posted a smartass comment that had nothing to do with this topic but was just trying to get another little dig in at a poster you’ve clashed with (baiting) which then lead to bickering back and forth, and him getting banned for a perfectly understandable response (after you dobbed on him).

Seems like a pretty clear breach of the above rule to me.

But ‘untouchables’ are called that for a reason I guess.

You do this constantly. You're an 'untouchable' if such a thing exists. Half of your comments are baiting, bickering or berating other posters. As reliable and compulsive as Curly when it comes to your behaviour. Just own it but don't be a hypocrite.

Happy for you to point out any such posts.

I think you’ll find all (or 99%) are on topic or in direct response to another poster initiating a discussion.

[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.

<1 day ban from commenting negatively on another poster>

This is what’s wrong with the site.

Constant little digs and disrespect (usually by a certain poster) go ignored, and when someone (rightly) bites back THEY cop a ban.

And it’s claimed there are no ‘untouchables’

Don't breach the rules and you won't cop a ban.
Easy to understand.

“Any post that negatively relates to or references, or baits (directly or indirectly) another poster, or posters, or group of posters in the Saintsational Fan Forum or leads to bickering to the level of an ongoing dispute, will be deemed a breach of rules and the penalty will be either a 1 DAY BAN or 1 WEEK BAN.”

You unnecessarily posted a smartass comment that had nothing to do with this topic but was just trying to get another little dig in at a poster you’ve clashed with (baiting) which then lead to bickering back and forth, and him getting banned for a perfectly understandable response (after you dobbed on him).

Seems like a pretty clear breach of the above rule to me.

But ‘untouchables’ are called that for a reason I guess.

You do this constantly. You're an 'untouchable' if such a thing exists. Half of your comments are baiting, bickering or berating other posters. As reliable and compulsive as Curly when it comes to your behaviour. Just own it but don't be a hypocrite.

I was going to post something similar along the lines of pot, kettle black. But decided he was not worth the effort.

He is part of a very small group who constantly rubbish the opinions of others.

Just ignore him. I intend to.

<1 day ban - reported for baiting - and as the third man into this contest, I agree it serves no purpose, other than to bait and further inflame>

[roskilde]

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>

This is what’s wrong with the site.

Constant little digs and disrespect (usually by a certain poster) go ignored, and when someone (rightly) bites back THEY cop a ban.

And it’s claimed there are no ‘untouchables’

Don't breach the rules and you won't cop a ban.
Easy to understand.

“Any post that negatively relates to or references, or baits (directly or indirectly) another poster, or posters, or group of posters in the Saintsational Fan Forum or leads to bickering to the level of an ongoing dispute, will be deemed a breach of rules and the penalty will be either a 1 DAY BAN or 1 WEEK BAN.”

You unnecessarily posted a smartass comment that had nothing to do with this topic but was just trying to get another little dig in at a poster you’ve clashed with (baiting) which then lead to bickering back and forth, and him getting banned for a perfectly understandable response (after you dobbed on him).

Seems like a pretty clear breach of the above rule to me.

But ‘untouchables’ are called that for a reason I guess.

You do this constantly. You're an 'untouchable' if such a thing exists. Half of your comments are baiting, bickering or berating other posters. As reliable and compulsive as Curly when it comes to your behaviour. Just own it but don't be a hypocrite.

Happy for you to point out any such posts.

I think you’ll find all (or 99%) are on topic or in direct response to another poster initiating a discussion.

I doubt the site has the bandwidth for me to publish all of your bickering, personally directed attacks mate but I saw in the Toby Greene thread you posted 'Ok Boomer' again.

That's baiting, it's personal -- you use it against Saynta -- and it has nothing to do with the topic and leads to further bickering.

Just to clarify if you want to bicker away with all and sundry I don't care at all. Fill your boots. I don't want you banned for that and I like a lot of your posts.

I just don't like it when people like the idea of banning others for the things they themselves are guilty of.

[The_Dud]

I was going to post something similar along the lines of pot, kettle black. But decided he was not worth the effort.

He is part of a very small group who constantly rubbish the opinins of others.

Just ignore him. I intend to.

LOL

And please, I would love it if you ignored my posts, I’ve been asking you to do that for a very long time

[saynta]

I was going to post something similar along the lines of pot, kettle black. But decided he was not worth the effort.

He is part of a very small group who constantly rubbish the opinins of others.

Just ignore him. I intend to.

LOL

And please, I would love it if you ignored my posts, I’ve been asking you to do that for a very long time

Glad to. If you ignore mine.

[skeptic]

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>

This is what’s wrong with the site.

Constant little digs and disrespect (usually by a certain poster) go ignored, and when someone (rightly) bites back THEY cop a ban.

And it’s claimed there are no ‘untouchables’

The passive harassment/stalking behaviour is a concern. The latest one coming my way is that 2-3 times per week like clockwork a certain forumite thanks me for one of my posts and immediately undoes it.

Based on the frequency, I think it’s an in the rules way of saying I’m still watching you... not that I can forget, it’s been 15 years of carry on at this point

It’s a worry however in that you never know how young ppl are or what they’re going through at a particular time. The constant finger gestures, put downs and character questioning with multiple multiple forumites is quite tiring and details a lot of discussion

I too would utterly love to go onto the list of the ignored but it simply doesn’t last... the more you ignore, the more brazen the attacks

Feel very sorry for St. Byron... is a very nice man who never has a bad word to say about anyone. You can tell that he posts less because of the constant attacks he endures.

[roskilde]

The thing with both of you though -- and Saynta you're as guilty of it as Dud -- you both feed off of it. You can't quit each other! It's sort of endearing in a way. Like an old married couple.

You both COULD have just placed each other on the enemies list at any time but obviously you don't want to.

I'd love to see you both meet IRL and become firm friends. That would be great. Think it might happen if you did as well.

[saynta]

The thing with both of you though -- and Saynta you're as guilty of it as Dud -- you both feed off of it. You can't quit each other! It's sort of endearing in a way. Like an old married couple.

You both COULD have just placed each other on the enemies list at any time but obviously you don't want to.

I'd love to see you both meet IRL and become firm friends. That would be great. Think it might happen if you did as well.

I presume the above post by one of my stalker's is referring to me. I did mistakenly thank him for a post today and I immediately removed it as it is my policy to completly ignore him. My blue but nothing sinister in it as suggested by that poster and to suggest I have some motive or do it fequently is absolute rubbish.

It was merely a case of thanking the post without realising who posted it.

I would prefer if neither of those posters ever replied to one of my posts. They can't help themselves it would appear.

Appreciate your suggestion but I carefully pick my friends.


I would love it if there were no disputes and we all could agree but that is not going to happen.

No room for name-calling or making things up. Too much on here of that and
no I don't place posters on the ignore list as there is no point. They only get quoted.

I merely pointed out to Byron that he was out of touch when he tried to implicate a former mod in the banning of TB. His reaction got him banned.

He overreacted. Not my problem.

[kosifantutti]

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>

This is what’s wrong with the site.

Constant little digs and disrespect (usually by a certain poster) go ignored, and when someone (rightly) bites back THEY cop a ban.

And it’s claimed there are no ‘untouchables’

How many times have you reported the ‘untouchables’?

[desertsaint]

or

http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?t=103269

peoples, if you haven't voted please go and vote to allow tb to remain. even with the rridiculous clause. link above. keeping it at top of new posts.

[skeptic]

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>

This is what’s wrong with the site.

Constant little digs and disrespect (usually by a certain poster) go ignored, and when someone (rightly) bites back THEY cop a ban.

And it’s claimed there are no ‘untouchables’

How many times have you reported the ‘untouchables’?

The problem is indirectly referencing and having digs at people is technically within the rules. Harassment is within the rules.
One doesn’t want to directly call out the behaviour for fear of being banned but when some posts that they’ve been ignoring you more of less on a weekly basis for 10+ years... you get the impression that they’re not ignoring you.

But hey... it’s just me right
And St. Byrons
And Duds
And Teflon
And Joffa Burns before he was banned
And Joffaboy before he had enough

And so on and so on and so on

[happy feet]

Hi.

Thanks for everyone contributing to this conversation.

I have a deep love for Saintsational.

I know that you do too.

I was around for it's creation and always supported the young founder of this site (he was but a teen) and had helped me get the then WWF onto free to air TV in 1997 or maybe 1998 (Channel 10) by getting tens of thousands of Australians signed up to an internet petition on the WWF website. Saintsational was born soon after. His father funded it. Later when money was needed, I organised a fund raiser via the club and hello to anyone who was at the Caulfield Chinese Restaurant in early 2000s when John Beverage agree to speak and the club gave me stuff to auction to raise funds for the site.

As some of you know, he was unable to continue on as administrator of this site due to a professional conflict.

There was a time that admin / moderation was done by others after he left.

Unfortunately it got to a stage where the site had crossed several lines and shut down was being discussed.

I stepped up and put my time, effort and money in to keep this place going.

Every past Mod will tell you that being a mod is a huge task AND the reward is being abused by people. Most simply burn out and ask to stop being a mod.

For years I (and other mods) gave 2nd, 3rd and 4th chances after permanent bans. Allowing posters back in with new nics.

The vast majority of the time they had to be banned again.

This year I made the decision that I was not allowing them back at all.

They have all had the chances prescribed to them.

I owe them nothing more than those chances.

The rules are clear.

I actually don't care WHO it is that breaches them.

If they breach the rules, then the outcome is listed in the rules.

I mourn each and every poster I ban permanently. I hate doing it.

But here is the bottomline - I was tolerant previously and that didn't work.

This is how things are now.

The rules have been set.

I simply assess each report against the rules.

I don't look at who has written the breach until AFTER I have assessed the content.

Only then do I see who the poster is so that I can input the ban into the admin panel.

I now have zero emotion invested in that process.

I wish True Believer all the best.

But banned posters are NOT coming back.

They all have Big Footy and Facebook as options.

Simon

Hi Simon,

Great that you have presented the history of the site, it needs to be acknowledged.

Certainly being a moderator is a thankless task, but I do note the inconsistencies where some posters continually snipe and bait others and noting is ever done about it. It appears to everyone else there are some posters who might be considered as protected species.

The principles of natural justice state that everyone is entitled to be able to ask for a review and be given the opportunity to present their case. Perhaps you may consider this.

[BackFromUSA]

Hi.

Thanks for everyone contributing to this conversation.

I have a deep love for Saintsational.

I know that you do too.

I was around for it's creation and always supported the young founder of this site (he was but a teen) and had helped me get the then WWF onto free to air TV in 1997 or maybe 1998 (Channel 10) by getting tens of thousands of Australians signed up to an internet petition on the WWF website. Saintsational was born soon after. His father funded it. Later when money was needed, I organised a fund raiser via the club and hello to anyone who was at the Caulfield Chinese Restaurant in early 2000s when John Beverage agree to speak and the club gave me stuff to auction to raise funds for the site.

As some of you know, he was unable to continue on as administrator of this site due to a professional conflict.

There was a time that admin / moderation was done by others after he left.

Unfortunately it got to a stage where the site had crossed several lines and shut down was being discussed.

I stepped up and put my time, effort and money in to keep this place going.

Every past Mod will tell you that being a mod is a huge task AND the reward is being abused by people. Most simply burn out and ask to stop being a mod.

For years I (and other mods) gave 2nd, 3rd and 4th chances after permanent bans. Allowing posters back in with new nics.

The vast majority of the time they had to be banned again.

This year I made the decision that I was not allowing them back at all.

They have all had the chances prescribed to them.

I owe them nothing more than those chances.

The rules are clear.

I actually don't care WHO it is that breaches them.

If they breach the rules, then the outcome is listed in the rules.

I mourn each and every poster I ban permanently. I hate doing it.

But here is the bottomline - I was tolerant previously and that didn't work.

This is how things are now.

The rules have been set.

I simply assess each report against the rules.

I don't look at who has written the breach until AFTER I have assessed the content.

Only then do I see who the poster is so that I can input the ban into the admin panel.

I now have zero emotion invested in that process.

I wish True Believer all the best.

But banned posters are NOT coming back.

They all have Big Footy and Facebook as options.

Simon

Hi Simon,

Great that you have presented the history of the site, it needs to be acknowledged.

Certainly being a moderator is a thankless task, but I do note the inconsistencies where some posters continually snipe and bait others and noting is ever done about it. It appears to everyone else there are some posters who might be considered as protected species.

The principles of natural justice state that everyone is entitled to be able to ask for a review and be given the opportunity to present their case. Perhaps you may consider this.

1. There may be "constant sniping" but unless it is reported, then assume it has not been seen or assessed for a breach of rules / ban
2. There are no protected species (except me as I have the keys to the joint) but to be banned there has to be an actual breach of rules worthy of a ban
3. Within the rules, there is an appeals process for a permanent ban and that process has laready commenced - see the sticky in this forum

[asiu]

Great that you have presented the history of the site, it needs to be acknowledged.

yeeeeees

which version though ?


seen through who's eyes

the (ex) once flourishing community's
or the constabulary's

history always had two versions minimum

[happy feet]

Hi.

Thanks for everyone contributing to this conversation.

I have a deep love for Saintsational.

I know that you do too.

I was around for it's creation and always supported the young founder of this site (he was but a teen) and had helped me get the then WWF onto free to air TV in 1997 or maybe 1998 (Channel 10) by getting tens of thousands of Australians signed up to an internet petition on the WWF website. Saintsational was born soon after. His father funded it. Later when money was needed, I organised a fund raiser via the club and hello to anyone who was at the Caulfield Chinese Restaurant in early 2000s when John Beverage agree to speak and the club gave me stuff to auction to raise funds for the site.

As some of you know, he was unable to continue on as administrator of this site due to a professional conflict.

There was a time that admin / moderation was done by others after he left.

Unfortunately it got to a stage where the site had crossed several lines and shut down was being discussed.

I stepped up and put my time, effort and money in to keep this place going.

Every past Mod will tell you that being a mod is a huge task AND the reward is being abused by people. Most simply burn out and ask to stop being a mod.

For years I (and other mods) gave 2nd, 3rd and 4th chances after permanent bans. Allowing posters back in with new nics.

The vast majority of the time they had to be banned again.

This year I made the decision that I was not allowing them back at all.

They have all had the chances prescribed to them.

I owe them nothing more than those chances.

The rules are clear.

I actually don't care WHO it is that breaches them.

If they breach the rules, then the outcome is listed in the rules.

I mourn each and every poster I ban permanently. I hate doing it.

But here is the bottomline - I was tolerant previously and that didn't work.

This is how things are now.

The rules have been set.

I simply assess each report against the rules.

I don't look at who has written the breach until AFTER I have assessed the content.

Only then do I see who the poster is so that I can input the ban into the admin panel.

I now have zero emotion invested in that process.

I wish True Believer all the best.

But banned posters are NOT coming back.

They all have Big Footy and Facebook as options.

Simon

Hi Simon,

Great that you have presented the history of the site, it needs to be acknowledged.

Certainly being a moderator is a thankless task, but I do note the inconsistencies where some posters continually snipe and bait others and noting is ever done about it. It appears to everyone else there are some posters who might be considered as protected species.

The principles of natural justice state that everyone is entitled to be able to ask for a review and be given the opportunity to present their case. Perhaps you may consider this.

1. There may be "constant sniping" but unless it is reported, then assume it has not been seen or assessed for a breach of rules / ban
2. There are no protected species (except me as I have the keys to the joint) but to be banned there has to be an actual breach of rules worthy of a ban
3. Within the rules, there is an appeals process for a permanent ban and that process has laready commenced - see the sticky in this forum

I have made reports several times and all that you say is to use the ignore function. So I have given up reporting it and formed the view that they operate under your protection.

[skeptic]

Hi.

Thanks for everyone contributing to this conversation.

I have a deep love for Saintsational.

I know that you do too.

I was around for it's creation and always supported the young founder of this site (he was but a teen) and had helped me get the then WWF onto free to air TV in 1997 or maybe 1998 (Channel 10) by getting tens of thousands of Australians signed up to an internet petition on the WWF website. Saintsational was born soon after. His father funded it. Later when money was needed, I organised a fund raiser via the club and hello to anyone who was at the Caulfield Chinese Restaurant in early 2000s when John Beverage agree to speak and the club gave me stuff to auction to raise funds for the site.

As some of you know, he was unable to continue on as administrator of this site due to a professional conflict.

There was a time that admin / moderation was done by others after he left.

Unfortunately it got to a stage where the site had crossed several lines and shut down was being discussed.

I stepped up and put my time, effort and money in to keep this place going.

Every past Mod will tell you that being a mod is a huge task AND the reward is being abused by people. Most simply burn out and ask to stop being a mod.

For years I (and other mods) gave 2nd, 3rd and 4th chances after permanent bans. Allowing posters back in with new nics.

The vast majority of the time they had to be banned again.

This year I made the decision that I was not allowing them back at all.

They have all had the chances prescribed to them.

I owe them nothing more than those chances.

The rules are clear.

I actually don't care WHO it is that breaches them.

If they breach the rules, then the outcome is listed in the rules.

I mourn each and every poster I ban permanently. I hate doing it.

But here is the bottomline - I was tolerant previously and that didn't work.

This is how things are now.

The rules have been set.

I simply assess each report against the rules.

I don't look at who has written the breach until AFTER I have assessed the content.

Only then do I see who the poster is so that I can input the ban into the admin panel.

I now have zero emotion invested in that process.

I wish True Believer all the best.

But banned posters are NOT coming back.

They all have Big Footy and Facebook as options.

Simon

Hi Simon,

Great that you have presented the history of the site, it needs to be acknowledged.

Certainly being a moderator is a thankless task, but I do note the inconsistencies where some posters continually snipe and bait others and noting is ever done about it. It appears to everyone else there are some posters who might be considered as protected species.

The principles of natural justice state that everyone is entitled to be able to ask for a review and be given the opportunity to present their case. Perhaps you may consider this.

1. There may be "constant sniping" but unless it is reported, then assume it has not been seen or assessed for a breach of rules / ban
2. There are no protected species (except me as I have the keys to the joint) but to be banned there has to be an actual breach of rules worthy of a ban
3. Within the rules, there is an appeals process for a permanent ban and that process has laready commenced - see the sticky in this forum

I have made reports several times and all that you say is to use the ignore function. So I have given up reporting it and formed the view that they operate under your protection.

I second that

One can be referenced and insulted indirectly and called a stalker frequently…
You bite back you get a holiday, you report you’re told to ignore. I got a holiday for making a joke about working at McDonald’s… but I’m allowed to be called a stalker repeatedly.

Maybe it’s worth a thread of its own given the level conflict surrounding the one issue

[The_Dud]

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>

This is what’s wrong with the site.

Constant little digs and disrespect (usually by a certain poster) go ignored, and when someone (rightly) bites back THEY cop a ban.

And it’s claimed there are no ‘untouchables’

How many times have you reported the ‘untouchables’?

I generally don’t like reporting people unless it’s for blatant homophobia/racism etc.

But as others have said already, if you raise anything you just get told to ignore it.

I had a PM discussion with the boss a few months ago after I was banned for my part in a back and forth with a certain poster (even though what I was saying was correct as the boss begrudgingly agreed) and when I raised the other poster’s blatant rule violations and questioned why they weren’t also banned, I was basically told by the boss that he agreed with/liked him more than me so he didn’t really care about the violations.

I was also told that if I continued to ask for clarification over the incident he would permanently ban me even though this was my first ‘strike’.

So yeah, untouchables.

I know it must be a difficult and unrewarding job, but don’t preach a set of rules and a fair and even playing field if there’s not, just say “I’m the boss and I adjudicate how I want”

[skeptic]

I also think the selectiveness that comes with the rule... not being allowed to talk about other posters prevents people from directly raising their frustrations

There’s simply no consistency in what ppl are allowed to do/not do. Like I said above, I got a ban for needling someone even though I didn’t say their name and that very thing has happened to me in this thread with no action... I’ve reported and been told to ignore, and a quick history search would produce 10+ incidents of where it’s happened before

Protected species

[happy feet]

I received 3 emails from one of our usual baiters. Threatening, abusive, aggressive and totally out of line. I reported them to Simon expecting a ban, that’s how bad they were, but no action was taken. Told to put on the ignore. Protected species.

[BackFromUSA]

I received 3 emails from one of our usual baiters. Threatening, abusive, aggressive and totally out of line. I reported them to Simon expecting a ban, that’s how bad they were, but no action was taken. Told to put on the ignore. Protected species.

You imply that you sent me these e-mails. You didn't. I cannot and will not take action on your word alone.

Evidence can still be sent to saintsationalentry@gmail.com

If they are as you claim "Threatening, abusive, aggressive and totally out of line." then they will be fully investigated and action taken if appropriate.

But I am not taking action just because you say it.

[BackFromUSA]

I hear your complaints and fully grasp that you feel there is favourtism and a so called protected species. I assure you that there is not.

Firstly the so called protected species has received bans when that person has crossed the line ... they are just very good at understanding where the line is and not crossing it ... most of the time. And the protected species has received significant bans and penalties before, but has adjusted to the new rules.

This is the best way to try and explain the rules and the way they are enforced and the penalty system and hopefully you can relate it to your circumstance.

SPEEDING RULES AND FINES

The speed limit here is 60kmh.

One driver is constantly driving at 63kmh.

He knows that at 63kmh he is exceeding the speed limit and going faster than allowed technically by the law.

However he also knows that the speed camera system is configured in such a way that if caught, he will only get waway with it or a warning letter at best.

If occassionally he is caught at 65kmh he knows that he will get a smallish fine and 1 demerit point (out of 12) - but he is also smart enough to use cruise control when driving so these instances are few and far between. Before accelerating further, he always checks the speedometer ... and adjusts accordingly.

Now the other drivers on the road see this driver and think he is a bit of a smartass and they don't like the way he drives - maybe he is driving in the right lane constantly, when the correct and polite thing to do is to move to the left. Or maybe he is driving a super fancy car and just looks like a tool.

So what they decide to do is hoon past him at 72kmh and they get caught by the speed camera.

They get a bigger fine and lose more demerit points.

Of course it is all the other drivers fault for being a bit of an ass.

Not their fault at all when of course they had the option to be patient, or even turn off and take another way around.

And of course the police are at fault too - they fine / penalise them, but not the original driver who was technically speeding too.

Of course the other driver was smart enough to have been technically breaking the law but not enough to be penalised.

Now the police understand that the second driver is furious that they are penalised and the first driver is not .... BUT is the answer that the first driver be penalised?

If that was the case then EVERYBODY who drove over 60 would have to receive a fine and penalty equal to the ones that were being issued for speeds over 64kmh.

If that happened, then there would be many more fines and demerit points issued, more licenses suspended (one week bans) or licenses lost (permanent nic bans) AND more outrage.

Claims of it being a POLICE STATE would replace those claims of a PROTECTED SPECIES.

So the Police decide to administer the law in the best, most balanced way that they can. They allow the 5% wiggle room of the speed limit.

And clever drivers continue to use cruise control in their cars to make sure they remain at or under 63kmh while ignoring driving etiquete and laugh to themselves as frustrated drivers speed by ...

The reality is the driver will continue to use the law to their advantage (as much as they can) and watch others crash and burn.

Other drivers would be best served ignoring that driver (the FOE function) ... or even finding a way to just undertsnad the actual game being played and find a way to swing the game back to their advantage (use the REPORT function to report baiting - rather than react to it)

Interestingly this advice has been given previously and ignored.

Which begs the question ... is there another game at play ... and am I the target?

I would hope not.

But it really is an interesting question.

[BackFromUSA]

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>

This is what’s wrong with the site.

Constant little digs and disrespect (usually by a certain poster) go ignored, and when someone (rightly) bites back THEY cop a ban.

And it’s claimed there are no ‘untouchables’

How many times have you reported the ‘untouchables’?

I generally don’t like reporting people unless it’s for blatant homophobia/racism etc.

But as others have said already, if you raise anything you just get told to ignore it.

I had a PM discussion with the boss a few months ago after I was banned for my part in a back and forth with a certain poster (even though what I was saying was correct as the boss begrudgingly agreed) and when I raised the other poster’s blatant rule violations and questioned why they weren’t also banned, I was basically told by the boss that he agreed with/liked him more than me so he didn’t really care about the violations.

I was also told that if I continued to ask for clarification over the incident he would permanently ban me even though this was my first ‘strike’.

So yeah, untouchables.

I know it must be a difficult and unrewarding job, but don’t preach a set of rules and a fair and even playing field if there’s not, just say “I’m the boss and I adjudicate how I want”

Misrepresentation of the highest degree!

WOW.

I do not give a damn about anyone here - I neither like or hate anyone. Nor am i the judge of right or wrong in an arguement between 2 (or more) posters.

However IF this is the sort of thing that you need to comfort yourself when you feel harshly done by, then so be it.

[st.byron]

[
I merely pointed out to Byron that he was out of touch when he tried to implicate a former mod in the banning of TB. His reaction got him banned.

He overreacted. Not my problem.

"Merely pointed out".

That would be something like, "KFT is no longer a mod".
That's pointing out. A bit of kindness. Letting someone know something they've missed. That kind of thing.

Describing someone as "out of touch" and adding rolly eyes is rude and insulting. It's consistent with your history of ongoing low level sniping.
The only thing wrong with the post for which I copped a day's holiday was the use of the word "f*****". That was over the line and worthy of a holiday.

The essence of the message that you're often abrasive and unpleasant stands. And if there's no room on the forum for calling out that kind of behaviour then what to do.

That you now seek to position yourself as a rule follower and on the high moral ground is a position, the irony of which won't be lost on anyone who's been on here for any length of time.