Let's have a Christmas amnesty.
- 22 December 2012 21:32207124By the same token we should all, in the spirit of reconciliation, cut the moderators a bit of slack as their job is not an easy one. However for a happy relationship to prevail in the future, decisions by the moderators should be more open, warnings should be issued in open forum and the entire process become less Kremlinesque.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
- 22 December 2012 21:45207125let's start with peter's preferred list.
1, 2 and 5 are relentless in ridiculing the forum and its members on dover locals and facebook.
3 because of demands from members and members of the public to do so.
sorry simon i have no recollection of the two names you mention ever being members let alone being banned. - 22 December 2012 22:12207126So that's a yes to David, then.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
- Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,894
22 December 2012 22:30207127I doubt if Bern would come back even if allowed, there seems to be too much animosity on both sides from what I have read.
I hope that means a yes to David.-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
------------------------------------------------------------------- - 22 December 2012 22:39207128Well there is some good news! Yarrow is swell peddle cant remember what name Liz used. I cant seem to access a list of members.
Anyway, I look forward to reading David again
Merry Christmas
- 22 December 2012 23:04207129Cat got your keyboard, Howard?
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson - 22 December 2012 23:08207130I hope all of this does not put too much pressure on those Howard chooses to invite back. I half expect back-flips, cartwheels and wit...two out of three would do me.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - 23 December 2012 06:50207133Should we need to know the reasons for those people's bans first ? I have been told that Chris P has a facebook page that is advocating people do not post on here; I also understand that some of the "anonymous" posters on Dover Locals (a number of them post on here under their real name) are really insulting to Dover Forum and its members/posters.
I like to read other people's views and contribute where I can; as far as I am aware, I have never been rude/insulting to anyone.
I don't post on here to be objectionable; I don't read the postings to get upset, but for enjoyment and to be informed - isn't that the same for everyone ?
Roger
PS: I didn't know Stephen and Liz were banned - do you know why Simon ? - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
23 December 2012 08:18207137Without having the full facts on bans it would be impossible for me to say ay.
I have seen some of the comments made on other sites about dover forum, not to some of those named persons credit, and im sure if i were them i wouldnt want to rejoin such a site.
some were far from complinmentary(to put it politely)
The moderators of any site have a difficult job don't forget some of those calling for the reinstatatement of others are on other sites
moaning about dover forum yet post on here(if i held that opinion i wouldnt bother i would stick to these other less known sites)
Of course I could muddy the waters further by saying these other sites are not much better if we look at banning
i made one post disagreeing with one member just telling him his post was not factual (dover locals)
and i was warned of being banned
and funnily enough joint members of dover locals/forum(some moderators ofdover locals)supported the view that i shouldnt have an alternative factual view!!!!
Any way happy christmas peter and all the best for 2013ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 23 December 2012 08:22207139I regret to say this is sounding like a bit of a witchunt against the two guys in charge now and its not acceptable. heavens sake even going back years to an era when people posted using pseudynoms. None of us then knew who anyone was.
Peter posting again...was taken by suprrise there!
But all this needs to stop.
The two guys took over to keep it going when i retired. I was on the verge of shutting it all down. Now they are being harrangued by a number of people on here for doing just that. They should be supported. It is an extremely difficult thing to do.
People who were excluded totally deserve it and who would want to moderate if all of them came back..abusers, bile peddlers, and so on. Roger is right, the stuff some of them peddle on the internet confirms it.
If the guys here receive complaints they have to act on it in this day and age..society demands it now.We were even featured on TV and national newspapers several times in the past and in a not very nice light for allowing stuff to go un-moderated.
As is often the case, the guys behind the scenes know a lot more than is generally known, so give them the support. Some of the posts on these threads are rather over simplistic Im afraid...for example if members of the public have complained about an individual for abusive posting, doverforum cant be seen to turn round and re-instate them five minutes later...not in this day and age.
People need to understand that.
Clearly some people on here now are not friends of Doverforum. Simon Crowley for example..on here a wet day and seems hellbent on being disruptive..has added nothing to the wellbeing since he joined and posts on nothing other than repetitive postings on David Little...(I feel sorry for David in a way, he quietly took it on the chin but has had his name spread over everything ever since..if a few thousand look at the thread several thousand more only read the headline).
If someone repetitively posts on the same thing its called spamming. Simon has been asked to stop several times. he has had all explained by the two editors and he keeps persisting. He has stopped the forum in its tracks engaging in other topics..because all this puts others off. Its unfair to other members who dont care either way.
Generally If someone is abusive to others you have to stop them in this day and age, and if they dont stop you have no choice but to exclude. There is no other way. Another forum allows all and sundry but is it a success...most definitely no. Surely that tells you something.
Also in my experience and i did it for a very long time...some would say toooo long
when the agressive abusers leave, the posting level goes up.
If people persist in running down the guys here then I recommend they leave and join another forum...where there are a couple of sad cases running on bile, clearly preferring to be here as is obvious in every post.email: dover7@msn.com - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
23 December 2012 08:29207142Thank you for that imformative post paulb
enjoy your retirement lol
im with you on thatALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
23 December 2012 09:26207151paulb.well said. - Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,894
23 December 2012 09:28207152No forum can or will ever be perfect for everybody all the time so people let off steam where they can without the risk of being suspended. As with any group there are those perceived as troublemakers while in actual fact they are simply putting an alternative view.
Free speech should rule even if some would rather not hear what is said.
In the present climate that is around the forum at the moment I feel that by just posting the above I could get suspended or banned which is not a nice feeling or how things should be.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
------------------------------------------------------------------- - 23 December 2012 09:41207153The problem is you can't keep everyone happy at the same time - some will say the bar is set too high and there's too much abuse, others that it's too low and stifling valid criticism of viewpoints they disagree with, as Jan says.
Not an easy one to get right and have a vibrant forum, I wouldn't like to try to do it.
On a related point, I do think a trick was missed with the change to new ownership and the posters with older 'anonymous' or single name logins could have been asked to have a new profile with their full name, as newer posters do - I was introduced to DT1 in the Just Reproach but wouldn't have known him otherwise (and he's a really nice chap!) - 23 December 2012 10:05207159#30
" all this needs to stop"Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - 23 December 2012 10:15207161Top posting Paul BAudere est facere.
- 23 December 2012 10:20207162Paul.
Well defended, its mostly black and white for us, not so for the moderators( not a job I would take on)
Jan.
I am willing to learn from anyone but will not be influenced by other's regarding what I post.
I am who I am and if I get banned then so be it, continue with your post's without fear.
Has BarryW gone away, I see no post from him on this one?"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum" - 23 December 2012 11:06207163Thanks PaulB - and yes you are right, although I wouldn't single out Simon necessarily - he is a close associate of David's and feels he should be re-instated. I don't know the ins and outs of the cat's backside on these issues and as you say, there's more than meets the eye.
Roger - 23 December 2012 11:51207166Apologies...in error I put this post on a similar thread......
# 30...totally agree...there have been some genuine posts but the majority have been an organised Mexican Standoff... - 23 December 2012 11:52207167#30, PaulB: I had decided not to post until David was reinstated but realised that I was cutting off my nose to spite my face. Hence trying a more diplomatic approach which I hope will succeed. David is always outspoken and always incensed that his business rates bring nothing in return. So he attacks politicians on the forum. Some may see that as rudeness or unreasonable behaviour but all politicians are fair game, if they don't like it they should step down from the forum or restrict their input to the anodyne.
Please therefore demonstrate that the forum is not an establishment poodle by bringing David back. In the few short months he has been getting involved he has helped to achieve much. Excluding him is beginning to look like an act of spite.
No moderator can get it right 100 percent of the time and on the rare occasions when they have got it wrong they ahould admit it and back down, not retreat into the bunker. This, I believe, is one of those times.
And please also refer to #21 above.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson