Attack on Andy

[rupert123]

Has anyone else seen the attack made on Andy over on MHF where a moderator accused him of only joining their forum for his own ends. Having spoken to Andy on the phone and exchanged insults with him by email he probably cares less about this but I do. I did not agree with him a lot of the time but he was always straight with his comments back to me. The rule on MHF that you cannot attack a moderator or even disagree with them is a recent one and pretty poor I will not rejoin that forum when my current subscription runs out. Thats it rant over, would be interested to know others thoughts on this, or am I over reacting as usual?

[Guest JudgeMental]

I with many others, left when subs where introduced and the heavy handed moderation worthy of a 3rd world junta started! *-)

[EJB]

I came here to get away from it........I suppose it will be in the Sunday papers next.

For goodness sake *-)

[Brian Kirby]

rupert123 - 2010-12-18 12:56 PM Has anyone else seen the attack made on Andy over on MHF where a moderator accused him of only joining their forum for his own ends. Having spoken to Andy on the phone and exchanged insults with him by email he probably cares less about this but I do. I did not agree with him a lot of the time but he was always straight with his comments back to me. The rule on MHF that you cannot attack a moderator or even disagree with them is a recent one and pretty poor I will not rejoin that forum when my current subscription runs out. Thats it rant over, would be interested to know others thoughts on this, or am I over reacting as usual?

Do you still have access to it Henry?  I can't find it, and the only promising candidate seems to have been locked.  Can you post a link?

[rupert123]

Brian Kirby - 2010-12-18 1:15 PM

rupert123 - 2010-12-18 12:56 PM Has anyone else seen the attack made on Andy over on MHF where a moderator accused him of only joining their forum for his own ends. Having spoken to Andy on the phone and exchanged insults with him by email he probably cares less about this but I do. I did not agree with him a lot of the time but he was always straight with his comments back to me. The rule on MHF that you cannot attack a moderator or even disagree with them is a recent one and pretty poor I will not rejoin that forum when my current subscription runs out. Thats it rant over, would be interested to know others thoughts on this, or am I over reacting as usual?

Do you still have access to it Henry?  I can't find it, and the only promising candidate seems to have been locked.  Can you post a link?

I have not got a clue how to posts links Brian, if you explain will do so. The thread was removed with frantic attempts by other moderators to cover it up. It has now been re instated in two parts, one is just about the usual Fiat thing which you should be able to see the other with all the other stuff has been placed in the subscribers forum which you cannot see unless you subscribe. Even here some of the stuff has been removed, myself and several others who were incensed have been blocked from posting on this thread. I will copy and paste the original remark so anyone who cannot see this is free to comment.

[rupert123]

Sorry cannot even do that now Brian, I have been blocked from the suscribers thread completely.

 

To summerise a new thread was started about the problems with the Fiat 3ltr clutch. Another member posted Andy's latest position on this, with I believe Andy,s permission. Another poster suggested it was a pity Andy was no longer subscribing to the forum. Up popped a moderator who clearly stated it was his opinion that Andy having got what he wanted had then cleared off. Not his exact words I am afraid because as stated I can no longer access the thread, I know others on here are members and it may be helpfull if one of them could paste the moderators original comment. Many whom Andy had helped were infuriated by this and said so but rather than just say sorry the mod. simply did not comment further and another three sprung to his defense. It is a rule on MHF that no one can disagree or in any way criticize a moderator.

[Mel B]

Which forum are you talking about? Motorhome Fun or Motorhome Facts?

[rupert123]

Mel B - 2010-12-18 2:04 PM

 

Which forum are you talking about? Motorhome Fun or Motorhome Facts?

MH Facts Mel.

[Mel B]

Ta- Thought it might be, I couldn't quite believe the 'fun' mob would be like that!

 

The 'hollier than thou' and 'thou shalt not criticise the mods' attitudes were just two reasons why I've never joined the facts forum.

 

I'll just stay here with you lovely (mostly *-) ) lot!!!! :-D

[747]

I was following the thread and I was a bit surprised at the post in question. I think it was more a case of a badly written post than an attempt to be nasty to someone.

 

I am quite happy to see a moderator getting a taste of his own medicine however. I have been chastised by a couple of them because my sense of humour goes over their heads sometimes.

[colin]

Not quite sure which thread is which, but here's the thread with rupert1 comment deleted.

http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftoptitle-98244-message-from-andy-stothert-re-3-litre-x250.html

[rupert123]

colin - 2010-12-18 3:53 PM

 

Not quite sure which thread is which, but here's the thread with rupert1 comment deleted.

http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftoptitle-98244-message-from-andy-stothert-re-3-litre-x250.html

 

Colin as I said it has been split into two. The one you have listed is the subscribers only one so most will not be able to read it. A lot of comments have been removed. As I have now been banned from both threads along with others seen as trouble makers not sure what is going on now.

[Brian Kirby]

rupert123 - 2010-12-18 1:36 PM ................ I have not got a clue how to posts links Brian, if you explain will do so.

Two ways.  (I am assuming a PC.  If a Mac, afraid I can't help further.)  First and simplest is to take your cursor up to the address bar at the top of the screen, where the http:// etc stuff begins, right click on it to open the pull down menu, select copy, and then bring the cursor back down and click in the forum edit box, then right click there and select paste from the edit options.  You should now see a copy of the url so: http://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/forums/thread-post.asp?action=reply&replyto=239743"e=yes  Then, just carry on typing as normal and, when finished, submit your post.  You should see the link appear, as in this post, as blue html text, underlined in the edit box, but without underline in the preview screen, and in the actual post.

These can get a bit tedious because they sometimes come out long and screw up the viewing screen after posting - those very wide windows that disappear off to the right of your computer screen.

So the second way is to download this: http://tinyurl.com/  This gives a truncated url that works as well as the original, but takes up far less room and can equally well be used in e-mails etc.  You can copy the url to your "favourites" so that whenever you want to post a link to a web page, you just click the Tiny shortcut to go to their web page.  Process is fairly self-explanatory on their site.

The thread was removed with frantic attempts by other moderators to cover it up. It has now been re instated in two parts, one is just about the usual Fiat thing which you should be able to see the other with all the other stuff has been placed in the subscribers forum which you cannot see unless you subscribe. Even here some of the stuff has been removed, myself and several others who were incensed have been blocked from posting on this thread. I will copy and paste the original remark so anyone who cannot see this is free to comment.

Thanks Henry.  All gone!  I guess one of the moderators had a little brainstorm, but was stamped on very quickly.  Even your comment had disappeared by the time I got there, so his attitude can't have been "official"!  Does one castigate them for having a fallible moderator, or praise them for acting quickly when he failed?  Forgive and forget, maybe?

[rupert123]

OK Brian thanks for that. As to the moderators it was the way they acted I and others objected to. They did not just remove it but 'ganged up' to excuse it, the originator could have just said sorry I made a mistake. Also the rule they have that no one can question anything they say or do is a little 'over the top'. This is one of the reasons I prefer this forum as although we all fall out on occasion it all seems to resolve itself without the little hitlers bit. Anyway I must be getting bored, not much to do at the moment, but am off to the alps sking on the 2 January for a few weeks.

[Corky 8]

IMO.Any attack on Andy is a none starter to begin with, all Fiat owners on this forum and others are only really aware of the judder factor of their Motorhome due to Andy, most would have persevered with the problem gearbox thinking it was their own lack of ability in reversing the dreaded thing , Andy brought it to the forefront and took on Fiat (spit), to get a resolution to the Problem and most if not all of the fixes completed under warranty is down to Andy.  I had the unfortunate experience of buying one from New ,the biggest Mistake of my life, which I have now rectified, But I will never even look at a sevel based Vehicle again,         I have been tempted to subscribe to Motorhome facts as I often visit the forum to glean tips and knowledge from all sources, but had an uneasy feeling about the forum the way it is controlled,now proved myself correct in not Subscribing,  From me   " Thanks and  Respect Andy"

 

[Sophie]

Could this help?

 

Relevant Posts from Moderator "acting as Member", following the first Post quoting Andy's account of the situation with 3 litre Fiats:

 

a)

"Could it be that he has no interest in MHF now he has got what he wanted? Rolling Eyes

 

Seemples!"

 

A little later:

b) "but doesn't it seem a bit strange ............that we never heard a peep from him before he had a problem, and he hasn't renewed his subscription since it was solved? Confused"

and then

c)" I was just picking up on ....'s..comment, and wondering why Andy has no further interest or involvement in MHF now the campaign has been won (mostly!)."

 

From here several members (especially one who apparently knew Andy more than most) came to Andy's defence and suggested that the Poster/Moderator was off the mark in making insinuations that Andy had been selfish in his motives. There were suggestions (reasonable imo) that the initial Mod/member should apologise or at least explain/admit he was wrong.

 

The result was that, rather than an apology, other Moderators intervened and in effect accused certain members of harassment/attacking the initial Mod/member. This was seen by some (again reasonably imo) as Mods coming to the support of another mod...yes,"ganging up" if you like.

 

The final, relevant post on this matter was by a member (none Mod) as follows:

 

"Let me make something clear. I started this thread, indirectly at Andy’s behest, to provide information which may be useful to x250 3litre owners

 

The thread was then “high jacked”,firstly inb a minor way by a member and then by a Moderator, (alriight, a member who happens to be a Moderator) who hiked things up a scale or two by insinuating that Andy’ s motives were selfish.

 

What's more the insinuations were repeated and endorsed by “very happy” emoticons- indicating that ..... was very pleased with himself for having the wit to suggest such a thing.

 

Let’s not be taken in by (the Pster's) “only my opinion of course” comment. The fact is , whether posting as a “member” or not he IS a Moderator, and as such should know better than to jump in and escalate what was intended to be an informative thread, to a discussion on the initial writer’s motives.

 

A Moderator's role presumably includes overseeing Posts and arbitrating on the very issues he’s been guilty of. So in that sense the roles overlap, with the cosequent potential of role conflict (only my opinion of course!)

 

And now, because I defend Andy and provided EVDENCE to show these insinuations were incorrect it seems I'm accused of “attacking” and "harassment" . So what about the "attacking" and "harassment" of Andy??

 

“it is against the rules to take issue with a moderator or challenge what a moderator says. There is no appeal and there are no exceptions.”

 

This bothers me, as does ......'s reference to " a very good website with a draconian set of rules" -I think he's right, My subscription expires in a few weeks and I have a lot of thinking to do.

 

To conclude- a final extract from Andy's last comment to me this morning .."But let it die a death ..... - the debate really should be about the vehicle, and not ........."

 

Another "nail in the coffin" of the (seemingly) few who may still believe he did all that for selfish reasons?

 

I'm now letting it "die a death".. and I'm out"

 

(I have the Poster's permission to post this here)

 

The Mod concerned was not "stamped on" at all let alone "very quickly"!

 

A bit difficult to summarise but that's about it

 

 

[Guest JudgeMental]

welcome Sophie....a good few of us left MHF for these very reasons a long time ago...som trully awful people on there, I am constrantly astonished that people put up with such heavy handed management...I am sure they would not be so gulliable in other areas of their lives...It makes you fink!

[Guest pelmetman]

Cor!...................... people pay to be on a forum 8-)

[Mel B]

Hi Sophie, welcome to the mad house. :-D

 

Thanks for the posting, it is appreciated.

 

If people only knew of a fraction of the hard work, time and effort that Andy has put in to get those with 'faulty' 'vans a fix from Fiat, with all the aggro, messing about etc, etc, they'd be proposing that he be Knighted!

 

Remember that if he had just wanted to be 'selfish' he could have taken up his converter's offer to take his van back and get his money back - but he didn't, instead he stuck it out and fought with Fiat for what should have been done from the very start.

[Sophie]

Thanks Mel-and that is what annoyed a number of Posters on this particular MHF thread who knew more than the person/Mod who decided to post unjustified "throw away" remarks.

 

And to exacerbate the situation a) it was perceived that other Mods combined to "protect" the individual concerned and b) that individual lacked the moral fibre and courage to extend apology/regret for his comments.

[Rosbotham]

I've no great inclination to get involved in this debate, but it does irritate me when half a story is told. As I'm a sub over at MHF, I do have access to the subscribers bar. Actually, as the mods over there killed what they viewed to be the unacceptable content, but only after someone else had quoted it, I think I'm actually able to see the content that got Rupert thrown off the thread as well.

 

Two main elements have been missed from the description above.

 

Firstly, when the person who (allegedly) questioned Andy's motives in joining MHF (allegedly) did so, they were abundantly clear in the pre-amble that they were putting forward a personal view and not doing so in the role of a moderator. In my working life I'm chair various committees, so in that context have a bit of sympathy that it can be difficult to separate personas. However they were absolutely clear they were making their comments in a personal capacity.

 

Secondly, the post above was somewhat selective in quoting. The MHF poster went on to say

 

>>

What a brilliant member of MHF he could have been if he had taken a genuine interest in the members and contributed more widely from his vast knowledge and experience.

 

I just think it's a shame he's not still here adding enormous value to our community. Even if he has been "gagged" on the one specific issue as you suspect, there's so much more he could contribute if he felt inclined.

>>

 

I wouldn't defend some of the choice of words, but the sentiment of the poster was that it was a shame that having sorted the Fiat issue out, Andy was stepping back from internet fora, and that was a loss to the internet fora given his wealth of knowledge. I don't have an issue with that and wouldn't actually perceive it as an attack (if anything the opposite).

 

Unless some of Rupert's material was removed from the subsequent quote as well as his initial post, his crime was to ask the question of "who moderates the moderators". I don't know if the outcome was right or wrong, but it's inevitable that if you have a pop at the moderators on any internet forum, you will be shown the exit.

 

Paul

[Sophie]

Dress it up as you wish Paul but the Poster (who happened to be a Moderator) who gave most offence (not just to Rupert but several others) implied (nay stated) that Andy's motives were selfish. And when others protested-in reasonable terms- they were told in no uncertain terms by OTHER Moderators that this was an "attack" and "harassment"

 

And despite subsequent Posts pointing out his errors, the silence by that Poster, (quick to make his initial observations) was deafening.

 

Yes- the Poster did acknowledge the work Andy did,. (Bear in mind though this was only after another Poster said his comments were unfair!) . But this was subsumed (and ultimately virtually forgotten by the end of the thread) by his (some may say) sarcastic inference regarding his motives.

 

One other Poster did say that, as a Moderator, he should have known better-and I agree. Escaping any criticism by hiding behind the title of Moderator is not acceptable.

 

Nor is the strongly perceived practice of unjustified "ganging up" on others.

[sshortcircuit]

"I don't know if the outcome was right or wrong, but it's inevitable that if you have a pop at the moderators on any internet forum, you will be shown the exit. "

 

Wow, what arrogance.

[Guest peter]

If that's their attitude, I wouldn't even bother joining in the first place.

 

[rupert123]

Well said Sophie, put better than I did. As to Paul he sounds like the moderator, their was no half truth here that is what he said. On the MHF forum you can thank a poster just by pressing a 'thanks' button. My email is full up tonight with peole saying thanks, a novel experience for me, so a hell of a lot agree with what has been said. Not me just having a go because someone is a moderator, I care less about this, but because someone has gone way over the top. I have had another go but my posts are being deleted guess I will get thrown of completely any day now. From now on I will stick with argueing with you lot a much better class of argument. If Andy is watching all this sorry mate but I seem to have put my hoof in it again.