Forum Vote for Mods

[Guest caraprof]

peter - 2007-07-25 11:27 PM Me-thinks he doth protest too much. Have you taken the vow Frank?. What with all this piousness and protestation of innocence. :D

I list below a post from Bazza, written after your attack on me. This sums it up. If anyone is protesting too much it's you. You know that your attack was ill-mannered and rude and no squirming now will change that.

On the bottom of page one of this thread, Bazza said:

Have to agree with Frank on this.

The whole discussion has been based on the Moderater ensuring that the threads are in or moved to the correct place.

Peter, I think that you have either misunderstood the thrust of the original discussion or purposely set out to be slightly controversial.

I rest my case.

[Dave Newell]

Judgement in favour of Frank. Peter sit down, shut up and stop being an awkward bugger :D :D

 

D.

[CliveH]

 

I read all this in disbelief!

 

The www enables superb communication.

 

This forum is just one example where it is free at the point of use and basically anyone can say anything.

 

We all freely contribute and freedom of speech applies. But Control Freakery is trying to take over.

 

The overall subject matter is based upon leisure activities.

 

And so far we have had a chap who posted about Canals and Narrow boats being told he is not wanted by a control freak

 

As well as certain individuals who see a personal attack in almost everything they see!

 

Some people on here beggar belief.

 

I find myself less and less "in-tune" with the pathetically puerile "He said that" and "He said this" nature of the posts.

 

How different from the magazine itself. Little wonder then that most posts seem to be from the same clique who just post over and over again.

 

Which is a shame because other forums have a far healthier far wider contribution base.

 

I would suggest that the antagonistic nature of some posts are driving people away.

 

 

 

[J9withdogs]

CliveH - 2007-07-26 10:35 AM

 

I would suggest that the antagonistic nature of some posts are driving people away.

 

 

 

I PM'd a newbie last week who had been soundly jumped on by a regular contributer. She apparently never logged on again. :-|

[Guest peter]

CliveH - 2007-07-26 10:35 AM

 

 

I read all this in disbelief!

 

The www enables superb communication.

 

This forum is just one example where it is free at the point of use and basically anyone can say anything.

 

We all freely contribute and freedom of speech applies. But Control Freakery is trying to take over.

 

The overall subject matter is based upon leisure activities.

 

And so far we have had a chap who posted about Canals and Narrow boats being told he is not wanted by a control freak

 

As well as certain individuals who see a personal attack in almost everything they see!

 

Some people on here beggar belief.

 

I find myself less and less "in-tune" with the pathetically puerile "He said that" and "He said this" nature of the posts.

 

How different from the magazine itself. Little wonder then that most posts seem to be from the same clique who just post over and over again.

 

Which is a shame because other forums have a far healthier far wider contribution base.

 

I would suggest that the antagonistic nature of some posts are driving people away.

 

 

Well said Cive. That about sums up the way this forum is going. How sad when you can't have a view that differs from the "control freaks" amongst us. God help anyone who asks about A-Frames as they will be imediately reprimanded by the armchair lawyer mafia. It's time that some members who proclaim to have a sense of humour, practiced it instead of seeing every comment as a personal attack.

[michele]

Peter & Clive H .

Just asking please why do you both think that anyone wants to be a policeman ? What has given you that idea Pete?.

 

It was only ever about changing threads to correct places It was never about stopping people having Views & opinions .

 

More like just keeping chatter in chatter and big boy stuff in M/H matters that sort of thing . It was and is not about banning members or jumping down people throats I don't think anyone ever suggested that either .

People like Brian Kirby whom have been put forward I don't see as a control freak 8-)

[CliveH]

Hi Michelle

 

The truth is Michelle that some on here DO jump on others as soon as they post - the example from J9withdogs above is exactly what I mean.

 

The Canal and Narrow boat nonsense was another.

 

And then as I say we have the "he said this/ he said that" childish nonsense of which there is more than one CLASSIC examples (complete with repeats!!!!!!!)

 

Maybe it's the rain - but I think some people that habitually post on here need to get out more.

 

[Victor Meldrew]

Dave Newell - 2007-07-25 5:22 PM

 

In general there isn't a problem with threads drifting away from the original topic as long as any questions posed by the topic starter get answered and the diversion follows some sort of logical path, like it has in the jack handle thread in Motorhome Matters. The problems only arise with going "off topic" when it is a diversion into totally unrelated subject matter, TC's posting on here about taxing his car is actually an excellent example of this.

 

I think the fact that no moderator or administrator has commented on this thread speaks volumes!

 

D.

 

Taxed it this morning actually Dave, done it on-line, much easier than going to the post office.

 

Whilst checking my documents I discovered that my MOT runs out shortly, I’ll let you know when I’ve had the car tested.

 

[twooks]

Hi 'chele,

 

you see it that way because that's the way you are, straightforward, some people prefer to see hidden agendas - that's the way they are - I think it's called paranoia

 

forget it, go away - chill out and have some fun - then come back to the same old same old crazy mixed up site. At the end of the day does it really matter that much if posts get stuck in the wrong slot - after all - if you always use the 'New Threads' option and 'Search' for old stuff you can generally find what you want - or that should be 'one can find what one wants'.

As long as newbies are pointed gently in the right direction -

 

and now the sun is actually shining - so as Clive says - I'm getting out while I can

 

:D :D

 

 

 

B-)

[donna miller]

IMHO we get along fine in real life without too much interference from moderators, in fact most of us complain like mad about the "big brother " culture of Britain, so why cant we all be adult enough to survive in a virtual community without one.

 

Is it really that big an issue if someone inadvertantly starts a thread in the wrong section, or goes off topic ( unless it's done just to antaganise people), does anybody talk about other subjects when they meet at a m/home show, of course they do. If it's important enough to be moved, it will be. Life shouldn't be put into little subsections, it should be enjoyed.

 

I do believe that there are a growing number of people on here who are too immature to be mixing with the majority of fun loving, helpful and humorous members of this community, of course threads go off topic on here, as they do in real life, but I have found that the more important the subject, the less likely it happens. And that it obviously happens more in the general chat section, because thats what it's there for.

 

So please people, stop taking this forum more seriously than life itself, if you've got an opinion then let us know but dont throw a strop if somebody disagrees with it.

 

And to those posters who take every word as a personal attack (no names, no pack drill), how the hell do you manage in real life, if I met you at a show or rally, I would avoid conversation with you like the plague, for fear of upsetting you and having to put up with the sort of manner you display on here. A lot of the time it's nothing short of bullying,and keyboard bullies are the worst and most cowardly kind of all.

 

I might not have 1000s of postings like some people, but I have dozens of friends in the caravan and motorhome world, and I'm ashamed to say that the vast majority of them avoid this site mainly because of the actions of the mindless minority, and who can blame them.

 

 

[Dave Newell]

So we're now immature mindless control freaks, wow!

 

Donna Miller's final paragraph sums up exactly why we do need moderators on here.

 

As for Donna's opening paragraph "IMHO we get along fine in real life without too much interference from moderators, " this is totally fallacious. We do have moderators in real life, we call them the Government and the Police force.

 

D.

[J9withdogs]

Dave Newell - 2007-07-26 1:20 PM

 

So we're now immature mindless control freaks, wow!

 

Donna Miller's final paragraph sums up exactly why we do need moderators on here.

 

As for Donna's opening paragraph "IMHO we get along fine in real life without too much interference from moderators, " this is totally fallacious. We do have moderators in real life, we call them the Government and the Police force.

 

D.

 

Hey, Dave, IMHO that's a tad strong.

 

Perhaps it's a bloke/gal thing? *-)

 

and it's still bl**dy raining here :-(

[MandyAndy]

Well said Donna, got to agree with most you said. I am also very nervous of posting on here, so many jump as though they are just waiting for the chance to put you right or condemn. I read the postings about 3 times a day and it goes from someone trying to goad others into a fight, or someone rewriting the entire works of a motorhome in answer to a very simple question (you know those where you loose the will to live half way through).

 

I will still keep adding to things I feel certain of , but nothing that might be deemed as questionable or my own opinion.

 

Thanks to all those who make me smile on a daily basis and all the info I have gleamed from this forum.

Mandy

[donna miller]

Dave Newell - 2007-07-26 1:20 PM

 

So we're now immature mindless control freaks, wow!

 

Donna Miller's final paragraph sums up exactly why we do need moderators on here.

 

As for Donna's opening paragraph "IMHO we get along fine in real life without too much interference from moderators, " this is totally fallacious. We do have moderators in real life, we call them the Government and the Police force.

 

D.

 

Dave

This is exactly what I am on about, Who called you an immature mindless control freak, I said there were a mindless minority on these forums, ( read the line "no names etc) however, if you wish to associate yourself with that description, then be my guest, am I not allowed to express MY OPINION without replies like this.

 

My observation about not needing moderators in real life refered to being able to talk amongst friends and collegues, without being told that I was not allowed to talk about such things during a conversation being held, maybe it was too unclear in what I actually wrote.

 

If I came to you for a speed limiter for my motorhome and you started to talk to me about another subject, or asked me about my family for instance,do you think then it would be acceptable for me to tell you that you were talking off topic and should stop straight away, and if you wanted to talk about the weather, then phone Sian Lloyd. Of course not.

 

And as for my final paragraph, there are active moderators on here already, and they dont seem to be doing a very good job.

[Dave Newell]

Sorry Donna my opening line was not aimed at you, I picked up on several terms that had been used by different members and only one word of that came from you. As I've said earlier in this thread going "off topic" per se is not at issue here. If there is a logical path that a thread takes then fine but if someone jumps into a thread about how best to change a wheel and says "I took my dog for a walk this morning" then that is clearly a non logical diversion that might well mean the topic starters questions don't get answered. As for active moderators, well if we really did have active moderators this thread would be redundant by its very nature.

 

D.

[donna miller]

J9withdogs - 2007-07-26 1:25 PM

 

 

Hey, Dave, IMHO that's a tad strong.

 

Perhaps it's a bloke/gal thing? *-)

 

and it's still bl**dy raining here :-(

 

Thanks J9, maybe as a mere girly (with a Class 1 HGV, who regularly takes out abnormal loads of 25 metres in length and 6 metres wide),plus being an advanced scuba diver who holds a private pilots licence, I should stick to the knitting or flower arranging forums, because I obviously know nothing about life.

 

And yes the rain is chucking it down here in South Wales.

 

:D :D

[CliveH]

Donna - well said - I could not agree more.

 

Dave - what are you like!!!! - Donna and i specifically said that only certain individuals take things personally - and then you go and do just that!

 

Absolutely bloody amazing!!!!!!!!!

[donna miller]

Dave Newell - 2007-07-26 1:46 PM

 

Sorry Donna my opening line was not aimed at you, I picked up on several terms that had been used by different members and only one word of that came from you. As I've said earlier in this thread going "off topic" per se is not at issue here. If there is a logical path that a thread takes then fine but if someone jumps into a thread about how best to change a wheel and says "I took my dog for a walk this morning" then that is clearly a non logical diversion that might well mean the topic starters questions don't get answered. As for active moderators, well if we really did have active moderators this thread would be redundant by its very nature.

 

D.

 

my writing of my last post has overlapped yours, and apology accepted, I do actually have you down as being one of the more sensible people on here, so was surprised at your reply.

 

 

[J9withdogs]

donna miller - 2007-07-26 1:51 PM

 

J9withdogs - 2007-07-26 1:25 PM

 

Thanks J9, maybe as a mere girly (with a Class 1 HGV, who regularly takes out abnormal loads of 25 metres in length and 6 metres wide),plus being an advanced scuba diver who holds a private pilots licence, I should stick to the knitting or flower arranging forums, because I obviously know nothing about life.

 

And yes the rain is chucking it down here in South Wales.

 

:D :D

 

You know, this is so weird. At first reading,I actually took Donna's reply to me the wrong way and thought she was having a 'pop' at me.

 

Just goes to show that, without seeing people's faces when the reply, how words can be misconstrued!

 

[michele]

Well you are all correct of course its so funny not to see people talking when you talk we rely on body language this helps obviously to assess the persons mood and subconciously we are all taking that in when we talk.

 

Sometimes certain people will assume that they are being put down or belittled I can assure you all that one I,m not like that and two if I have a problem I say so . I did not join this to fall out with people quite the oposite i would rather make friends with people and learn from them.

 

I don't know all of us can't get it right all of the time can we *-)

why oh why can we all not agree to differ instead of wanting a verbal punch up in cyberspace ... :D

i know some people hate these smiley things but in all honesty I think in cyberspace when we cannot see what someones body is telling us then they are a god send.. (lol) (lol) :D

[Victor Meldrew]

Dave Newell - 2007-07-26 1:46 PM

 

Sorry Donna my opening line was not aimed at you, I picked up on several terms that had been used by different members and only one word of that came from you. As I've said earlier in this thread going "off topic" per se is not at issue here. If there is a logical path that a thread takes then fine but if someone jumps into a thread about how best to change a wheel and says "I took my dog for a walk this morning" then that is clearly a non logical diversion that might well mean the topic starters questions don't get answered. As for active moderators, well if we really did have active moderators this thread would be redundant by its very nature.

 

D.

 

 

I’m not surprised you thought Donna had you in mind Dave, I did as well.

[donna miller]

Thanks again J9.

 

I really must learn to use new sentences more often. Thus avoiding confusion.

 

It should have read, "thanks for the support J9" and then gone on to say the bit about girlies etc. in a new paragraph,

 

 

 

 

[J9withdogs]

donna miller - 2007-07-26 3:51 PM

 

Thanks again J9.

 

I really must learn to use new sentences more often. Thus avoiding confusion.

 

It should have read, "thanks for the support J9" and then gone on to say the bit about girlies etc. in a new paragraph,

 

 

 

 

No probs, Donna - us girlies have to stick together - we all know that men come from a different planet :D

 

But that is just my opinion and I don't want to cause any offence - I'm thinking about making that my signature to go at the bottom of all my postings *-)

 

PS I was a qualified firing range control officer - and I can shoot with deadly accuracy. :D

[Dave Newell]

As its plainly obvious that some have misinterpreted my comments I'll explain a little better (perhaps). My reference to Donna's final paragraph illustrating why mods are needed stemmed specifically from this comment "I'm ashamed to say that the vast majority of them avoid this site mainly because of the actions of the mindless minority," . My reference to Donna's opening paragraph was quite clear I feel. Donna didn't make it clear that she was referring to a conversation in real life.

 

I'm sorry if anyone found this offensive in any way, it was certainly not meant to be.

 

I really don't understand why so many members are against the idea of having member moderators, as I've said every other web forum I've looked at uses them to great advantage.

 

D.

 

Oh and by the way, nowhere did I say I felt the finger was pointing at me personally, I said WE.

[donna miller]

So are we all still friends then ?