bollox solicitors/barristers are instructed to defend/prosecute said people in the eys of the law the court judges them innocent/guilty not jo blogs public with their own agendas.., wheres your comment regarding pros counsel/solicitors attacking the innocent? hmmmm

Jeez [size=59(other deities do/may well exist)[/size



You go away for a few hours to do Her Maj's bidding, come back and find a fair little old spat going on and a none too little spewing out of emotion all over the board . . . . . who'd have thunk it

. . . oops godda be careful with that one, apparently

To make it clear the "icon_rolleyes.gif " was simply that. No hidden meaning. I was simply rolling my eyes on yet another "anti" Mac comment. I saw no great harm, nor major personal insult in doing so - I was evidently wrong.

Given the strength of feeling that generated I'm happy to let lie, on this occasion, my new [itag [/iof "[imost unimpartial moderators I have ever seen on a message board[/i". I'm sure other Mod's would not.

Of itself that does not mean it is open season for ignoring the AUP. It is a one off, as a gesture of goodwill, if you will.

I'm more than happy to discuss with anyone via PM - as numerous, current and lapsed, posters on here are readily aware - on all things posted. Specifically so if I have caused offense / people have issue with others posts. I try to deal with such matters, contrary to comments here, in an impartial and objective manner. If anyone feels that I haven't, then at least do me the courtesy of letting me know so that I can review/revise what's occurred, seek the guidance and gauge views of other Mods.

I did toy with the idea of addressing all of the above via PMs - but I've tried that already in the past and it doesn't appear to have been worth my effort.

Thanks to which ever Mod split the thread whilst I was away - much appreciated.

BP . . . . . . . . . . .

What comment is that then?

point exactly you are happy to have a go at solicitor fighting for rapist etc, but failed to have a go at the otherside fighting to send down innocent people....

Indeed. Then that makes it closer to 100% of lawyers then and further strengthens my point. Cheers boss!

Dearie me today.

I can't speak for any other mods but I'd be happy to use this specific thread to reach a consesus on moderation of these boards and indeed any aspect of the moderation process.

Whilst the rule about not criticising mods helps prevent every thread becoming a mess, if we were to keep it solely in this one thread I wouldn't have a problem with that. That said, I am clearly a little too placid to have irked anyone that much and the fire would be aimed at other mods.

Anyway that's my thoughts for the record. I'm happy to have my moderation questioned in a calm structured manner.

TBH I can't really be ar5ed reading this thread all the way through but if anyone wants to question the mod process on here in a civilised manner then it doesn't bother me.

If you think you know more about the laws of the game than a referee then become one or STF up. If you don't like the mod levels on here become one or STF up. The difference is refs get paid for the abuse they receive.

To set the matter straight, I have not criticised the moderation process on here, rather one individual mod, whom, after being caught out dishing out abuse of me in a place where he thought he would not be seen, and basically saying that the only reason FA gets involved with arguments is because I goad him into them, knows full well why I have an issue.

Some quick thoughts while I wait for my headache tablets to kick in...



I suggest people need to first get clear whether they have an issue with a mod in his capacity as a poster, or in his capacity as a mod?

If the former, then there is no reason whatsoever to bring the poster's status as a mod into it. Is there? Deal with it like you would deal with an issue you have with any other poster!

I had an issue with the attitude of what seemed to me to be a small clique of posters on another board. Who just happened also to be the mods. And despite more than one of them trying to suggest otherwise, I made my position perfectly clear throughout. And I took the advice of one wiser than me, and just packed in posting on there. No one had died, after all, and if its not enjoyable no-one forces you to post! One suggests that option is open to anyone who has issues with other posters - one reason why I believe few post on the T&A rantaboard, for example.

If the latter, then there is a process in place in the AUP for dealing with it, is there not? And mods on here have gone well beyond that anyway by inviting civilised public debate.

And again, if anyone has an issue with a mod or the process, there remains the alternative option of - again - just not bothering to post. I did just that when I had an issue with a mod in his capacity as mod not poster. Again, hey no-one died! And despite me at first being angry, what benefit in all the hassle arguing would bring? Life is far too short. If he wanted to act like a muppet (as I saw it) let him do it on his time not mine. So I just buggered off, till he did. An option open to anyone who has an issue with moderation, since (and despite the commendably laissez-fair approach of the current mod team) RLFans is not a democracy and does not pretend to be.

Alternatively, if a mod has an issue with a poster surely they should have the guts to mention this in the open rather than in an "encrypted zone" where they think that they can say what they like without being caught out?

Unfortunately it was not kept as "private" as they would have liked and when caught out, nothing was done about it.

Maybe his thoughts about you would have breached the AUP?

Indeed they did.

Not a good example being set then?

However, I have made my point, I have no further wish to add anything else on this matter.

How did you come to find out about this encrypted zone containing comments about you?

Just to answer you BB, I was sent a PM of it by another RL Fans poster who gained access to the zone in question.

Since most parties involved have now said they aren't going to say any more on the matter, is it not worth locking this now?


(I appreciate I said I wasn't gonna bother reading it again, but I was bored

)

FA?

That poster can presumably only have been another mod? And not necessarily on this board?

If that is the case, is that person fit to be a mod?

1. Not a mod.
2. Not from this board.
3. Probably not!

(BTW I said I did not want to comment on the issue anymore but I am merely replying to questions!)

To avoid any possibility of doubt . . . . . it's me



I'm the one . . . .

This Mod/poster is the one that ME has the, apparently ongoing, issues with.

This Mod/poster is the one that commented, on a private board, that he was not disappointed that ME had taken his bat home and wasn't posting at that time. . . . along, broadly speaking, with the earlier comments on this thread about ME's ability to get reactions out of other posters with his comments/games. There was also some flippant comment about repairing Hadrian's Wall . . . . . . .

This mod/poster is the one who went to some length to discuss the issue, by PM, with ME when he chose to post several paper thin veiled / barbed comments about the above several months ago.

This is the Mod who still has the PM's from ME on that position and our joint agreeing to move on.

This is the Mod/poster who hasn't commented publicly on other PM comments (sort of like private boards really - ironic or what

)

This is the Mod who is content in the knowledge that his integrity, following that slip in judgment, is better intact.

This is the Mod/poster who's come back from doing Her Maj's bidding for a second night and found even more spewing of emotion and playground tactics . . . . and so is locking this thread (that'll be the because I'm the most unimpartial moderator ever seen on a message board, apparently)