Dev
Moderator
speaker cable
- Thread starter oceanobsession
- Start date
- Status
.penance
Arrogant Cock
So, Mikes underhand snipes are not snide, or is he included in the characters?
Dev
Moderator
Andy, you don't have to read too many posts in this or any cable thread to make that judgement for yourself. It's sad to see ZG reduced to this.
penance
Arrogant Cock
That is true, a shame to see Mike reduced to that behaviour.
mr cat
Member of the month
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 3,375
- Reaction score
- 5
yeah, it's even sadder than these perputators don't get banned...
take a leaf out of this super wanker, sorry mods book -
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=668834
take a leaf out of this super wanker, sorry mods book -
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=668834
lordsummit
moderate mod
Basically as a mod you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. Moderate and you're preventing free speech. Don't moderate and you're letting the wankers win. Deal with a problem, and you've taken sides.
These speaker cable debates are just going round in circles. TBH I haven't got the time nor the inclination to read pages of grown men going round in circles, and calling each other names. Bit like primary school children except they know some bigger words. In fact a lot like.
I'm very tempted to either roll all the cable debate into one thread and let you all get on with it Lord of the Flies style, or just to remove these threads when they appear. I've got better things to do as has Dean and Dev. Believe it or not we do this job for no recompense, in our own time, and tbh I could happily live without the grief.
I could easily ban people, but except in really extreme cases that solves very little. Who should I ban now? Who's caused what, who's responded to whom, who's called whom a bad name? Personally I think it's better to warn people when they've stepped over the line and then to respond if they repeatedly ignore the AUP. I don't think we've failed to do that. Bans are for repeated extreme obnoxious behaviour.
Helpful suggestions are welcome. But without banning cable discussions, I can't see an obvious solution. Can anybody else?
Anyone publishing a list of names to be banned by the way will be banned themselves !
These speaker cable debates are just going round in circles. TBH I haven't got the time nor the inclination to read pages of grown men going round in circles, and calling each other names. Bit like primary school children except they know some bigger words. In fact a lot like.
I'm very tempted to either roll all the cable debate into one thread and let you all get on with it Lord of the Flies style, or just to remove these threads when they appear. I've got better things to do as has Dean and Dev. Believe it or not we do this job for no recompense, in our own time, and tbh I could happily live without the grief.
I could easily ban people, but except in really extreme cases that solves very little. Who should I ban now? Who's caused what, who's responded to whom, who's called whom a bad name? Personally I think it's better to warn people when they've stepped over the line and then to respond if they repeatedly ignore the AUP. I don't think we've failed to do that. Bans are for repeated extreme obnoxious behaviour.
Helpful suggestions are welcome. But without banning cable discussions, I can't see an obvious solution. Can anybody else?
Anyone publishing a list of names to be banned by the way will be banned themselves !
Dev
Moderator
Andy, whatever Mike has done do you think he deserves comments such as the one below?
As LS has already said, we could ban people but we like to do that only as a last resort. In cable debates certain participants from both sides need to be banned IMO.
Anyway, I'm going to lock this thread now and delete the offending posts when I have more time.
- Status
