Why is Zerogain going downhill?

As someone who appreciates vinyl and JBLs, I'll be your friend, Merlin.
BTW are you looking for TAD compatible horns?

 

Merlin's much less pleasant in real life you know...

-- Ian

 

Bah, your're just jealous 'cos Merlin has full-sized components

 

I'm not sure whether he has any components at all at the moment, can't keep track of the bugger.

-- Ian

 

Joel,

Yes I need a TH-4003 but the UK can't supply Looks like the JBL solution - it's about half the price anyway!

Take no notice of Ian BTW, he's only jealous because his system is devoid of meters and tone controls.

And I'll also add my support for Bub - I added him to that ignore thing a few days ago and hadn't even noticed anything had happened.

 

It's got more ceramic than average though.

-- Ian

 

Let me see if I can find something for you over the weekend. No promises, and they aren't cheap, but it's worth a try.

 

I'd like to draw your attention to the following part of the AUP:

"If any member has been removed from the forum for whatever reason they should no longer be the subject of any discussion, this is only fair as they no longer have any right of reply."

Any discussion relating to Bub or his banning breaks the AUP, and such posts will be deleted. I'm not going to enter into discussion about moderator decisions.

Michael.

 

Sorry Mike, but that's stupid. My deleted post was directed at the mods and not at any banned member, and thus didn't need a response from a banned member.

You are of course entitled to your moderating decisions, but a forum where one is not allowed to discuss moderating decisions (in a sensible, non-confrontational fashion) is not one where I'd like to be.

No need for you to answer this one either, I just like to speak my mind and expect to not have my posts deleted when I do so.

 

^ What he said.

-- Ian

 

Same here. If a banned member's name can't be mentioned, how do we know that he has been banned? It's rather perverse that we can be in breach of the AUP without knowing it.

I certainly didn't know he was banned up until this point.

reg

:Bub:

 

Sooo , what,s the goss ?

 

someones been booted - guess who

 

FFS sake guys, I've got a very busy day and I don't want to waste my time discussing this. The AUP is quite clear in respect of referring to banned members. I don't have the time to weigh up each moderating decision on it's individual merits. If a post breaks the AUP, it gets deleted. No discussion.

Michael.

 

I've re-opened the thread now that I've had time to address some of the issues raised.

I don't think that discussing the pros and cons of specific moderating decisions, particularly decisions to ban a member are healthy for any forum. It's hard and time consuming enough to moderate fairly without having to justify every decision in detail to anyone who disagrees with it. However, I don't have a problem with discussing the forum moderation in a more general way.

Banning a member is not a decision that's taken lightly and, except in cases where there's clearly no need for discussion (eg: if a new member joined and started posting racist material), is always discussed amongst the moderators. The moderators btw are myself, Robbo, julian2002, bottleneck and HenryT. There have been very few bannings on ZG, less than 5 people I believe (allthough some of those have been banned more than once). Generally the reason is that either repeated and blatant breaking of the AUP and ignoring moderator warnings or the fact that they have been doing more harm than good to the forum by constantly getting themselves into flame wars.

Arguably, flame wars could be more aggresively moderated but given that all of the mods have full time jobs and lives beyond the forum it's often too late before a mod spots a battle and by then the damage has usually been done. If there's one member that seems to always be involved then it's simply easier just to ban that member. Of course it takes two to tango but it's usually clear who the key player is.

Now I realise that if people are to abide by the AUP and not discuss banned members then they have to know who is banned. I will think about the best way to do this without making an unnecessary spectacle of bannings. In the thread above, it was quite clear from the edit I made to merlin's post that Bub was banned and that discussing him or his banning would break the AUP yet everyone then weighed in with their own opinion of the matter, utterly disregarding what I'd just said. There's no point in having an AUP if the moderators don't enforce it. Some breaches are open to interpretation but discussing banned members it not.

Bans are usually temporary. If I remember correctly, there are only two people (allthough they may have used more than one alias) who are banned permanently.

Lastly, Lawrie, if you have nothing useful to add to the forum other than utterly baseless accusations of biased moderating then please stay away.

Michael.

 

Fair point(s) Michael, your forum and your rules. No issues at all with your rules really. I have never knowingly posted anything offensive and my posts were just meant to be jovial (I don't think there's enough laughter in the world), that's why I couldn't see why they posts were deleted.

Also another point is that a lot of people didn't initially know that the person had been banned, so we were joking about him not knowing that we were referring to a banned member. Edit: sorry you have already made this point.

Edit: I do appreciate how difficult and time consuming the moderator's job is.

 

Don't know if any of you remember a scene from the last 5 minutes of the second series of one of the best TV series ever - This Life - when Warren, who's been away for a fair while, walks into a wedding to see a punch being thrown....and wonders what the hell's going on..

I'm feeling a bit like Warren...





..except for being gay.



Chin up Michael!

 

So, are you coming out ?


or was Warren gay?

 

You never saw This Life then? Shame, it was great..

 

Fair enough, but I do think that as a (hopefully) adult member of this forum I should be allowed to comment on your decision. You don't have to justify that decision to me, but public feedback can't hurt. Keeps you from the danger of getting out of touch with members' feelings.

Of course, that means that I as a member have to keep my comments short, to the point and reasonable, or I make life miserable for you and you'll have every reason to eventually pull the plug on this forum.

Maybe you could have a little faith in your members and trust them to behave responsibly. Those who don't should get the boot anyway.