Page 1 of 1

Forum Moderation

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 8:37 am
by Rich G
Oh dear. I thought there was just an outside chance of turning it into a civilised discussion but if we are back to hurling insults I don’t really want to spend any more time on a badly-run property forum.

Re: Glenn Armstrong

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:08 am
by Nick
Rich G wrote:if we are back to hurling insults I don’t really want to spend any more time on a badly-run property forum.


As the only person responsible for the running of this forum I would like you to justify that comment please. Why is this Forum badly run?

Re: Glenn Armstrong

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:16 am
by Rich G
Because you allow personal abuse and take part in it yourself.

Re: Glenn Armstrong

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:35 am
by Nick
Can you give examples?

Please note that I haven't had a complaint about anything current.

Re: Glenn Armstrong

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:41 am
by Nick
At a guess you are complaining about:

You first said you were now making enough money to give up your job, i.e. you're financially free. Then you said you weren't. I don't really believe you are as the only deal you shouted about which actually came off, I think you made about £8K off? You do seem to big yourself up on FB about how you "always do this" and "never do that" and "whenever you've bought at auction, you've done this" but I suspect you're talking out of your Arsenal. What other actual money have you made off deals this year? You'll have to forgive me for me being direct, and ignoring all the philosophical carp. I don't really give a shoot for how happy you say you are now (I know myself and all members here have terrific family and friend relationships, but don't have to protest about it on the internet - funny that!).

Back to the point - how much actual net profit have you made this year from property (not carpentry)? I really do rise to the challenge of confronting and outing bullshit on the internet, and I suspect (as I have done for a long time) that you spout as much bullshit as some of my close, real life, farming friends do whilst muck spreading.


:?:

Re: Glenn Armstrong

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:53 am
by Jo King
Rich G wrote:Because you allow personal abuse and take part in it yourself.


And you calling people Diickheads, Numpties, Witches and Negheads on a public forum is acceptable behaviour?

Everyone is perfectly aware you came here to provoke a fight - your reputation goes before you Rich. Are you miffed because you didn't get one? You just got straight talking non confrontational answers from Nick but still you kept on trying. Nick has been an utter first class Gent and considering your treatment of him I think he deserves better from you.

Re: Glenn Armstrong

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 10:41 am
by Nick
Rich,

In defense of my moderation:

1) There have been no complaints.

2) With the comment quoted above - it is not a personal insult, or an argumentum ad hominem
Image

  • You are promoting people (Glenn Armstrong, John Corey, Ahm Charles) without substantiating your promotions.
  • In the last week specifically you made statements about the G&A Property/Glenn Armstrong/Kenny Ranns v Teresa Rollands County Court Case which weren't factually correct (although I concede that you haven't actually admitted that you were wrong).
  • Therefore justification for your statements and promotion of people (Glenn Armstrong, John Corey, Ahm Charles) is based upon your experience and expertise in the areas that you are promoting them on.
  • I see that last night Rachel made a statement about you on Facebook, which this morning you refuted by challenging her experience and expertise in property.


On that basis I think that it is entirely reasonable to question and challenge your experience and expertise in the areas that you are pronouncing on.


I have the following difficulties in my moderation:

  • I have a number of personal involvements which mean that if this were a team moderated board I would ask someone else to take the decisions. It isn't so you will just have to accept my moderation, and publicly justifying myself. I have privileged information about individuals, but I have not brought any of this information into debates.
  • Rachel refers to multiple instances of your BS. It would indeed be better if she were to challenge you piecemeal, in each different location of your statement. However we don't live in a perfect world, and I can accept her making a generalisation. I would suggest that you ask her to substantiate anything that you think is unwarranted (with links to examples if appropriate).

That is the logic for not deleting the post.

Re: Glenn Armstrong

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 10:50 am
by Rich G
Wow you guys really hate me don't you.

Re: Glenn Armstrong

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 11:04 am
by Nick
Rich G wrote:Wow you guys really hate me don't you.


Maybe we just live on different planets. I just spent a long time justifying myself to you, and talking about unsubstantiated statements, and that is your response! :lol:

Re: Glenn Armstrong

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 2:07 pm
by Jo King
Rich why does it always have to be about you? I don't hate you, that's a playground word.

Don't detract from the important issues - can you substantiate what you came here to tell us about Glenn & Teresa's situation or not? Nick has given you valid reasons why your 'source' may be incorrect & anyone can check their validity - it would be better to accept, deny or drop the subject, not turn it into another attention seeking moment or attack on friends who you chose to drop & publicly mock elsewhere.

Re: Glenn Armstrong

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:49 pm
by Chrissy
Shut up baldies


now there's a personal insult for both sides.

Re: Forum Moderation

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 9:42 pm
by Nick
Rich G wrote:I know you can edit other people's posts as you once did it to Jo and she didn't like it either.


Yes - I can do practically anything that I want, but I don't. It's very unfair of you to pick on the one occasion in 5 years when I altered a genuine member's post. It was obvious what I had done, and you are right she didn't find it funny, but it's unfair of you to imply some wider conspiracy.

I can also set the forum so that members CANNOT edit their posts, in fact I think that is the default. It's a common setting, some software only allows editing for 3 mins after posting. In the internet at large there seems to be a problem with people changing what they have said, or deleting the record of it. Indeed I have received a complaint about you doing this yourself, and I know that you are aware of the problem and spend time each day making a record of all your conversations and forum postings so that you are protected against a forum owner deleting or editing them.

To date the idea is that this forum is populated by adults who are given control over their own postings, and are trusted to use it fairly and wisely. The exception to this are spammers who are treated mercilessly and unfairly by the admins and moderator.

Re: Forum Moderation

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:03 pm
by Lynda
I don't think we treat spammers unfairly, Nick. They deserve everything they get!

Re: Forum Moderation

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:20 pm
by Ruth
Lynda wrote:I don't think we treat spammers unfairly, Nick. They deserve everything they get!


:clap: :clap:

Re: Forum Moderation

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:30 pm
by Nick
Lynda wrote:I don't think we treat spammers unfairly, Nick. They deserve everything they get!


ROFL