PDA

View Full Version : Why is it that ...



Iain Sinclair
03-06-2008, 19:49
... every time a thread starts to get interesting, someone locks the fucker?!

Mike
03-06-2008, 19:52
I don't know....

But it's getting to be bloody annoying TBH!

:steam:

I feel a 'resignation' coming on.

Marco
03-06-2008, 19:56
Guys,

What would you rather - arguments going round and round and round and round...forever?

Or what, exactly?

Marco.

Mike
03-06-2008, 20:03
Sorry Marco, but locking threads all the time does exactly what you are trying to prevent IMHO.

Everything just re-surfaces in another thread or the 'perpetrator' ends up getting banned. Neither situation is good for the forum.

If these 'arguments' (your phrase) were allowed to run their natural course they would either reach a conclusion or die a natural death.

Insults and such like would still need to be moderated of course.

:confused:

Filterlab
03-06-2008, 20:08
But they don't Mike, if you read the 'rant' thread it's just the same old crap going on and on, the same idiot spouting the same negative drivel about the same idiotic views on an industry that is supposed to be of interest.

And actually there's only been one thread locked recently, bearing in mind there's almost 600 threads on here that's a slim percentage in anyone's book.

If it worries you we can always take a different tact; instead of locking it we'll just delete it completely. No locked threads, everyone's a winner! :)

Mike
03-06-2008, 20:20
if you read the 'rant' thread it's just the same old crap going on and on, the same idiot spouting the same negative drivel about the same idiotic views on an industry that is supposed to be of interest.

That's the whole bloody point of a rant! :doh:

*Note* - Are the words in bold exactly what Richard has been 'chastised' for using by any chance?

Filterlab
03-06-2008, 20:25
That's the whole bloody point of a rant! :doh:

Indeed it is the point of a rant, but the way Richard chooses to undertake his ranting (i.e. personal attacks rather than reasoned arguments) does NOTHING positive for the forum at all, other that is than put off potential new members (trust me, I look at the trend charts a lot), and in that case what's the point in having the rant blather on loop tape style? Say it once, make a point, but don't go on and on attacking people for disagreeing.


*Note* - Are the words in bold exactly what Richard has been 'chastised' for using by any chance?

No.

Steve Toy
03-06-2008, 20:35
Richard has gone further than using the term 'idiot.' Perhaps calling him one doesn't exactly lead by example but it is warranted given the antagonistic line he's taken. It's a case of if you dish it out, expect to get it back.

Filterlab
03-06-2008, 20:37
I hadn't even noticed him calling me an idiot. He can call me whatever he likes as his opinion is of no value whatsoever to me, whether it be in a personal or professional regard. What Steve or Marco choose to chastise is their business, take it up with them. What I can add though is that Steve, Marco and I all sing from the same song sheet and will generally take similar courses of action.

By all means though Mike, put a quote up of the post where he referred to me as an idiot, because I can't see it. :)

Mike
03-06-2008, 20:47
By all means though Mike, put a quote up of the post where he referred to me as an idiot, because I can't see it. :)

Sorry Rob....

Apparently that is not allowed.

:steam:

Filterlab
03-06-2008, 20:48
Sorry Rob....

Apparently that is not allowed.

:steam:

Why? :scratch:

Mike
03-06-2008, 20:49
see PM

Marco
03-06-2008, 21:00
By all means though Mike, put a quote up of the post where he referred to me as an idiot, because I can't see it. :)


Rob,

It was here (post #29 of Richard's):

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=650&page=3

But someone seems to have further edited it (not me). Initially Richard referred to you as an "idiot", and I blanked it out the remark with a series of "*****".

Marco.

Filterlab
03-06-2008, 21:01
This is daft folks.

Richard isn't even on at the moment ad he's started an argument between admin and mods!

Mad.

Marco
03-06-2008, 21:03
I'm not arguing with anyone - I'm just pointing out facts :)

Marco.

Filterlab
03-06-2008, 21:04
I was referring to earlier in the thread.

Marco
03-06-2008, 21:06
Yep. It's interesting to note that none of this was happening before Richard reappeared - everything was running very smoothly... :)

Marco.

Filterlab
03-06-2008, 21:07
I know, and the wave of new members has oddly stopped.

Mike
03-06-2008, 21:27
This is daft folks.

Richard isn't even on at the moment ad he's started an argument between admin and mods!

Mad.

No he hasn't. It just looks that way!

Why isn't there a bloody 'tongue in cheek' smiley?

:scratch:

Marco
03-06-2008, 21:29
Tee hee... :eyebrows:

Marco.

Iain Sinclair
03-06-2008, 21:51
But they don't Mike, if you read the 'rant' thread it's just the same old crap going on and on, the same idiot spouting the same negative drivel about the same idiotic views on an industry that is supposed to be of interest.

And actually there's only been one thread locked recently, bearing in mind there's almost 600 threads on here that's a slim percentage in anyone's book.

If it worries you we can always take a different tact; instead of locking it we'll just delete it completely. No locked threads, everyone's a winner! :)


I personally don't like the way mods and administrators add to locked threads 'because they can'. Either a thread's locked or it isn't. So actually deleting a thread might be fairer.

Mike
03-06-2008, 21:53
Noted!

:)

Marco
03-06-2008, 21:58
That's a fair point, Iain. I think what tends to happen is that one of us will lock a thread, and then give a reason for doing so; then the other admin & mods will add their thoughts on the matter.

I'll propose a rule that whoever locks a thread in future gets the last word, and that's the end of the discussion :)

Marco.

Filterlab
03-06-2008, 22:16
I personally don't like the way mods and administrators add to locked threads 'because they can'. Either a thread's locked or it isn't. So actually deleting a thread might be fairer.

It's a fair point although Marco's reasoning is bang on the nail.

WikiBoy
03-06-2008, 23:32
But they don't Mike, if you read the 'rant' thread it's just the same old crap going on and on, the same idiot spouting the same negative drivel about the same idiotic views on an industry that is supposed to be of interest.

And actually there's only been one thread locked recently, bearing in mind there's almost 600 threads on here that's a slim percentage in anyone's book.

If it worries you we can always take a different tact; instead of locking it we'll just delete it completely. No locked threads, everyone's a winner! :)

Exactly!

You can insult with impunity the same way as you did in the original Rant thread. So you got some back, it is that simple, who else did I insult (well apart from Ash and JC, but that is like putting down a rabid dog).

Steve Toy
03-06-2008, 23:54
Richard, feelings are running high and you've managed to upset a few folks with your brand of dishing out personal insults. Whilst it isn't leading by example it is a case of getting exactly what you asked for.

We're all even now, fair and square, so lets draw a line under this silly nonsense and get back to the programme. Your thread is open again so off you trot, post on it and don't give us good reason to kick you out for good.

Filterlab
04-06-2008, 08:33
As I said Richard, post whatever purile crud you feel is important in your silly little existence, your opinion is of no value to me whatsoever.

Steve Toy
04-06-2008, 10:44
After another insult hurled in the direction of a member of the admin team, Richard has clearly decided that he no longer wishes to contribute to our forum. As such he has been relieved of his posting rights indefinitely. I think he's pretty much said as much as he had to say anyway and further contributions seem to be adding nothing but negativity, bad vibes and divisions within the forum.

There have been a couple of folks on here who seem to have almost taken delight in forcing us to show them the exit and attempt to take a few members with them on the way by making us appear to act heavy-handedly and unfairly. On this occasion I made it clear under what conditions Richard was to continue posting. In good faith I reopened his ranting thread only for him to do exactly what was required to be asked to leave. The conditions applying to him were only those that everyone else is able to respect without any difficulty whatsoever (unless he manages to drag some of us down to his level in retaliation but we all are only human.)

It is a shame because he's very knowledgeable, I've every reason to believe his products are very good and he made some very interesting points that in turn stimlated some lively debate. However from an asset-to-liability aspect he's tipped sharply towards liability to the point that I've got people wanting to leave because of him and he may well be scaring off new members.

I hate banning people, I derive no pleasure from it whatsoever but the admin team are unanimous on this, so he's history on this place (as he is on a few others.)

Can we move on now and get back to the programme? :)

Marco
04-06-2008, 13:05
I agree with your summary and sentiments, Steve. It's unfortunate but it had to be done.

We tried our best with Richard but it just wasn't working. It was fair enough him having his own thread where he could rant about what annoyed him about the industry, etc, but it had got to the stage where he abused the privilege and was using the forum as his own personal playground simply for the benefit of his amusement at the expense of everything else, whilst feeling he was entitled to insult others with impunity. That was just not on.

If one examines, for example, his recent dialogue with Guy (Puresound):


Does it matter why should you worry, it is only a rant. Or do you wish to activate conflict again like the last time. Does something make you feel threatened again? Look at the wording, confrontational! you could just give facts and correct my keyboard slip and lack of time, it is all in attitude.


That was yet another threat directed at a member bearing in mind he has already threatened Chris Frost on the phone, with physical violence, over a dispute about Ebay! He should have been banned the last time for that and we were far too lenient in dealing with the matter.

Given his posting history on forums, Richard also needs to look introspectively at his own behaviour and examine his attitude. After reading the quoted dialogue above how on earth he can accuse Guy of being confrontational and having the wrong attitude is quite unbelievable. The level of hypocrisy shown is astounding such that I feel the phrase: 'Have a look at yourself in the mirror' has never been more apt.

Much as I agree with many of Richard's views on hi-fi and on the industry in general, I have never encountered a more confrontational character in all my years of contributing to audio forums, and believe me that's saying something. Yet undoubtedly Richard will somehow rationalise it in his head that he is in fact the victim.

However, given that Richard is now banned, and therefore has no right of reply, I would ask that all members refrain from discussing him further on any area of the forum, and for that reason this thread will now be locked. Furthermore, as a result of our new ruling that once a thread has been locked by a moderator or member of the admin team, and a reason given, I would ask that no further comments are added by other mods or admin. This thread will now remain closed.

Marco.