|
|
Post by Dr Bunsen Honeydew on Jul 15, 2014 23:09:30 GMT
In my world you do when they are illegal and immoral, and they are already in the public domain but you wont allow a link to be published to them. Then take it to court but you cannot bring it here. Censorship and biased moderation. IMO |
|
|
|
Post by Dr Bunsen Honeydew on Jul 15, 2014 23:11:37 GMT
So as an ex-moderator I am biased? kk, thanks for pointing that out. Poppycock!!! (good word that  ) You are so biased it is a miracle you can walk straight through the post. (reasons explained many posts ago if it hasn't been removed) |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 15, 2014 23:12:35 GMT
Anyway Martin lets sleep on it. 'night, Richard  |
|
|
|
Post by Dr Bunsen Honeydew on Jul 15, 2014 23:16:25 GMT
Sleep tight Martin, mind the bugs don't bite.
|
|
Marco
Rank: Trio
Banned
Posts: 242 
|
Post by Marco on Jul 15, 2014 23:20:16 GMT
Folks, how much longer is this guy going to be allowed to use TAS to attack AoS (and me), and fan the flames of disputes from elsewhere?  We're letting it run in the hope that, when everyone has it off their chests, we'll get some good input from it. However, we're on a fine line here and I won't let this become a personal slug-fest. I see, and can (kind of) appreciate where you're coming from. I presume then, I can defend myself (and AoS) accordingly, as long as it's done in a reasonable manner? Marco. |
|
Marco
Rank: Trio
Banned
Posts: 242
|
Post by Marco on Jul 15, 2014 23:58:11 GMT
Lol @ Timbo - I think if you'd given it a chance you could've become a master at it! What is utterly galling (and mildly amusing in a way) is he who is complaining most about being provoked is himself the master of provocation  The fact is, if he addressed people more civilly in the first place, then much of the conflict he subsequently creates (seemingly unwittingly), from their reaction to his abrasiveness, would be avoided. The problem is getting him to understand that most people, outside of his world, aren't used to being addressed in such a way as he considers to be accpetable, and so sometimes retaliate accordingly. Marco. Marco this is nonsense do I really have to publish your private emails to me full of insult, threats, lies. With nothing of the ilk returned. MODERATION: further ad hominem removed. Richard, stop turning things onto me. Ignoring what I've written above won't make the problem go away. We're talking about the continually abrasive and confrontational behaviour YOU have displayed to date on this forum, not just towards me, but others with whom you have no 'history' (which is precisely why your remarks have been so heavily moderated by those in charge). Why can't you just respond to people in a civil manner, and show some respect for your fellow man, especially to those who are simply engaging you in a discussion about hi-fi? Your belligerence (and the fact that you think you can say what you like to whom you like, whenever you like) is what continually gets you into trouble. You should also consider the notion that when joining a forum, it's up to YOU to fit in with it, not IT to fit in with you. As has already been said, if you don't like the rules, then don't join the club. Marco. |
|
|
|
Post by Dr Bunsen Honeydew on Jul 16, 2014 0:03:43 GMT
Marco you are a hypocrite to even write that, and I have no desire to ever talk to you after the way you have treated me and other people. I am only willing to talk about you.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 16, 2014 0:04:18 GMT
We're letting it run in the hope that, when everyone has it off their chests, we'll get some good input from it. However, we're on a fine line here and I won't let this become a personal slug-fest. I see, and can (kind of) appreciate where you're coming from. I presume then, I can defend myself (and AoS) accordingly, as long as it's done in a reasonable manner? Of course! |
|
Marco
Rank: Trio
Banned
Posts: 242
|
Post by Marco on Jul 16, 2014 0:10:20 GMT
Marco you are a hypocrite to even write that, and I have no desire to ever talk to you after the way you have treated me and other people. I am only willing to talk about you. Well, that's a rather bland response! We'll get to that in a minute. However, until then, please answer my question. I repeat: why are you always so abrasive towards people who have shown you nothing but civility? Are you incapable of ever being nice? Marco. |
|
Marco
Rank: Trio
Banned
Posts: 242
|
Post by Marco on Jul 16, 2014 0:11:16 GMT
I see, and can (kind of) appreciate where you're coming from. I presume then, I can defend myself (and AoS) accordingly, as long as it's done in a reasonable manner? Of course! Thanks! Rest assured, that's exactly what I'll be doing  Marco. |
|
|
|
Post by Dr Bunsen Honeydew on Jul 16, 2014 3:30:13 GMT
Got up for a pee, computer was on so re-read the thread. It all went pretty fast last thing last night, but the one thing that is obvious is that even though I am being attacked the only person who is being moderated and having posts removed is me - obvious conclusion is censorship and biased moderation. I am being asked to fight my corner with one arm tied behind my back and a foot nailed to the floor. Anything I wish to say at this point will be removed because it is obvious certain people are being protected.
When the mods here are willing to have factual information published which is in the public domain which is pertinent to the current discussion and its participants there is little point in me posting on this thread just to have more and more of it removed as I win the argument - pointless.
An attempt will now take place to rewrite history with non factual conjecture and that will be allowed. I will say again I have initiated no attack, I have responded, but due to censorship and biased moderation my posts are butchered to the point of the loss sequence and loss of point - so what is the point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jul 16, 2014 4:13:54 GMT
I'm with Steve on this. I've no idea what has gone on on other forums and don't give a hoot.
I find the docs comments interesting and he certainly knows his stuff.
There's a lot of posts getting sidetracked the now with poxy bickering - why not just start a doc vs whoever thread and keep it in one place? (Not a serious suggestion)
Personally I think you should all pack it in and give the guy a chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Jul 16, 2014 4:59:13 GMT
I have seen no evidence of Jerry behaving that way. Well we will have to agree to differ, for me it is written all over his posts. You are a classic example of the difference, you don't do it. I think you have acquired one sheep but not from trying. I could say many agree with me as it is far from me who talks about it, but I am sure loads would say they haven't seen it, so little point. As with all things I am giving opinion not stating fact. Have I acquired "sheep"? Or have I just tried lots of kit over the years due to my liking for 'boxswapping' and some folks like to follow my hifi journey through my forum posts and now & then ask me for my opinions based on that experience to provide input to their own decision making?
I've had quite a few favourites during my time, and where I find a make of particular merit and good vfm I do try to promote them, especially if they are of the small cottage industry type which have a hard time struggling against the better publicised and funded majors - examples of this include Amptastic, Beresford, RFC and yes, NVA.
Since buying from him and enjoying a pair of NVA A80 amps I can only ever recall singing their praises for sq and vfm on the forums, so I am at a genuine loss to understand RD's previous comments about any 'dissing' of his work.
Jul 15, 2014 20:59:23 GMT 1 Dr Bunsen Honeydew said:
So you take every opportunity to try and have a go at me and NVA
Yes, we fell out personally after you asked me to leave HFS, but as far as I can honestly recall I have never as a result of that dissed your products.
As for me being ego driven - so is most of humanity, I suspect - and I recall several times agreeing with you that that was probably part of my motivation on forums. Lots of people write hifi reviews, maybe it's paranoia on my part but you do seem to single me out personally for attack on this.
Anyway, I'd much rather rebuild bridges of friendship with you, Richard, than continue in confrontation. No, I'm not perfect. And yes, I do regret launching in on forums, including this one, when an olive branch would have better served everyones' interests.
I don't do the reviewing thing anymore that was largely responsible for the growing rift between us, and my boxswap posting on forums is greatly reduced - so how about it?
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 16, 2014 5:45:48 GMT
even though I am being attacked the only person who is being moderated and having posts removed is me - obvious conclusion is censorship and biased moderation. I am being asked to fight my corner with one arm tied behind my back and a foot nailed to the floor. Anything I wish to say at this point will be removed because it is obvious certain people are being protected. Richard - the only person who has required posts to be moderated in this thread is you. Where you have made an accusation, we have allowed the response to ride. I have no earthly idea who you think we are protecting, but this forum is not allied to any other and we are still the 'three guys with day jobs' that started the place. I'm afraid you will have to accept that we will not allow previous disputes to be brought into this forum. We don't want it and it is elsewhere if members want to look it up. We meant what we said about a fresh start for everyone and leaving your baggage at the door. I don't know what history you think we are rewriting since we don't want any of it here at all! |
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on Jul 16, 2014 5:48:07 GMT
A thread about moderation. Bloody hell whose ideA was that . Points from me. Moderate to address the what the post says. The past may or may not be relevant No repetition of the same point in the same thread but different post. "post removed for reason of repetition" Moderate the point. "Post removed as it had no point or was bloody irrelevant rubbish.  |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 16, 2014 5:51:36 GMT
I find the docs comments interesting and he certainly knows his stuff. There's a lot of posts getting sidetracked the now with poxy bickering - why not just start a doc vs whoever thread and keep it in one place? (Not a serious suggestion) Personally I think you should all pack it in and give the guy a chance. Well Chris, part of the purpose of this thread is to get feedback on how you think our moderating has gone so far. If by 'the guy' you mean RD then we most certainly are giving him a chance - he has joined this forum and has contributed some valuable posts. We have not threatened him with banning and we have only moderated his posts where he gives his views on other members - essentially the baggage that we had asked him to leave by the door and ad hominem that I am certain he would not allow on his own forum.
If you would like to quote specifics of where you think our moderation has gone wrong then please do!
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 16, 2014 5:54:42 GMT
Anyway, I'd much rather rebuild bridges of friendship with you, Richard, than continue in confrontation. No, I'm not perfect. And yes, I do regret launching in on forums, including this one, when an olive branch would have better served everyones' interests. I don't do the reviewing thing that offended you anymore, and my boxswap posting on forums is greatly reduced - so how about it? Thank you, Jerry. Olive branches are most welcome. |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 16, 2014 5:56:13 GMT
Moderate to address the what the post says. The past may or may not be relevant No repetition of the same point in the same thread but different post. "post removed for reason of repetition" Moderate the point. "Post removed as it had no point or was bloody irrelevant rubbish. Thanks, and at your last point but one man's rubbish may be another's valuable nugget! |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 16, 2014 6:00:44 GMT
WARNING
The "he said, she said" arguments will be allowed for a limited further time period and then we will revert to moderating this thread in the manner of all others. We are still very interested in your analysis of our moderation and whether you think we are getting the flow of conversation right. Please quote examples by all means. I appreciate your feedback and we have noted the number of members who dislike the warning system. This is being discussed behind the scenes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2014 6:02:44 GMT
I too got up early and re-read all this.
Last evening I decided I would be sensible and just stay out of the argument. Fanning the flames is never a good idea but sometimes ignoring the whole thing becomes just too difficult.
I regret to say that the image that constantly comes to mind is that of Not the 9 o'clock news and John McEnroe. A character who thinks that thumbing his nose behind teacher's back and calling them names constitutes grown up behaviour when it clearly should be left in the playground. Yomanze might have phrased it differently than I would but the sentiment seems entirely appropriate.
There is a suggestion on the thread offered as evidence that I am 'stalking' Mr Dunn. I'm afraid that both that and expectation that we are to read something into the fact that members over there support Mr Dunn's behaviour is beyond humour.
If he seriously thinks that the whole world is against him or even that a few people have an agenda to to try and bait him then some quiet reflection is in order.
When it comes to moderation, I can only use an example from my own experience of posting on his forum. Anything I might post there that was disagreed with just disappeared under the heading of 'thread cleaning'. (Sorry if that is old baggage) Accusations here of biased moderation joins comments above in the bin.
I am tiring of his constant campaigning, diatribe, childishness and inability to see himself as the root cause of his own problems.
I am disappointed in a way that I feel the need to say this given my previous comments about building bridges, but such things are a two way street. If Mr Dunn would at least make some attempt to moderate his usual aggressive stance, there may perhaps be a chance of at least tolerance if not a meeting of minds.
|
|
)
