Jump to content

Re: For the Record


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 156
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

In no particular order or priority.

Miki could also be very condescending - does it not seems a tad hypocritical to be objecting because somebody wrote to him in the style he sometimes used?

At the end of the day, I will be very disapointed in Archant if they do not publically support the mods. I would expect it fom my manager. So, if Miki wants to return he will have to look to negotiate.

If I were in his postion, I wouldn't want to return, I'd say "sod them" and do something else. From what I know of Miki, he would return so that he could say he had won and then say "Sod them".

I'm not bothered whether Miki returns or not, he can be well considered, interesting and funny, so I would read his posts and respond as and when, but there are others who are equally well considered, interesting and (I think) funnier. I would be sorrier if we lost them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Quillan"][quote user="Owens88"]

Miki as Kilroy ?

[/quote]

One thing you could NEVER say about Miki, and I am serious, he is not a hidden racist let alone a open one (Kilroys comments about Arabs was it?).

[/quote]

Profound apologies. I am not fully au fait with these TV people. No slur intended (on Miki). I'll crawl back into my day job.

p.s.

Somebody else suggested Jerry Springer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="SaligoBay"][quote user="Owens88"]

Miki as Kilroy ?[/quote]

Why not Miki as Moderator?  [Www]

[/quote]

That is what I meant. If you read the other thread (in 'comments about the forum') I was suggesting different tones of moderation in different parts of the forum. Miki had a bruiser/bouncer style (obviously popular ) which would fit the 'more robust' end of the spectrum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Owens88"][quote user="SaligoBay"][quote user="Owens88"]

Miki as Kilroy ?[/quote]

Why not Miki as Moderator?  [Www]

[/quote]

That is what I meant. If you read the other thread (in 'comments about the forum') I was suggesting different tones of moderation in different parts of the forum. Miki had a bruiser/bouncer style (obviously popular ) which would fit the 'more robust' end of the spectrum.

[/quote]

[:)][:)]

Please send that suggestion into James along with a scale of pay ( ! ), is it more for the Des O'Connor lot ? Or the Jerry Springer? I could probably manage the Paul O Grady brigade, I reckon they are the saucy blue rinse Ladies who enjoy a knees up but also a cup of cocoa and early bed - and thats all about all I feel ready to take on at this moment !

I could probably make a case for getting  Archant to pay for a week away in France to get over this weekend - perhaps I should stay near St Malo  ???? LOL[:D][:D][:D]

Its alright Miki - I'm joking !

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[JohnM wrote]: “So, if Miki wants to return he will have to look to negotiate.”

Unfortunately I think this (and other related threads) have made it totally impossible for Miki to return with any credibility. He kept going on about the fact hat he was arguing “for the good of the forum”. Were he to “negotiate”, etc. then clearly all his high morals actually will have meant nothing as when it came to it he rolled-over, discarded all those ideals, etc. just to be allowed to re-join the forum.

Had everybody just kept quite, let things ride for a month, then he would have been quietly able to reassure the moderators and returned after a brief break. All the “publicity”, publishing messages, etc. have made this impossible without his “high moral causes” being a total joke.

(My opinion anyway).

Ian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote Quillan : "So if you want Miki kept please say so in this thread... etc"

So, I take this as my cue to chip in on this subject. I speak as, I would imagine, a text book example of the hitherto 'silent majority'. I have been a registered member, and pretty much daily user of this site since, I think, 2001 - anyway there were only some 800 members when I joined - but in all that time I have myself posted on only a handful of occasions. This is a reflection of my personality. In 'real life' I am very quiet, and definitely not a conversationalist. This does not, however, prevent me from being as interested as anyone else in what (some) others have to say on subjects that interest me, and from having reactions and opinions of my own, though I choose generally not to make them public.

Anyway, for what it's worth, my opinion on the current furore concurs with practically everything that has already been said by the regular posters who deplore this crazy ban. I also agree that the moderators should be thanked for giving up their time and energy to try to provide a difficult service to us, their 'community' - I am convinced that they are trying as hard as they can to get it right, but my abiding impression at the moment is that they are getting further and further out of their depth, and the outlook for the continuation of the forum as we know and love it, is not good. (Will, your loss to the collective voice of the mods is immeasurable - please consider rejoining...?)

My only hope is that things will soon naturally stabilise, as has happened before, and we can get back to the usual level of generally intelligent, informed and witty debate as befits the Post Bag section. The thing that must NOT happen is that we lose any more valued contributors over all this. We need Miki back forthwith, and we absolutely need to hang on to Dick Smith - please Dick, take no more risks at the moment! Also, Coco - stick around, you are missed!

Well, having got all that off my chest, I suppose that I will now have to consider becoming a bit more sociable on here. We'll see.

Regards,

Lindsey

PS Long Live Furryknickers !!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Quillan"]

[quote user="Clarkkent"]10% of 79,049 is 7,905 (to the nearest whole number). 790 is 1% of 79,049. What can we accept? Even simple arithmetic appears faulty! ......................................... Free the St Malo 1[/quote]

I knew somebody was better at maths than me and would check it out. If I am right that makes the figures look even better for the 'pros'.

If we use only the figures others have quoted in this thread somebody said there were 6,000 members so lets say 10% are active, doing the figures correctly thats 600.

Tresco counted 45 people, lets add another 10 to that thats 55. I take it that Clarkkent agrees with the rest of the calcualtion then thats 9.2% (rounding up again). So that means that over 90% of the active forum can't be bothered if Miki comes back or stays banned. So if you want Miki kept please say so in this thread and when you get 301 people I guess Archant will have to put him back because as has been said many times before its Archant that owns the forum and only they can override a ban or 'strike'. Thats what democracy is all about, even Miki could not disagree about democracy if he were able to reply. I'm sure you would get a much better result if you got all your 301 people to email Archant directly in fact I would suspect you wouldn't need even 300 just a 100 or more.

[/quote]

Oh dear, Quillan.

I've no idea whether the total you arrive at is right or wrong and neither have you, but you say that Archant will have to reinstate Miki if over 50% of the total members vote in his favour, because that's what democracy is all about. So, in a democracy, if none of the available options achieves the approval of 50% of the registered voters, the result is undemocratic. Is that what you are saying?

Then you go on to say that Archant will probably reinstate Miki if 100 people (16% of the total) e-mail them directly. That wouldn't be very democratic, would it. After all, by your definition, 84% are against reinstating Miki.

Or have I misunderstood?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not want to get involved in this wrangle (which probably represents 95% of the 6000 odd members), but since a moderator has asked us to essentially vote on whether Miki should be banned, I have no other course of action than to say, since the moderators cannot/will not release the evidence of what he has done, and since you are innocent until proven guilty, them Miki must be allowed to return immediately and without sanction.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="zeb100"]

Hello

I think if Miki is allowed back we should bring back Outcast and La Buffoon.

Have a nice day y'all

Regards

Sidney

[/quote]

Then start a thread of your own - I'm sure you'll  find 100 sock puppets to support your wish[:D]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Dick Smith"]

What makes you think they aren't already? A bit of a slip in a recent post suggests so.

[/quote]

It says in the C of C that any attempt by a banned member to rejoin the forum under a new name will result in their posts deleted and banned immediately. Also anyone caught using a second login will receive the same treatment. If you are referring to a person who as far as we know has made one post by the name of L'Outcast I think you will find we kept to our word and have suspended them subject to investigation and their posts deleted which is something that was requested by the members (the suspension bit rather than a straight ban) in another thread. I noticed that you never hit the report button seeing as the name was so suggestive, you would normally. In fact we rely on you somewhat to spot Mr O for us and that’s NOT meant a a snide comment. If L'Outcast has sneaked another post in that we didn't catch can somebody please report it so we can action it?

Just to make one thing clear we are totally unsure if this is a banned member or a member using a second login so we have suspended them for 7 days to enable them to respond. If they don't we will ban them for life.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Deimos"][JohnM wrote]: “So, if Miki wants to return he will have to look to negotiate.” Unfortunately I think this (and other related threads) have made it totally impossible for Miki to return with any credibility. He kept going on about the fact hat he was arguing “for the good of the forum”. Were he to “negotiate”, etc. then clearly all his high morals actually will have meant nothing as when it came to it he rolled-over, discarded all those ideals, etc. just to be allowed to re-join the forum. Had everybody just kept quite, let things ride for a month, then he would have been quietly able to reassure the moderators and returned after a brief break. All the “publicity”, publishing messages, etc. have made this impossible without his “high moral causes” being a total joke. (My opinion anyway). Ian[/quote]What a lot of tosh - doesn't make any sense at all.  Your opinion anyway?  Your hope, you mean.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Absafc"][quote user="Quillan"]

[quote user="Clarkkent"]10% of 79,049 is 7,905 (to the nearest whole number). 790 is 1% of 79,049. What can we accept? Even simple arithmetic appears faulty! ......................................... Free the St Malo 1[/quote]

I knew somebody was better at maths than me and would check it out. If I am right that makes the figures look even better for the 'pros'.

If we use only the figures others have quoted in this thread somebody said there were 6,000 members so lets say 10% are active, doing the figures correctly thats 600.

Tresco counted 45 people, lets add another 10 to that thats 55. I take it that Clarkkent agrees with the rest of the calcualtion then thats 9.2% (rounding up again). So that means that over 90% of the active forum can't be bothered if Miki comes back or stays banned. So if you want Miki kept please say so in this thread and when you get 301 people I guess Archant will have to put him back because as has been said many times before its Archant that owns the forum and only they can override a ban or 'strike'. Thats what democracy is all about, even Miki could not disagree about democracy if he were able to reply. I'm sure you would get a much better result if you got all your 301 people to email Archant directly in fact I would suspect you wouldn't need even 300 just a 100 or more.

[/quote]

Oh dear, Quillan.

I've no idea whether the total you arrive at is right or wrong and neither have you, but you say that Archant will have to reinstate Miki if over 50% of the total members vote in his favour, because that's what democracy is all about. So, in a democracy, if none of the available options achieves the approval of 50% of the registered voters, the result is undemocratic. Is that what you are saying?

Then you go on to say that Archant will probably reinstate Miki if 100 people (16% of the total) e-mail them directly. That wouldn't be very democratic, would it. After all, by your definition, 84% are against reinstating Miki.

Or have I misunderstood?

[/quote]

Probably, what my thinking is that if you lobby Archant one of three things will happen. Firstly they may say we don't want all these emails, let this guy back, sack the moderators and let our own staff do it. Secondly, we won't be dictated to in a forum we supply at our own expense (it’s hosted in-house on their servers no ISP involved), so make it in to a moderated forum. Thirdly the forum is baggage they inherited when they bought Living France and it's just not worth the grief and dumps it. I personally think that it will be possibly option two but more than likely option three. It's would also be interesting to see how far they will support their mods. So in the case of contacting Archant direct numbers don't come in to it because if I even had say 100 emails I would do something on the basis that I have far more important things to do in life than mess around with a forum that has absolutely no positive impact on my business (probably little or none at the best of times either).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say that I believe Demios made one complaint about Miki although Miki says five.  However, and I hope Demios and Miki don't mind me speaking about them here but their personalities are chalk and cheese.  Amongst us all there are quieter more reserved members and there are those that hound and don't let go.  I would like to see Miki and Demios sort out their differences and then either shake hands, tolerate each other or simply ignore each other.  As for the rest of us, lets all stand together and first one, be it Demios or Miki (on his hopeful return) to make a snidey remark about the other gets it a playtime. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="andyh4"]

I did not want to get involved in this wrangle (which probably represents 95% of the 6000 odd members), but since a moderator has asked us to essentially vote on whether Miki should be banned, I have no other course of action than to say, since the moderators cannot/will not release the evidence of what he has done, and since you are innocent until proven guilty, them Miki must be allowed to return immediately and without sanction.

[/quote]

Actually he has been judged, found guilty and sentenced by the moderators. I think this is about the sentence being unfair and the fact the moderators won't release the evidence. But then there have been a few court cases in the past where the evidence has been given and not published.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="KatieKopyKat"]I must say that I believe Demios made one complaint about Miki although Miki says five.  However, and I hope Demios and Miki don't mind me speaking about them here but their personalities are chalk and cheese.  Amongst us all there are quieter more reserved members and there are those that hound and don't let go.  I would like to see Miki and Demios sort out their differences and then either shake hands, tolerate each other or simply ignore each other.  As for the rest of us, lets all stand together and first one, be it Demios or Miki (on his hopeful return) to make a snidey remark about the other gets it a playtime. [/quote]I understood from Miki that Deimos only made 1 complaint (though Miki had originally thought/was led to believe that he'd made more ) - unless I misunderstood - but Gay insists that there were three complaints, so presumably two other people also complained.  The question is whether Miki deserved to be banned for acquiring three complaints, when as has been said, lots of other people receive complaints (sometimes more) that aren't actioned - or are not actioned for a very long time.  Despite what has been said about evidence we have not seen - I just don't feel comfortable about this banning situation and definitely don't feel comfortable about the tone of the letter sent to Miki by Eslier.  I feel even less comfortable that Deimos is allowed to continue slagging Miki off (being the one of the complainants) when he's not here to defend himself.  It's like he is now smug that he has 'won' and has the floor.  Ugh!

PS I voted on Twinkle's 'Do we want Miki back?' thread, for what it's worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Debra wrote.: "I feel even less comfortable that Deimos is allowed to continue slagging Miki off (being the complainant) when he's not here to defend himself.  It's like he is now smug that he has 'won' and has the floor. (being the complainant) when he's not here to defend himself.  It's like he is now smug that he has 'won' and has the floor."

Should be changed to (being one of the complainants)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Quillan"][quote user="andyh4"]

I did not want to get involved in this wrangle (which probably represents 95% of the 6000 odd members), but since a moderator has asked us to essentially vote on whether Miki should be banned, I have no other course of action than to say, since the moderators cannot/will not release the evidence of what he has done, and since you are innocent until proven guilty, them Miki must be allowed to return immediately and without sanction.

[/quote]

Actually he has been judged, found guilty and sentenced by the moderators. I think this is about the sentence being unfair and the fact the moderators won't release the evidence. But then there have been a few court cases in the past where the evidence has been given and not published.

[/quote]

 

I accept totally what you say Quillan, but if you are now asking us to make a judgement about reinstatement; we have to understand the crime - no evidence = not guilty.  So sorry I stand by my comment.

 

I am only glad I don't have to be a mod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

{template="widgetContainer" group="global" app="core" params="'footer', 'horizontal'"https://www.frenchentree.com/}

×
×
  • Create New...