Banning traffic from towns

[John Wright]

8 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

I don't have a screen shot of a warning because you didn't give me a warning. That's my point. You should have given me a warning. The reason for my ban was "stop turning the screw on bandits" fair enough you could have said that in a warning especially as bandits was one of those repeat offenders who flit in and out and I was a long time member and subscriber and someone of good repute on here. It was a bad decision IMO. But hey I recognise being a moderator is tough and you can't always get it right. 

FTR. The Ts and C's do not mention anything about turning screws. 

There have been plenty of warnings about tit for tat escalation, turn of the screw responding.

You'd been warned about your posting before, in posts by me.

You were moderated. The notice of points/suspension you get is the warning. It’s messaged here.

If, as you say, you are a long term member, of good repute, a subscriber, you should have known better. You have less excuse than most. This place runs on self restraint and self policing, in the main.

You’re entitled to disagree, but expressing that disagreement is challenging, not accepting, moderation. I was moderating and per se my decision was right. Just as well I’m not moderating any longer.

You fell into a trap, you were trolled by bandits and your responsive posts were disproportionate. The measure of fairness is that you’re still here, bandits isn’t.

[Happier diner]

11 minutes ago, John Wright said:

You'd been warned about your posting before, in posts by me.

Had I? I don't remember. I'd disagree, a gently warning would have been appropriate and heeded. I fell into a trap. I am human. I take your point but you were still wrong IMO 🤔

Edited July 10, 2023 by Happier diner

[John Wright]

18 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

I agree with you and it shows how emotive the subject of bans is especially when you’re paying for the privilege having been provoked by some of the usual posters who contribute nothing to keep the forum going but create some of the biggest fuss. 

Except it’s not possible, fairly, in those tit for tat escalations to spend hours weighing which protagonist weighs heaviest in the balance of blame. Both get suspended. Summary justice? Rough and ready? Yes. But anyone who posts on here will have seen it happen and been aware.

Then there’s the language. Neither you, nor HD have been banned. Your posting rights were suspended for a temporary period. A warning is notification of that event. If you think I looked at whether a poster who was complained of was a subscriber or not, or how many previous warning they’d had, or what their e-mail sign up was and whether I know them, before suspending, you’re wrong. There isn’t enough time.

[John Wright]

48 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

I’m not suggesting you did at all but I am suggesting that plenty of non subscribing accounts are playing games tactically reporting things just to create issues and that’s wrong really as they’re contributing nothing to keeping this place going so why should any mod act on a report from someone with an anonymous email and no identification and take it seriously? If it’s not libelous or gratuitous really what was said is none of the business of someone who is not even prepared to put their name to an email address or anything else.

Unless things have changed since I stepped down that suggestion  simply isn’t true.

Even non supporting posters contribute. Advertising revenue is based on number signed up and active. Subscribers pay to be ad free and for other benefits.

As a subscriber I’d expect you to be better at self policing, in other words I expected higher standards from subscribers, should know better type stuff.

[Andy Onchan]

On 7/8/2023 at 10:33 PM, Roger Mexico said:

Actually it is because the land isn't owned by the Council or the Government, but by the property developer (who has failed to develop it, despite planning permissions, for the last 30 years).  The 'Town Square' was always supposed to be handed over as planning gain, but it never seems to have happened.

Who owns that town square land, is it AXA??

[John Wright]

11 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

Not sure why given most of the nonsense posted here by anon accounts. Anything controversial you can just ask a subscriber to delete it. There’s simply no need to suspend or otherwise block an account unless you’ve asked for something to be deleted and they don’t agree/comply. 

And there we appear to have it. “I’ve paid. I should be allowed to post what I want without consequence”

Elitism.

Cronyism

Entitled.

much?

If the mods allowed that they’d be rightly accused of favouritism.

[John Wright]

9 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

But that isn’t what I said is it? I said it’s very easy to request that a subscriber deletes anything because they can. 

You’re wanting different treatment because you pay to avoid adverts.

[Gladys]

Just now, offshoremanxman said:

But that isn’t what I said is it? I said it’s very easy to request that a subscriber deletes anything because they can. 

Not sure of your point here. The subscriber option is to support the site, not guarantee preferred treatment.  The added rights are few, but the main one is to delete posts, which subscribers should think about using to self-moderate.  If you wouldn't say what you have posted in person to the recipient, then should you really post it? 

It is rather sad that MF has become so confrontational.  I have said before there was robust, but respectful, debate on here. But now we have very confrontational posts, often supported with numerous new accounts and a pile in.

Let's face it, what is posted here will not change the bigger picture, but it allows people to voice their opinion.  Very few MHKs post on here now.  I wonder if it is because the only responses will be vitriol and accusations. 

 

[Jarndyce]

2 hours ago, offshoremanxman said:

I am suggesting that plenty of non subscribing accounts are playing games tactically reporting things just to create issues and that’s wrong really as they’re contributing nothing to keeping this place going so why should any mod act on a report from someone with an anonymous email and no identification and take it seriously?

Just because you suggest it (and just because you are a subscriber) doesn’t make that true, though.   For example, you’ve accused me of tactically reporting things in the past - but if any of the Mods care to check, they can confirm that I am yet to make any report of any kind whatsoever.

[Jarndyce]

4 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Very few MHKs post on here now.  I wonder if it is because the only responses will be vitriol and accusations. 

Probably - I’m not an MHK and, frankly, it puts me off posting sometimes.

[Jarndyce]

13 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

14 minutes ago, Jarndyce said:

For example, you’ve accused me of tactically reporting things in the past.

I have not. Link please.

You are correct - I withdraw that.   On checking, it was a broad statement about “non-subscribers“ in general.   Although it came close…

My mistake.

Edited July 10, 2023 by Jarndyce

[Happier diner]

8 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Not sure of your point here. The subscriber option is to support the site, not guarantee preferred treatment.  The added rights are few, but the main one is to delete posts, which subscribers should think about using to self-moderate.  If you wouldn't say what you have posted in person to the recipient, then should you really post it? 

It is rather sad that MF has become so confrontational.  I have said before there was robust, but respectful, debate on here. But now we have very confrontational posts, often supported with numerous new accounts and a pile in.

Let's face it, what is posted here will not change the bigger picture, but it allows people to voice their opinion.  Very few MHKs post on here now.  I wonder if it is because the only responses will be vitriol and accusations. 

 

Yeah why can't it just be good natured and fun. 

I am still keeping to my NYR....just. 

[John Wright]

4 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

No, as I have said several times, because I and others can easily delete anything we might post if asked to do so. I can’t see why you would need to suspend any subscriber account when they can easily delete anything anyone might have an issue with voluntarily. 

It’s a sanction for posting something you shouldn’t have posted in the first place. And you do post anonymously. 

You seem to think you can buy a free pass. That’s not how it works.

I do know you’ll pursue the argument, however merit less, you’d  argue about the number of angels on a pin head. You’re doing that now about whether the Manxman is financed by tax payers money. You stretch stuff to beyond their reasonable meaning.

Manxman was bought by the Steam Packet with money it borrowed from IoMG which had borrowed it from market investors. No tax payers involved. It’ll be paid back by loan repayments and dividends from the SPCo paid out of revenues from passengers. Only time taxpayers are involved is if SPCo defaults.

You know that. I know that. Everyone knows that. But still you troll.

[offshoremanxman]

14 minutes ago, Gladys said:

If you wouldn't say what you have posted in person to the recipient, then should you really post it? 

I’ve never said anything on here that I either haven’t or wouldn’t say publicly anywhere else as I don’t have the mistaken perception of anonymity some other posters might have. And I don’t see what is wrong with asking a subscriber to use the delete button rather than suspend an account as any offending comment is easily delete-able unlike other posters which require a moderator to delete. 

[Gladys]

1 minute ago, Happier diner said:

Yeah why can't it just be good natured and fun. 

I am still keeping to my NYR....just. 

Good point.  But there are posters who think this is the only vent to their frustrations and that it makes a difference.  In reality the more extreme posts just serve to confirm to those who can make a difference to avoid it.  They may have a valid point, but those who can make changes will avoid engaging on here. 

It also gets way too personal, particularly against those whose identity is plain to see.

It has become an unpleasant place to be.  The original idea was to provide a platform for debate, I believe.  It is now a platform to harangue and make personal attacks.