Thatcher's funeral zine

[Sparrow]

... at this point I would normally post a quip about "lax bottoms" but that's probably inappropriate at the moment ... 🙂

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

mods are not expected to defend their actions here...

why is it that the action of a mod is considered wrong without question?

i am tired of being second guessed and the assumption instantly made that the mod is wrong.

when a thread starts going off course there is the time consumimh option of making many deletions to keep it on track...move it to off topic or just close it.

yesterday we closed a thread that was starting to be anti semetic...and there was an uproar...of course it was assumed that the mod was wrong...
maybe some would enjoy a more 'wild west' approach be taken at rff and let anything be...

i have seen sites hit bottom because moderation was too lax...

There has been a huge misunderstanding on everybody's part about how that happened.

I'll try to outline a few points so that we don't go into tangents:

- Closing the thread was a good move.
- Deleting the offending post plus saying that people were going off-topic was a bad move (because the context, the offending post, was gone) and it was misperceived as being just a fancy closing.
- I cannot imagine being a moderator as it's I'm sure not only a lot of work, but hard decisions have to be made.
- If you cannot or will not consider feedback, then that's that.
- If this is how you're going to take feedback --if being gentle about it is "cheap shots", then really is no recourse, because the other is telling off, like you're doing to me right now.

You want to lash at me because it's easy to do so, go ahead. But I stand by what I said above. If that, to you, means I dislike it, I can't do anything about it.

If I disliked it I wouldn't really care and would just sit back and say nothing, but I do like it, and I thought feedback was in order. If it's against RFF's rules to not keep quiet and not sit back, then I guess I haven't read the modified rules lately.

I know you can get a bit hot-headed joe, and quite honestly, in a completely pal-to-pal (although I can tell you haven't considered me that for a while) fashion, wouldn't want to see you get all flustered about what really is nothing.

And lastly, it's evident you don't think so, but I'm on your side.

 

[back alley]

i know that rff is not what everyone wants it to be.
some want complete freedom to run amuck and some want even more moderation...tough to balance that one out.

some support, overt support would be nice.
i appreciate the p.m.'s that are supportive but frankly some out in the public support would be nice too.

as soon as politics or religion enter a thread it is downhill from there. it has been demonstrated over and over but still there are those that want it allowed and i think enjoy the fighting that ensues.

why don't i leave? because i was part of the team that built this site and i'll be damned if i'll allow myself to be railroaded out of town.

 

[back alley]

There has been a huge misunderstanding on everybody's part about how that happened.

I'll try to outline a few points so that we don't go into tangents:

- Closing the thread was a good move.
- Deleting the offending post plus saying that people were going off-topic was a bad move (because the context, the offending post, was gone) and it was misperceived as being just a fancy closing.
- I cannot imagine being a moderator as it's I'm sure not only a lot of work, but hard decisions have to be made.
- If you cannot or will not consider feedback, then that's that.
- If this is how you're going to take feedback --if being gentle about it is "cheap shots", then really is no recourse, because the other is telling off, like you're doing to me right now.

You want to lash at me because it's easy to do so, go ahead. But I stand by what I said above. If that, to you, means I dislike it, I can't do anything about it.

If I disliked it I wouldn't really care and would just sit back and say nothing, but I do like it, and I thought feedback was in order. If it's against RFF's rules to not keep quiet and not sit back, then I guess I haven't read the modified rules lately.

I know you can get a bit hot-headed joe, and quite honestly, in a completely pal-to-pal (although I can tell you haven't considered me that for a while) fashion, wouldn't want to see you get all flustered about what really is nothing.

And lastly, it's evident you don't think so, but I'm on your side.

i am hot headed...i agree.
they were/are cheap shots...not gentle feedback.
start a thread to discuss this and i'm there...insert a remark into a hot thread and to me it's a cheap shot.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

i know that rff is not what everyone wants it to be.
some want complete freedom to run amuck and some want even more moderation...tough to balance that one out.

Nobody should be allowed to run amuck in RFF.

some support, overt support would be nice.
i appreciate the p.m.'s that are supportive but frankly some out in the public support would be nice too.

I don't send PMs to you because I know your box is probably longer than my spam box. I'm not going to kiss anybody's kiester, but I don't think I have ever nonsupportive of you.

as soon as politics or religion enter a thread it is downhill from there. it has been demonstrated over and over but still there are those that want it allowed and i think enjoy the fighting that ensues.

Yes. But, again: closing a thread and removing the offending posts creates further confusion (and outrage from those who have no idea what happened).

why don't i leave? because i was part of the team that built this site and i'll be damned if i'll allow myself to be railroaded out of town.

I'm very sad to see you think I'm trying to railroad you out of town.

Looks like there's nothing else to do but...

 

[back alley]

I'm very sad to see you think I'm trying to railroad you out of town.

Looks like there's nothing else to do but...

this was not directed at you...


i started another thread for some discussion..http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=133449

 

[sar-photo]

Arrggghhhh!! It's veering off topic again!! Here's another photo from the zine - a Thatcher fan from the look of it...

 

[Vics]

I have my order in, and even before it arrives, I'm wondering if one can still buy "back issues?" You mentioned that you'd done several of these...

 

[sar-photo]

I have my order in, and even before it arrives, I'm wondering if one can still buy "back issues?" You mentioned that you'd done several of these...

You sure can Vic - click on the Fistful of Books link in my signature...

 

[back alley]

i hate to be a pita...but please conduct business off line.

 

[Sparrow]

It has been moved again then LINK

 

[Roger Hicks]

Arrggghhhh!! It's veering off topic again!! Here's another photo from the zine - a Thatcher fan from the look of it...

No, no: this is the Irony Lady.

Cheers,

R.

 

[sar-photo]

I don't recall any anti-semitic posts in the thread (anti-Thatcher ones yes, but she's definitely not Jewish) - are you sure your not getting this one mixed up with another one?

Simon

 

[Michael Markey]

I don't recall any anti-semitic posts in the thread (anti-Thatcher ones yes, but she's definitely not Jewish) - are you sure your not getting this one mixed up with another one?

Simon

Neither do I ...it all sounds a bit odd.

 

[sar-photo]

Another photo - this one is of a cheery London bobby...