# Off Topic > The Water Cooler >  >  Repeal Mordred's ban? / Revoke dominicb's Mod status?

## ConneXionLost

Was Mordred's expression of personal comments in the Watercooler so heinous as to warrant a permanent ban from our community?  Was he entitled to state his opinion?

Was dominicb's Mod action (to permanently ban Mordred) reasonable, fair, and in keeping with the best interest of our community?  Was he acting on a grudge or emotionally motivated?

We know the Mods will not openly criticize the actions of another Mod, (but that shouldn't prevent them, or the Admin, from having that discussion using PMs). As a community, we should help them to decide the appropriate course of action in decisions that affect us all. To help them with this, we should voice our thoughts, engage in fair discussion, and share our recommendations with a poll.

Let the Mods (and Admin) know what action you would like taken in response to this event.

P.S. - In order to maintain their impartiality, it is requested that the current Mods/Admin refrain from participating in this poll.  We're doing this on your behalf, so let the results speak for themselves.

----------


## JBeaucaire

The user brought the banning on themselves from definite unacceptable posts.  The fact that DominicB was the moderator faced with having to do that is irrelevant.

There is no automatic forgiveness for bannable posts just because you've been awesome in the past.   As a moderator, I am just as open to having my user account banned if start posting as Mordred did.   It's unfortunately that simple.

A public poll on this is also pointless.  We all liked Mordred and I'm sure a poll will reflect that from voters who get to vote based on liking Mordred.


This is an Excel community first and foremost.  Everything that detracts from people helping others with Excel questions is something to be minimized, in my opinion.


EDIT:  Thank you for the polite tone of your post above.  It's refreshing to see calm disagreement offered.

----------


## romperstomper

Why not issue a warning via PM first? (or was there one?)

----------


## ChemistB

I usually stay out of the politics of this site as I am just here to help people and to improve my skills and, while I understand the frustration of all the individuals who had a certain vision of how this site should be run, I do understand that the owners have the right to run it the way they want.   However, I cannot condone the banning of Mordred for expressing his opinion at the water cooler.

----------


## JBeaucaire

Reminder - Mordred the user account was banned.   Mordred has another user account and has used it and is free to do so under the same constraints as all of us.  If the "human" behind the account focuses on helping with Excel issue, like Mordred did originally, then there is no issue.

The moderation process, banning process is not a site-wide discussion process, at least it's not been in all my years here.  

Thank you ChemistB for a reasonable response.  Even the Water Cooler is subject to moderation, for all of us.

----------


## romperstomper

> This is an Excel community first and foremost.  Everything that detracts from people helping others with Excel questions is something to be minimized, in my opinion.



In what way is that related to this discussion?

Presumably the water cooler and other Office apps forums should all be closed down then as they are a distraction from Excel?  :Wink:

----------


## Richard Buttrey

@ ConneXionLost

This is a very bad construction for a poll. You'd never get a job with MORI.

1. It doesn't allow a complete choice in respect of the two questions. i.e. there's no option to retain Mordred's ban and Dominic's status.

2. You give no indication of the things complained of. You are assuming that we've all visited the watercoooler and are intimately aware of what's gone on. That's an assumption too far. A Poll, if it is to be fair should state clearly the comments on which you are seeking judgment. Otherwise voters will all have different evidential standpoints if at all.

3. What you have written is highly partial. You make suggestions about Dominic's mindset without using the same words in connection with Mordred. i.e. isn't it equally questionable that Mordred was 'acting on a grudge or emotionally motivated'? 

It's extremely kind of you to offer us all this help. May I say I'm overwhelmed. 

I see the forum operating in the way Edmund Burke saw democracy. i.e. the mods. are representatives of the community not delegates for it. There's a subtle but significant difference. 

So whilst I hear all the noise going on I for one will make my judgments on what I believe is best for the community as a whole, and will treat the results of an extremely badly formulated poll with the attention I think it deserves.

----------


## NBVC

> 1. It doesn't allow a complete choice in respect of the two questions. i.e. there's no option to retain Mordred's ban and Dominic's status.



ummm... isn't that the first choice?

----------


## Richard Buttrey

> ummm... isn't that the first choice?



Not the way I read it. Which rather reinforces my first point.

I read that as wanting to lift Mordred's ban, AND revoke Dominic's mod status. Which if it were to be instigated would not be the status quo.

----------


## NBVC

Leave things as they are now.. means to me don't do anything (i.e. leave the ban, leave the mod status)

The last option is the opposite.... remove the ban, revoke the mod status...

----------


## romperstomper

Question: Repeal Mordred's ban? / Revoke dominicb's Mod status?
Option 1: Do neither. Leave things as they are.

Seems pretty clear to me.  :Wink:

----------


## JBeaucaire

I read it the same way, NBVC.
=============

The "poll" is still an uninformed approach, as polls usually are.  They indicate what people think, what they generally like.  They aren't an indicator of anything factual.  The offending posts have been deleted, the user banned, there is no public process for banning, that falls to the unfortunate moderator(s) faced with the offenses.  

So, a really good addition to the poll might have been:  _"I saw all the offending posts..."_

...although, really, it's all still over.  Mordred can post here as his new persona, or not.

----------


## Andrew-R

> Everything that detracts from people helping others with Excel questions is something to be minimized, in my opinion.



I agree absolutely.

With that thought in mind look at the list of people that this ridiculous ban is upsetting - they're the people who are the most active on this forum and who provide the most help.

----------


## JBeaucaire

Which is why what Mordred did was so unfortunate.  Those who loved him and are not responsible for moderation can simply be mad at the moderation event and thus the moderators. That's a normal response, I have to say.

Any person is capable of trashing themselves and their rep on a forum with just a few horrid things, that happened, banning occurred, now all the expected outcry is a result.  If I were a paranoid type, which I am NOT, one could suspect this might actually be Mordred's intent.  We can't know that, though.

Your point is a good one, though.  People should realize that when they flame themselves out of a social circle where they are respected, they leave anger and dissent in their wake.  Whether it was intentional or not, his actions HAS set former "mates" at odds with one another.

This poll does nothing but fan that flame as well.  The ban won't be revoked by poll (the results of the poll known in advance, we all liked Mordred), the offenses occurred, the user was banned, the event is over and we are all left feeling the effects of what Mordred caused.

----------


## romperstomper

So, again, no overreaction on the mods' part? Couldn't have issued a warning, or a temporary ban, for example? Still, you are correct that this poll does nothing.

On the other hand, you are incorrect in your implication that Mordred has trashed his rep on this forum.

----------


## Andrew-R

> the user was banned



Yet, by your own admission, the user hasn't been banned - the account has been banned.  You are aware that Mordred has an alternative account and is still being allowed to access the forum through it.

Either what he did was so unpardonable that a permanent ban of the user was required, or the offense was slight enough to warrant only a warning/infraction.

What makes no sense is banning an account and then insisting, in the face of all reason, that the particular account used can never be unbanned.  It's like being banned from driving for a motoring offence, but then told it's fine for you to apply for a new licence under a different name.

How this looks from the non-mod side of the fence is that somebody did something in an overly hasty fashion and now the principle of moderator unity is being put in front of anything else, most importantly reason and keeping this forum focused on its stated purpose.

----------


## FortySixAndTwo

I just want to interject a little here.  I was banned for apparently making rude posts and threads but they were only comments and threads that dominicb didn't like, they weren't rude.  He kept deleting me and I kept remaking threads.  All I did was question the consistent use of thread locks, post deletions, and thread deletions.  

Yes JB, I can use this account but the point is dominicb told me after the ban that 



> I didn't take this banning step lightly - I think you are a knowledgable poster and at one time were a real asset to EF and if this weren't the case and you weren't a former moderator I'd have done it ages ago, but now you just seem to post spite



which is not entirely true.  This also tells me that he has been waiting for a reason, any reason, to ban me.

To conclude, yes I have been angered here by censoring and yes I've posted my unhappiness but I wasn't rude as dominicb said I was (which is another part of the PM from him).  Up until that point I was not only in the water cooler but I was also helping OP albeit sporadically but still helping.  

I know full well that this will not be undone and it's a shame that it has come to this.

Mordred/FortySixAndTwo

----------


## Kyle123

:EEK!:  I think that is pretty shocking

----------


## ConneXionLost

Hi Jerry,

Wow, you've really done a stellar job here of framing the discussion.  First by confirming, without permission for doubt, the audacity of those "'definite' unacceptable posts" by Mordred.  Then by making it hard for us not to feel sorry for poor dominicb, the unfortunate victim "faced with having to do that" dirty deed.  Some nice prose in establishing the futility of this poll, followed swiftly by the finality of the ban decision.  Fait accompli!  Not bad for putting a positive spin on the knee-jerk reactions of overzealous Moderator hammering on a minor indiscretion.  You should consider the legal profession.

Knowing that the Mods are obligated to defend each other's decisions/actions regardless of their personal opinions, you have certainly gone above and beyond the call.  I hope you're given some acknowledgement for your efforts - a T-shirt perhaps.  By the way, you weren't on jury duty in April 1992 were you?  Just a random thought.

As a side note for other readers who may not know, the forum software allows for the ban to be reversed at any time.  So to clarify Jerry's intonation of finality; it isn't that they can't undo the ban, it's that they won't.

P.S. - Thanks for acknowledging the polite tone of the first post.  I wish I could respond in kind, but your posts in this thread...well, seem to have a motive that has overlooked politeness.

P.P.S. - @ Richard Buttrey.  Dude, RTFQ. Really.

----------


## JapanDave

Seriously, can the mods involved in this caper please just take a step back and view the situation? Especially dominicb (Who BTW has been very quite about this whole affair) It is not as if he robbed a bank, shot a goat and stole someones beer.

Are you seriously going to uphold a ban of a user who has contributed significantly to this forum, which BTW is built upon those people like him who answer all those threads that get posted here? Does that count for nothing, the time he has spent answering threads and helping people under the name of ExcelForum? I think it was Richard Buttrey who said that the admin can run the forum the way they want, and they can, but what is the forum without all the experts here to answer threads? Are the mods going to field all the threads? How about Vaibhav? 

Where is the common sense in all of this? 

@dominicb, we get it, you were pi$$ed off. But , you have the great opportunity show your loyalty to ExcelForum by reverse the banning of a member who has contributed more than most here. Doing that, will show that you are the good guy here.

----------


## arlu1201

The user account Mordred has been banned, not the person.  Everyone knows that.  Mordred can continue to assist and share his vast excel knowledge with the rest of the users using his other user id.  Over time, everyone will recognize him (i dont think it will take long, considering his exceptional skills).

----------


## Kyle123

Then what exactly is the point of banning his handle? You're quite happy him posting, so why not just let him carry on with his original alias?

If he'd done something so horrible that warrants banning, you wouldn't want him posting at all

----------


## arlu1201

The ban was not given for his excel help to the other users but for spreading the negativity around. 

I guess the moderators & admin have every right to take decisions regarding what is right / wrong for the forum. Would any other forum allow such negativity to be spread on its own site?  Mordred is just one example.  Even Teylyn was banned earlier.

----------


## Kyle123

But by that token, surely you wouldn't want him posting at all? You've accepted that you're happy with him posting?





> I guess the moderators & admin have every right to take decisions regarding what is right / wrong for the forum.



Indeed if there were some sort of community approval scheme for appointing moderators, they would then be acting on behalf of the community. Without this process how can they decide what is best for the community?

Or are you suggesting some sort of parental dictatorship is best for everyone?

----------


## arlu1201

Has any other mod/admin banned someone for helping users in this forum?  Mordred can surely help others constructively but dont expect the mods to sit quiet when you see hatred, negativity, spite, etc being spread across the forum.

If any of the ex-mods were mods now, do you think they would have allowed anyone to make such noise?  So, why are they doing it themselves?

----------


## Andrew-R

> Would any other forum allow such negativity to be spread on its own site?



Would any other forum handle legitimate concerns from its contributors so poorly that it turns into negativity?

----------


## Kyle123

"Hatred"? 

Can you send me a link to demonstrate the overt hatred being spread?

----------


## JapanDave

> The ban was not given for his excel help to the other users but for spreading the negativity around. 
> 
> I guess the moderators & admin have every right to take decisions regarding what is right / wrong for the forum. Would any other forum allow such negativity to be spread on its own site?  Mordred is just one example.  Even Teylyn was banned earlier.



Arlu, can you see how contradictory you are being? It is fine for him to post under another handle , but not his own? What exactly did he do that was "SO" bad that he had to be banned , but allowed to post under another handle? You speak of negativity, but all this and other acts by the moderating team is bring negativity. Why not ban all the forum gurus and valued forum contributors for expressing their concern in this forum? I know why you don't, b/c then there would be no one left to answer the questions provided here. You and others continue to uphold your decisions , but if the truth is known, no discussion was had regarding this amongst the moderators, am I correct?

----------


## JBeaucaire

@ConneXionLost - For what it's worth, I got a T-shirt, so yeah, I guess that's something.    :Wink: 

Also, I wish you could respond in kind, too. That is my only motive, I don't have nearly as many levels as you seem to imply.  I think that's a good thing. You will always see in my posts, for what I'm able to accomplish, an attempt to encourage and acknowledge courteous discourse.  I am perfectly fine discussing difficult topics and I believe it is possible to do calmly, so I do it, and I acknowledge others who do the same.  There is nothing sinister in that goal.  That is what it is.

In fact, the actual "motive" to which you infer, if anything, is I hate banning as much as you and am striving to keep that from happening as a result of something someone says in thread I'm already involved in. I've been a mod for a few short weeks.  There's nothing magical about this job, and it certainly takes away from the time I spend here doing what I love, helping others with EXCEL question.  So, being unable to successfully encourage a calm discussion would be sad to me.  

You are correct, the software has unbanning tools, certainly.  I apologize if anyone thought otherwise due to what I said, which I don't believe actually happened.  The ban could be undone, it isn't going to be, to my knowledge, so I'm glad you help keep that clear.


@JapanDave - I hoped to have addressed that point earlier.  Everyone is subject to moderation no matter how awesome they've been in the past.  And fortunately banning doesn't remove that awesome past contribution. 

But inappropriate posts on my part TODAY would get me moderated TODAY regardless of past awesomeness, and repeated attempts to keep posting the moderated content would get me banned.  TODAY.  You, me, anyone.   

The simple answer to _"What is the common sense in all of this"_ for me is this:  There is no provision I know of that says, _"Since you've done so much for others in the past, you get X passes on normally unacceptable things."_   That is a common sentiment, truly, I admit that, but it's not more sensical.


@Kyle - that point has been made already... if he can post under a new ID why not unban the old one?  Because this is the "nice guy" approach Dave was asking for.  Mordred got his main ID banned and we'd like to think, like you seem to, that he can continue to contribute and not go over the lines again.  _Since we all believe that_, his second ID has not been banned as well.   There are users on the forum that will benefit from the second chance allowed under the second ID, I hope it's a good benefit.


@Andrew - Since we were all such good friends with Mordred, the negativity that has ensued is a normal response from loved ones.  In a big way, this whole discussion is natural.  Family defends, that's what it does.  The topic exists, however, because of what Mordred did to get his account banned.   There is no love for the "police force" in any scenario/story/TV show/movie where authority has been imposed on someone's family... the family always hates that and often defends it regardless of what it was.  That's family.

----------


## NBVC

i am really getting less and less inclined to visit this forum anymore... it's all gone down to ... ehehem... you know!

----------


## Andrew-R

> @Andrew - Since we were all such good friends with Mordred, the negativity that has ensued is a normal response from loved ones.



You miss my point - why was there negativity for Mordred to post, as per Arlette's post?  What is so wrong with the forum that seasoned users here feel that they have to be openly negative about it?

You're taking Mordred's ban as being a causation of negativity here, rather than as a symptom of the continuing disillusionment that regulars here have come to feel.

This negativity is because the regular increasingly felt that, despite all of their contributions to this forum, their opinions counted for nothing.  Some of our number got so vocal about this that they've been banned and that is now leading to more negativity.  At some point, a wet-behind-the-ears mod is going to take offence at something in this thread (or one of the ones like it) and we're going to have another banning, another argument, more negativity.

Do you not see how it is the mods, admins and owners here who are perpetuating this cycle?  How you are responsible for putting the importance of toeing the line above the importance of making this forum serve its intended function?  It would cost you nothing to back down and un-ban a user who is free to enjoy the forum anyway, and the we on the rational side of the fence might feel that, for once, we'd been listened to.  Instead you're going to stick to your guns, and dozens of us contributors are going to take another look at whether it's worth giving hundreds of hours of our time to a forum that cares not a jot what we think.

----------


## Kyle123

Maybe there should be industrial action.....  :Wink:

----------


## JBeaucaire

It's all one big issue for you guys, then.   I guess I understand that.  It still doesn't change the fact this thread isn't about everything, but I hear you.  No, I don't agree with your conclusions about how easy it is to just let it go and undo it.  Since I am a moderator, I do have to look at it from that stance that actions have consequences.

Mordred wouldn't take moderation and pushed til he got banned... action>reaction.  I believe that's normal. (or maybe typical is a better term)
Dominic banned Mordred and his supporters cry foul and band together in protest.  action>reaction.  I believe it's normal.

Making this event equivicol to all things disliked about the forum/owners/moderators/moderation... that's not normal.  But it is happening.  I didn't enjoin that in the past and I do not do so now, not because I'm a moderator, I just don't put everything together the way others do.  So I'm staying on topic here, "framing the discussion" as I have been accused.  Guilty as charged.

Prior to becoming a mod, I just reported the forum inconsistencies and bugs and went back to helping others.  I pretty much never engaged things like this.  The forum serves it purpose, questions are asked and contributors answer.   The more active a contributor is the more irritating bugs and technicalities become to us, but letting that steal my cake was never an option, so I just kept helping questioners.  Others get more involved, which is good, but they get their cake stolen along the way frequently.  

I do not know, have not asked, and aren't that interested in the motives of the owners overall, the forum serves its purpose for me.  As heated as all this stuff gets or is getting, it's all still a distraction.  In the past I could live with the problems real and perceptual by staying focused on helping others.  I can still do that.  I do still do that.

----------


## royUK

My major concerns are:

Dominic very rarely moderates on the forum and to paraphrase his message to Mordred. He was awol & did little moderating when I was admin. Even to the point where I considered removing him from the moderators list.

It's a farce to just ban Mordred from using his name here, and if he can post as another name then reinstate him.

What Mordred apparently said in the *deleted* posts is true, hence their deletion.

Anyway, there are no experienced moderators here now & no admin to guide & support them.

----------


## JBeaucaire

I want to find common ground with your points, Roy, but it's really hard.

Dominic's attendance... your concern is valid, it would be a good one for any moderator not actually moderating.

_It's a farce..._ I do not agree at all.  Everyone wants Mordred to continue to help, this lets him start over and do so.  To me it is the fair option, an acceptable compromise, if it needs to be characterized as such, between banning all contribution and just the offending account.


_Hence their deletion..._ Begging the question if ever I've seen it.  You've declared the posts were deleted because they were true.  Odd.  We were all told they were deleted for repititious inappropriate verbiage.  

This is just a stupid example... but if I posted over and over "I love this forum {expletive}{expletive}{expletive}{expletive}", I'd get banned.


Using your reasoning technique... if the ex Moderators wanted controlling input on the Moderation decisions and to guide moderating decisions, they should not have resigned. I actually wished you hadn't.  

Well-intended suggestions are welcome, but the current moderating team still has to moderate on current events.  
Input outside is taken as advisory, so really needs to be something more substantive than: 
_"We would never do this if we were in charge" 
"We disagree with this action we didn't see occur so it must be wrong"
"We're ok with whatever Mordred said/did, so you should be, too"
"This is more of the same stuff I already don't like...(list follows)"
_


This whole thread implies Moderation events occur at the community level.  That has never been true and you know it.

----------


## romperstomper

> _It's a farce..._ I do not agree at all.  Everyone wants Mordred to continue to help, this lets him start over and do so.  To me it is the fair option, an acceptable compromise, if it needs to be characterized as such, between banning all contribution and just the offending account.



It is a farce. What does it actually achieve? If you think he's going to post more of the same, you should ban him outright; if not, you should at worst have given him a temporary ban to cool off.





> _Hence their deletion..._ Begging the question if ever I've seen it.  You've declared the posts were deleted because they were true.  Odd.  We were all told they were deleted for repititious inappropriate verbiage.



By whom were you told this? I did not see anything in those posts that would merit a ban.





> This is just a stupid example... but if I posted over and over "I love this forum {expletive}{expletive}{expletive}{expletive}", I'd get banned.



Yes, these days you probably would.





> Using your reasoning technique... if the ex Moderators wanted controlling input on the Moderation decisions and to guide moderating decisions, they should not have resigned. I actually wished you hadn't.



If we'd had controlling input, we wouldn't have resigned.





> This whole thread implies Moderation events occur at the community level.



No it doesn't, it merely shows that a proportion of the more senior members of the community think this particular decision was wrong. Any rational person, moderator or otherwise, would expect a similar reaction. Do I think you should listen to the community consensus? Yes. I would have. Do I think you will? No, especially in light of this thread.

(to be clear, Jerry, wherever I say 'you', I mean the mod/admin team as a whole, not you personally)

As Andrew said, there was a certain amount of ill-feeling present before this event which was largely down to the way certain things were handled. Unfortunately, the way this was handled has probably not helped that situation. Still, as has been said before, if we don't like it, we know where the door is. I'll close it behind me to avoid a draught.

----------


## royUK

> Using your reasoning technique... if the ex Moderators wanted controlling input on the Moderation decisions and to guide moderating decisions, they should not have resigned. I actually wished you hadn't.



Rory has answered the other points.

As for this one, I hung on hoping things would improve. I even tried to get on with Arlette's attitude. In the end I realised it was just getting worse.

----------


## snb

What is so difficult about lifting Mordred's ban ?
Pride ?, prejudice ?, low self-esteem ?, feelings of embarrassment ?, over zealousness ?, inappropriate semantics ?, orthodoxy ?, forum fundamentalism ?

Which disasters will occur after lifting Mordred's ban ?
What harm will the lifting of this ban do ?

----------


## teylyn

Hi folks. Nice to see things are still chirpy and bright here. 

re "even teylyn was banned" -- Yes, indeed, I was. After I told the owner a few truths on how to run an international business. That was, apparently, racism.But the ban was temporary, so, hey, I'm back. Only, I don't really care anymore. ( Side note:  Seeing how npamcpp fares right now, mentioning language skills of the "tech team" and general aspects of international business is still considered racism and warrants post deletions and infractions. But I digress.)


re "Negativity" -- I wonder where it all comes from. That mysterious "negativity", I mean. Who generates it? This forum was tracking along with a good group of moderators for a few years. The only unhappiness was that the moderators' suggestions for changes to the forum were never implemented. I remember Vai's full-mouthed promises from years and years ago. Along the lines that "it's the users who run the forum" and that he would happily follow the guidance and advice of the (then) admin and (then) moderators to make this forum great. What really happened is that the advice from the (then) moderators got ignored, the (then) admin was banned (see a pattern here?), and the forum leadership was dis-established and replaced with people selected NOT by community consent, as had been the custom before. Pray, tell, who is spreading "negativity"?

re "DominicB moderating" -- In my years as a moderator in this forum, I've never seen much moderating from DominicB. He seemed to enjoy the title and the status (what status? For the real mods it's just more work), but never really got involved in any discussions in the mod forum, or in guiding members to keep with the forum rules. I hardly ever saw an infraction and never a ban from DominicB. This very untypical behaviour of placing a ban on Mordred smacks of a knee-jerk reaction that must have roots somewhere beyond Mordred's conduct. Whether or not the conduct was acceptable or not is something I will not embark on, since I don't feel that this forum treats everyone equally anymore.

Finally, banning "Mordred" but at the same time saying that his contributions are welcome to this forum with his other handle is a breathtaking paradox. I see from the above posts that others share my sentiment. 

Arlette, JB, and all other moderators: Please don't get confused by the virtuality concept of a web site. It makes absoutely no sense at all to ban a "handle". 

That's like getting a driving ban because I violated a traffic rule with the blue car. So I now can no longer drive the blue car, but I can still drive the green car. Where is the logic in that?

Oh, but yes! I see it now: The forum does not want Mordred as an exceptionally skilled contributor who also has a personal opinion (which does not align with the forum owner, so he's not allowed to air it). No, the forum does not want any of that. The forum only wants Mordred's skills, so the forum can shine. Mordred's opinions need to be shut up, but his skillful contributions to the community are still welcome.

I'm not sure I get the correct English term for this concept, but it's somewhere along the lines of exploitation, bloodsucking, and favouritism.

So, in closing, I'll repeat my opening line:

Nice to see things are still chirpy and bright here.

----------


## JBeaucaire

> That's like getting a driving ban because I violated a traffic rule with the blue car. So I now can no longer drive the blue car, but I can still drive the green car. Where is the logic in that?



That's not an accurate metaphor.  More accurately would be you violated a traffic rule in the blue car and it was IMPOUNDED by the police and sold, you no longer have that car.  You now have to drive the less-desirable red car and do your best not get that one impounded, too.

Teylyn, this forum shines most from the Excel skills of all who contribute Excel knowledge.  That is undeniably true, and Mordred in the 'red-car' is hopefully continuing to add to the shine.  It's not a paradox that he has the option of trying the red-car.  

Since your banning was reversed, anything is possible.  I imagine it was earned.  Perhaps a great red-car performance can lead to reacquisition of the blue-car... who knows for now?  We'll see if that's what can happen or not.  It won't happen with this discussion, it would happen because of what the red-car accomplishes, I'd offer.

The forum isn't sucking anyone dry of anything.  We are all here voluntarily, we all WANT to be here, so we are.  I have never seen anyone coerced into contributing here against their will, the door is open both ways at all times.



On the other note, in honesty, and as posted in the other thread, I do not share the idea that mentioning language skills or language barriers is racist.  But I warned that others do and had reported that post as such, so all the moderators were drawn to moderate it.  It happens.   That's why we always have to moderate our own comments, especially when we're unhappy about something.  I'm breathtakingly amazed at what people give themselves permission to say when they're angry.

----------


## Andrew-R

> That's not an accurate metaphor.



It's a perfectly accurate metaphor, and you must be being deliberately disingenuous not to see it that way.

The only purpose of a permanent ban is to remove an undesirable element from the community and if a person is undesirable when they call themselves A they are equally so when they call themselves B.  Do you really believe that if you say otherwise often enough that you will convince anybody?

Clearly nothing we say matters and this ban is going to stand, but please don't add insult to injury by trying to convince us that a bad decision, possibly made for the wrong reasons entirely, was actually a carefully considered compromise.

----------


## JBeaucaire

The metaphor was flawed and has been corrected to match what is the current state of affairs on this issue.  Is it disingenuous for YOU not to see that?  I wouldn't accuse you of that, that's unnecessary.





> The only purpose of a permanent ban is to remove an undesirable element from the community



That is the main purpose, agreed. But it's not the only overall result.  Teylyn's as a case.  

You're right, the moderators CAN ban every user account from the IP / real person.  But we haven't.  And do not plan on it in this case.  Not at this time.  Even if you want that since that point keeps getting hit, FortySixAndTwo will get banned if that account is used in a way to warrant it.  And that could definitely lead to it being the permanent ban so importantly underlined.

No insult, nor injury in my posts is intended.  Yes, I believe my point can be understood by others, I'm not needing agreement, too.  Convincing would be a great accomplishment, but no, I do not think that will happen.  Since I care about this stuff, I will try as I wish to make my points, as you try to make yours.

----------


## zbor

> That's like getting a driving ban because I violated a traffic rule with the blue car. So I now can no longer drive the blue car, but I can still drive the green car. Where is the logic in that?



The sad thing is if you drive a car nobody (police) will give you benefit of all traffic rules you've done right. 
But break only one rule and you'll get a penalty.
Sometimes only warning. Sometimes you'll pay. Or you might lose your driving licence. 

And that doesn't change were you sit on the wheel for a first time or you were professional F1 driver.

(Car color doesn't make any difference).

----------


## Andrew-R

> The metaphor was flawed and has been corrected to match what is the current state of affairs on this issue.



No, it has been twisted to attempt to justify actions after the fact.  I don't know why you feel the need to argue your ridiculous case, but what I've come to realise is that it doesn't matter, because this thread has provided me with all of the excuses I need to leave this forum behind.

I've enjoyed the time I've spent here, and it has been an incredible learning experience for me, but the people running this forum clearly do not care about the people who contribute here, so it seems pointless remaining.  I'm not the first, and I won't be the last, I just wonder how many good people you'll lose before reason prevails again.

Bye,

Andrew

----------


## ConneXionLost

@ JB

One main point most don't agree with is the "permanent" ban over the temporary; and in all your posts, I don't see you properly address this either.  Honestly, don't you agree a "permanent" ban is overkill? In fact, I don't understand why a temporary ban wasn't the chosen action, and I don't see how modifying the current ban from permanent to temporary would lessen the point made from the Mod perspective.  If Mordred lost is temper, got angry, and said/wrote some things he shouldn't have, don't you think a temporary ban would be the *reasonable* Mod response to allow a "cooling-off" period?

Please, lets not go back to the "One Fish Two Fish Red Fish Blue Fish" analogies.  Mordred's other account is beside the point and irrelevent to the issue of assigning a permanent ban as a first response to an emotional outburst from a Senior forum member.

----------


## JBeaucaire

Your habit to characterize my arguments rather than simply refute them with yours is adding to your frustration, which is why I don't characterize other people's arguments as dumb, ridiculous, or whatever.  All have ready access to what they think.

Outside this thread, Andrew, you and I have been at odds on nothing I can readily recall.  I am responding for no other reason than I have an opposing view to posted comments, nothing else.  It's a given that nothing in this thread will change anything, it's a discussion, it can serve as table for discussion.


If my responses here as a moderator lead to you leaving the entire forum, then it's my turn to be floored.  My attempts to discuss something courteously and without inflammatory comments leads to someone of your earned rep leaving?  Ghastly.  Truly ghastly.  My turn to say "baby out with the bathwater".  No way you should equate your involvment with users and the resolution of interesting Excel scenarios to this issue with Mordred.  We all accomplish ourselves so much better outside this stuff.  Shudder.  I do urge you to reconsider that decision.

This forum , for me, has been about help and learn and admire.  It will continue to be so for me, now and when someone else takes my moderator badge.  Nothing in threads like this one is going to steal my cake.

---------- Post added at 03:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:12 PM ----------

@ConneXionLost - good points.  I dont' currently agree it was overkill, but it is worth looking at without all the hooplah. 

I hope Mordred addresses those ideas privately to the moderating team in a contrite manner.  Anything is possible.

----------


## ConneXionLost

> ... I dont' currently agree it was overkill, ...



I still don't understand your rationale for this, but then perhaps it wasn't a fair question, and perhaps your answer isn't what it seems.  If you were to agree (it was overkill), it would put you at odds with another Mod.  I do not (cannot) know that your current response is honest, or just quoting the party line to avoid the conflict.  Hopefully, this "pointless poll" will have served its purpose and generated some honest reflection amongst the Mods.

----------


## JBeaucaire

> Hopefully, this "pointless poll" will have served its purpose and generated some honest reflection amongst the Mods.



And it has.  Thanks for being an even hand in a difficult discussion.

----------


## JapanDave

Can I point out the obvious here, why is it that Vaibhav iｓ always quite around these threads. Come on Vaibhav, it is your forum, take responsibility start answering some questions. As I have said before , I run a company and and if I did not outline where I want the company to advance to, I would have a lot of confused workers. It is part and parsel of running a business to answer employees concerns. 

But, there is one big difference between a forum and a company, the people here are not paid to help "YOUR" forum to get to where it is today, so I at least think you owe the senior members that much. I am a realist, I don't expect every decision to go in favor of the members , that is just impossible. But , on the same token, if you want the senior members to stay I believe that you should at least try to listen to them and if possible accommodate the very simple requests I have heard so far and give some sort of explanation as to why it can't be implemented if that is the case.

So members, here is Vaibhav's chance to set things reasonably straight. And Vaibhav, if you decide on remaining silent, I think the general consensus will be that you really don't care about the members here. You know what they say, "silence speaks louder than words."

----------


## vlady

Just questions didn't really expect answer's.

Are the problems being mentioned or discussed by the senior member's exist when vai, arlu,new mod's and others are not handling this forum?
or it's just now that the issues are being bombarded to the new admin's.
Are those problems posted to the "Suggestion for improvement" and didn't take any action?

Did the senior member got warning or is a warning needed just because it's a senior not a new member.
If the issue "spreading negative" is true and continuously doing it isn't it like a spammer that we automatically banned?

if this is a new member is he automatically "banned"?
If ever i would own a forum like this or be a member of other forum and want to over rate this forum, can i make criticism so this forum will go down and my/new forum will boost?

Why is there a sudden resignation's of position when the new admin were instated? Isn't it that like a "strike/boycott" didn't like the new admin? why??

These are just few questions that's running on my mind.
hopefully i didn't offended anyone with this..just all my thoughts

Regards,
vladimir

----------


## Toonies

Hi it might be an idea to have an independent board of appeal 

as I’m sure that in any democratic society everyone has that right 
to ensure that if a judgement has been made it is safe and unbiased

----------


## Richard Buttrey

@vlady

You haven't offended anyone. Since you've asked I'll attempt to give some factual responses and refrain from any subjective judgment for obvious reasons.

I think it's fair to say that the change of ownership when Vai bought the business was the start of these matters.

I suspect that absence of changes being made in response to some of the 'Suggestions' thread/forum was a contributory factor.

I'll be careful with this one. I had no prior knowledge either way whether the person banned received a warning. It has been stated that there had been dialog between the moderator concerned and the person banned. The moderators operate under a code of practice laid down before the business changed hands. i.e. in the main by previous moderators. That code of practice does not preclude unilateral action being taken and recognises that it may be necessary. That code of practice also requires that moderators don't question the decisions of other moderators.

I have no direct knowledge of what happened when the new admin was installed. My belief, and it is only that and may be wrong so don't take this as a fact - I offer it as a potential explanation, is that the previous admin and the owner couldn't agree about some matters. What those matters were I have no definitive knowledge and your guess would be as good as mine. 

To avoid any doubt this is not meant to be any value judgment on anyone.

Hope that helps.

----------


## npamcpp

Richard, as a moderator you have full access to the discussions among the moderators about issues and changes --  in the mod forum. You are one of the moderators who don't seem to care to participate in the mod forum discussions. If you chose to do so, some of your knowledge gaps might be closed.

----------


## Pepe Le Mokko

Just to add some info, I was moderator here some time ago and didn't participate much in mods discussions either. Why? Because English is not my mother tongue.
I do know enough to moderate or help, but did not feel at ease in discussions.
This of course is my personal problem and does not apply to anyone else. 
My point is that not participating in discussions does not necessarily reflect a lack of interest in what is being said

----------


## Richard Buttrey

> Richard, as a moderator you have full access to the discussions among the moderators about issues and changes --  in the mod forum. You are one of the moderators who don't seem to care to participate in the mod forum discussions. If you chose to do so, some of your knowledge gaps might be closed.



So is there something in my last post that is factually wrong? I'm genuinely interested to know and given that seemingly you know more than I do you're in an ideal position to tell me. Off line in a PM if you prefer.

----------


## ConneXionLost

> ... That code of practice also requires that moderators don't question the decisions of other moderators. ...



In the "open" forums this is true, however I don't believe this was ever intended to give any Mod taking unilateral action to just leave it as that.  There is/was an expectation to explain your actions thus giving the other Mods some understanding of what occurred.  If the action is supported, then fine, but if the other Mods didn't agree or find the action to be reasonable, then corrections were made, by the Admin if necessary.  Since nothing appears to have been done to change the length of Mordred's ban, then either:

- no discussion has taken place (Why not?); or
- you all agree that a permanent ban is reasonable (Given it was Mordred, we find this difficult to understand without substantiation); or
- the Admin is "absent" from duty (this one is the long story).

Realizing that you (as a Mod) can't/shouldn't respond openly to these questions doesn't help I'm afraid.

----------


## martindwilson

ban everyone and start again

----------


## Richard Buttrey

> In the "open" forums this is true, however I don't believe this was ever intended to give any Mod taking unilateral action to just leave it as that.  There is/was an expectation to explain your actions thus giving the other Mods some understanding of what occurred.  .....



With respect what you 'believe' is not particularly relevant. What's important is what's written. I quote
"3. Moderators should respect each other moderators' decisions regarding the handling of threads/users...e.g locking, deleting, banning, disciplining, etc."

That isn't qualified in any way, nothing is implied and hence includes the moderators forum or indeed anywhere.

Regards

----------


## ConneXionLost

> That isn't qualified in any way, nothing is implied and hence includes the moderators forum or indeed anywhere.



So, you're a real "Letter of the Law" kind of person.

----------


## martindwilson

dom b and richard b both come from the NW UK, they're a funny lot up there lol

----------


## Pete_UK

Hey, I heard that !!

----------


## TMS

We Northerners don't have a great opinion of them down South either  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## martindwilson

shame that as I'm visiting blackpool tommorow . best put my flat cap on and wind my IQ down a notch so i fit in  :Smilie:  :Smilie:  :Smilie:

----------


## Richard Buttrey

> So, you're a real "Letter of the Law" kind of person.



No. Not in all arenas and on all occasions.
Just someone who's careful. Particularly here where any divergence from the rules or procedures is regularly jumped on by the many who are keen to comment and criticise. No point in offering a hostage to fortune is there?

----------


## TMS

@mdw: you sound like my granddad ... So that must make you about 100. Funny enough, he used to enjoy going to Blackpool for his holidays, too  :Cool:   :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):   :Smilie:

----------


## Richard Buttrey

> shame that as I'm visiting blackpool tommorow . best put my flat cap on and wind my IQ down a notch so i fit in



Can it be wound down much further?

Don't forget the whippets either.

----------


## TMS

> tommorow



Is that an example of you winding down your IQ?  Good one!

----------


## shg

> best put my flat cap on and wind my IQ down a notch so i fit in



Increase the average IQ both home and away, huh?  :Smilie:

----------


## royUK

Andrew-R is yet another valued poster leaving.

The comment about banning IPs for Mordred is ridiculous, have you never heard of proxy servers? There is one way to stop someone using the Forum & I have used it a couple of times, but I'm keeping that method to myself.

---------- Post added at 06:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:41 AM ----------





> With respect what you 'believe' is not particularly relevant. What's important is what's written. I quote
> "3. Moderators should respect each other moderators' decisions regarding the handling of threads/users...e.g locking, deleting, banning, disciplining, etc."
> 
> That isn't qualified in any way, nothing is implied and hence includes the moderators forum or indeed anywhere.
> 
> Regards



There is nothing in the Mods' Code of Conduct to prevent a discussion in the Mods' Forum & earlier posts by mods suggest this has happened. I think he only reason the ban remains is because the current mods are afraid of losing face. If I was still admin then I would have initiated some discussion, but it's difficult to provide evidence when posts have been deleted. Have you "mods" never thought of using soft delete?

I'm just amazed that the remaining mods of the old team are the ones who did the least moderating and tended to ignore the rules when it suited them.

----------


## FortySixAndTwo

> Has any other mod/admin banned someone for helping users in this forum? Mordred can surely help others constructively but dont expect the mods to sit quiet when you see hatred, negativity, spite, etc being spread across the forum.



First of all, Ive never spread any hatred or spite here, be clear on that!  That statement is akin to calling Teylyn racist.   Have I disclosed my displeasure here?  Yes and it seems the failsafe way for you and your new mod team (save for a small few) to deal with OP displeasure is a life ban.  Very diplomatic of you! Insert sarcasm here!  





> If any of the ex-mods were mods now, do you think they would have allowed anyone to make such noise? So, why are they doing it themselves?



  Did any ex-mods see such noise?  I know I didn't see any such noise prior to Christmas 2011.  Why do the ex-mods do it themselves?  You and the non-active owner should really look in the mirror to find that answer.




> Would any other forum handle legitimate concerns from its contributors so poorly that it turns into negativity?



Still waiting?   :Wink: 




> if he can post under a new ID why not unban the old one? Because this is the "nice guy" approach Dave was asking for.



No, the nice guy approach is as many have said, a temporary ban.




> There are users on the forum that will benefit from the second chance allowed under the second ID, I hope it's a good benefit.



Really?  Care to elaborate more on who (other than spammers) benefit from second IDs?




> Since we were all such good friends with Mordred, the negativity that has ensued is a normal response from loved ones.



There is a sly undertone that I dont like in that sentence, one of a few!




> Mordred wouldn't take moderation and pushed til he got banned... action>reaction.



The only moderation that happened during my pre-ban was mysterious post and thread deletions (and I didn't know who was deleting so it's not like I was pointing fingers at anyone particular moderator).  Yeah I pushed with silly, see it *(SILLY)*, thread restarts but how you or any current moderators conclude that I pushed to a permanent ban is beyond me.  

The rest of post 33 is what I like to call fluff and stuff.  I usually see politicians say fluff and stuff when they want to skirt issues, they distract with rhetoric!





> Everyone wants Mordred to continue to help, this lets him start over and do so. To me it is the fair option, an acceptable compromise



I would be very interested to see how you would take to being banned from here based on an overanxious moderators action.  Would you be interested in taking on a new ID and starting all over?  Would you still find it a fair and acceptable compromise?  




> Since your banning was reversed, anything is possible. I imagine it was earned. Perhaps a great red-car performance can lead to reacquisition of the blue-car... who knows for now? We'll see if that's what can happen or not. It won't happen with this discussion, it would happen because of what the red-car accomplishes, I'd offer.



If you think I will apoligise to an overzealous moderator and for having an opinion that the new team doesnt like you are sadly mistaken.  I have done nothing that warrants an apology and I will not beg, my upbringing will not allow me to do so unless it is warranted.  Im adult enough to acknowledge that I was at worst being childish but again, a life time ban is an example of the do I as I say draconian state this forum has become.




> But I warned that others do and had reported that post as such, so all the moderators were drawn to moderate it.



Funny how that wasnt the case for me!  Its hard to believe that I might take that personal in nature and thus Ive been flagged to ban with minimal reasoning eh?




> The metaphor was flawed and has been corrected to match what is the current state of affairs on this issue.



Of course it was flawed, you as a moderator decided it must be so!  




> FortySixAndTwo will get banned if that account is used in a way to warrant it.



So dont get caught being a part of a community and make interweb friends?  Now I must, as FortySixAndTwo, only answer questions in the Excel forums and stay clear of these threads?  I must not criticize the hierarchy here otherwise it will lead to a definite  permanent ban?  I must resign myself to no more than a machine in order to stay controversy?  




> No insult, nor injury in my posts is intended.



I am actually quite insulted by you and if I was a current moderator I would be holding a discussion with other moderators to ban you.  Youve aloud yourself to fall into a position where you feel it necessary to impose your interpretations of others and enforce your reasoning by sleight of hand responses!  Im not going to quote all your rhetoric as others can read (and I encourage you others to re-read JBs posts) but Ill shine a light on you for the moment!  Before I became the person in the field that I am now, I worked under a person that was very crafty at making others (myself included) look bad in order to make him look good.  You are cleverly doing the same but to a lesser degree.  The evidence is all over this thread and is summated well with 



> Since I care about this stuff, I will try as I wish to make my points, as you try to make yours.



You couldnt care about other peoples points if they dont exactly match your own.  I've never had a problem with the way you help other people here up until now.  Am I insulting you by not liking you at the moment, no!  Am I spreading negativity because I don't like you at the moment, no!  Am I hating you and thus spreading hate, no!  Will I get banned for speaking out against you, most likely!  People here are questioning your reasoning and you are not liking it so your reaction is to trivialize people's comments.  I don't like it one bit!  




> I hope Mordred addresses those ideas privately to the moderating team in a contrite manner. Anything is possible.



Again, why should I beg and where is an apology warranted (Im sure youll be expecting one now)?

I am who I am!  I enjoy good learning forums like any other person that donates time to the cause and I will keep doing so, just not here if I have to "start all over".  I will take part in water cooler type discussions and I will speak out when I feel it's necessary.  I will NOT insult people unless they've insulted me and I won't push unless I feel I've been pushed, it's the way I am!  I don't like having to respond like like this but at the same time I won't cower or concede to the issues bestowed upon this forum.  To expect me to in order to lift this lifetime ban which is baseless is an unreasonable request.

Do what you will with me, ban both my IPs for all I care, there are other forums out there that take criticism from members and try to better their forums.  Those forums are worth my time and energy.

----------


## Richard Buttrey

> There is nothing in the Mods' Code of Conduct to prevent a discussion in the Mods' Forum & earlier posts by mods suggest this has happened. .... If I was still admin then I would have initiated some discussion, but it's difficult to provide evidence when posts have been deleted. Have you "mods" never thought of using soft delete?



Hi,

I refer the honourable gentleman to the reply I gave earlier. Do you accept that as a matter of fact what I said is correct? 

Neither did I say that there is anything that prevents discussion amongst mods. There isn't: I agree. 

But again the code of practice is still relevant. Point 2 recognises that a unilateral ban (or presumably a lesser sanction) by a mod is permitted. 
You use the words 'If I was still admin I would have initiated discussion'. But you also used the same expression in your post #34 on 31st August where you tacitly admit that:
"....He was awol & did little moderating when I was admin. Even to the point where I considered removing him from the moderators list."

Presumably in considering that removal you knew you would be acting within the practice code? Would you have expected to be subject to the constant questioning and argument that's gone on here in recent times. I don't see any substantive difference between the two.

Would you have accepted the sort of abuse we saw earlier when npmacpp said "you're such a sorry waste of a moderator space, ...you were a failure from day one.....you just don't belong in this role". I guess not. Such comments are a disgrace and have no place here where normal civil courtesies are the order of the day.

Let me ask you a direct question. Would you have banned or otherwise sanctioned npmacpp for that? I'd be really interested to know.

Look Roy, all I'm saying is that from what I can see nothing that has been done is contrary to the code of practice? Would you agree that too? Nor indeed any different to what you might have done. You and others may well think it should have been done differently but on your own evidence there are clearly circumstances where you felt it would be perfectly acceptable to take the action you mentioned which is essentially no different.

Do you think that this whole matter has not subsequently been discussed by the mods?

----------


## JapanDave

> Do you think that this whole matter has not subsequently been discussed by the mods?



If a discussion was had, I and others would be very interested as to the reason that the ban is still being enforced? We as members need some sort of continuity, which does not seem to be happening. I have seen people do worse things than what Mordred said and they are still here. If you really wanted to ban someone , why not ban this <insert your choice adjective  here> ? This is a mystery to me.

----------


## Richard Buttrey

> If a discussion was had, ..



Did I say had?

----------


## npamcpp

This is quite an interesting thread. 

It shows me that this forum has no future. The veterans and the now-mods are arguing over how the forum should be used, what the rules really mean and how to enforce them. 

With whatever handle I have used here, this is just getting too much.  I'll log off now and delete all my cookies, reset the browser, re-start the world and never return here. This forum has declined in answer quality and in moderation quality very, very sharply since the mass exodus of moderators. I've used this handle to help folks who need answers to Excel questions, but all the politics are really off-putting. 

Sorry, but I'm not willing to handle this any more. 

For the last few years, whenever I entered an "e" into the address bar, the browser would suggest "excelforum.com". I'll wipe that. I'll go to Microsoft Answers or to Eileen's Lounge or The Code Cage instead from now on. 

(Hey mods, this post does not breach rule 13. I don't have a link in my signature and there is not a single link in the text above, so no reason to delete the post, get it?!!)

Struggle on. 

Good-bye, and thanks for all the fish. 

I've had it.

npamcpp/teylyn

----------


## Richard Buttrey

> This is quite an interesting thread. 
> Good-bye, and thanks for all the fish. 
> 
> I've had it.
> 
> npamcpp/teylyn



Mmm, interesting timing. 
Still no apology I see for those rather disparaging words of yours that I quoted. One wonders if this exit is because you haven't the good grace to retract those words. Still you won't see this post so I'll say no more.

Sorry you're going, you were very good when here but at least it's now one less distraction.

pip pip.

----------


## royUK

Richard

I never said that I would remove moderators without discussion, so don't twist my words.

I never discussed mods' decisions publicly but on occasion I PM'd if I disagreed with their actions.

As for this discussion continuing if I was still admin, no it wouldn't because I  and most of the other moderators at that time would have been no party to a stupid decision to ban a username & then tell the user that it's OK to post under a different ID. Utter nonsense.

----------


## Domski

Can't be bothered to read all the posts in this thread but this all seems just a little bit pathetic.

Does what Mordred said really justify a complete ban?

Dom

----------


## Richard Buttrey

> Richard
> 
> I never said that I would remove moderators without discussion, so don't twist my words.



I didn't say you did but your words speak for themselves. 

With or without discussion is rather the whole essence of this current debate so it's incumbent on you to be quite explicit. In reading your post I expected you to have considered your words carefully. Why didn't you add, 'after discussion with other mods.'? That would have been so easy to do.

----------


## Richard Buttrey

> Richard
> 
> As for this discussion continuing if I was still admin, no it wouldn't because I  and most of the other moderators at that time would have been no party to a stupid decision to ban a username & then tell the user that it's OK to post under a different ID. Utter nonsense.



That wasn't the question I asked. I asked if you would have sanctioned npamcpp/teylyn for her disraceful reference to Arlette?
So....?

----------


## JapanDave

> Did I say had?



I don't understand?
You said,
_"Do you think that this whole matter has not subsequently been discussed by the mods?"_ 

How else was I supposed to take that?

So the mods have not discussed this matter. Well then that is disgraceful if you haven't, I would have thought banning an obviously respected member who was good enough to be a mod here warrants a discussion, don't you?

----------


## Richard Buttrey

Hi,

You were supposed to take it exactly as written. i.e. A question as to whether or not you thought it has subsequently been discussed by mods.
i.e present perfect tense not past perfect. If it helps it has been and is currently being discussed.

Regards

----------


## JapanDave

> Hi,
> 
> You were supposed to take it exactly as written. i.e. A question as to whether or not you thought it has subsequently been discussed by mods.
> i.e present perfect tense not past perfect. If it helps it has been and is currently being discussed.
> 
> Regards



I can't play with words. Has it been discussed or not. Yes or no will suffice.

----------


## Richard Buttrey

See my previous last sentence. If it helps - yes.

----------


## FortySixAndTwo

> I had no prior knowledge either way whether the person banned received a warning. It has been stated that there had been dialog between the moderator concerned and the person banned.



There was no discussion before the permanent ban, there's no doubt one now but there wasn't before hand.  Time to get off the horse!

----------


## ConneXionLost

> Mmm, interesting timing. 
> Still no apology I see for those rather disparaging words of yours that I quoted. One wonders if this exit is because you haven't the good grace to retract those words. Still you won't see this post so I'll say no more.
> 
> Sorry you're going, you were very good when here but at least it's now one less distraction.
> 
> pip pip.



Your level of snark here is not doing you, or the forum, any favours.  Rather, you're giving this community more substantiation to agree with those who've already gone.  As a Mod, is your behaviour really better than what you consider one less distraction?

Feel free to apologize.

----------


## JapanDave

> Can I point out the obvious here, why is it that Vaibhav iｓ always quite around these threads. Come on Vaibhav, it is your forum, take responsibility start answering some questions. As I have said before , I run a company and and if I did not outline where I want the company to advance to, I would have a lot of confused workers. It is part and parsel of running a business to answer employees concerns. 
> 
> But, there is one big difference between a forum and a company, the people here are not paid to help "YOUR" forum to get to where it is today, so I at least think you owe the senior members that much. I am a realist, I don't expect every decision to go in favor of the members , that is just impossible. But , on the same token, if you want the senior members to stay I believe that you should at least try to listen to them and if possible accommodate the very simple requests I have heard so far and give some sort of explanation as to why it can't be implemented if that is the case.
> 
> So members, here is Vaibhav's chance to set things reasonably straight. And Vaibhav, if you decide on remaining silent, I think the general consensus will be that you really don't care about the members here. You know what they say, "silence speaks louder than words."



It has been a day and still Vaibhav has not responded???

----------


## Domski

> It has been a day and still Vaibhav has not responded???



Be realistic, you might hear back in 6 months or so.

Dom

----------


## TMS

Come on guys ... 3 pages and 86 replies!?  

I usually stop banging my head on the wall before it starts to scar (me or the wall)  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

Don't you think it's time to draw a line?  Nothing's going to happen, neither side will agree, Vai won't respond ...

Worth raising the point and supporting Mordred but probably time to step back into the real world.

----------


## Marcol

@ TMS
Spoilsport!!!

I just love a pointless cat fight, keep it up guys ...  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## TMS

@Marcol: you Scots ... you're all the same  :Wink:

----------


## Domski

I'm in between holidays and don't like thinking about the real world very much at the moment. Roll on Friday... :Smilie: 

Dom

----------


## JapanDave



----------


## Kyle123

And just because I'm from Barnsley and can;t resist a Kes reference:

----------


## TMS

I'm detecting a bit of a mood swing here that seems like a good thing ...  :Smilie:

----------


## Domski

My mood generally swings between exasperation and disbelief when I visit here.

Dom

----------


## Blake 7

Wow, shocked and horrified to hear this news. M is a top bloke and entitled to his opinion and free speach - isn't that what the watercooler is for?

Where can I read the darstadly prose to judge for myself how "awfull" it may or may not have been?

If whatever he wrote was soooooo bad surly this merits banning the person and not the ID, otherwise its a farce!

Who is the Dominic they speak of anyway? I know him not.....

----------


## TMS

@Domski: come on Dom, we were doing so well. Keep taking the meds!  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## daddylonglegs

This thread is now closed - please see "sticky" thread in The Water Cooler for more details

----------

