Sharkbok, I'm not sure why you have me down as a 3 but just for the record...
As for my vote, it's obviously a 2.
Captain12,893 posts
16 Jan 2017, 20:17
#41
16 Jan 2017, 20:17#41
Board poll on posting practice.
Started by Mozart155 REPLIES2,504 VIEWS· 13 Jan 2017, 18:47
sharkbok
Captain23,261 posts
Captain23,261 posts
16 Jan 2017, 20:22
#42
16 Jan 2017, 20:22#42
@Denny I will update.
@Moz- this is the voting thread. We all need to be working from the same data source.
If it is split over 10 different threads- the numbers will have no statistical validity. It would be too easy to make a mistake.
Everyone has to formally vote to be counted.
@Moz- this is the voting thread. We all need to be working from the same data source.
If it is split over 10 different threads- the numbers will have no statistical validity. It would be too easy to make a mistake.
Everyone has to formally vote to be counted.
sharkbok
Captain23,261 posts
Captain23,261 posts
16 Jan 2017, 20:25
#43
16 Jan 2017, 20:25#43
@Moz- p.s- you post is missing some comments? Brycy paraphrased your comments- to which I was referring to.
mozart
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 18458RE: Board poll on posting practice.
January 15, 2017, 17:45:42
Brycy
Status: Senior player
Posts: 2865RE: Board poll on posting practice.
January 15, 2017, 18:02:39
mozart
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 18458RE: Board poll on posting practice.
January 15, 2017, 17:45:42
So far it's 9 to 8 in favour of 3. Obviously very close. I propose we leave the polls open to capture all the posters who post mostly during the week. But regardless it's likely to be close and we don't want to leave half the Board unhappy, so some form of compromise is in the cards.
Brycy
Status: Senior player
Posts: 2865RE: Board poll on posting practice.
January 15, 2017, 18:02:39
...Mozart i think you may have contradicted yrself and voted for 1 or 2 instead with this comment '' I can understand that politics, religion and even such topics as Global Warming are divisive. I would have no problem in having that section below even if I don't favour it.'...
..that is what most of us want i think so how can you not want that and still vote for having it..?Captain26,388 posts
16 Jan 2017, 20:36
#44
16 Jan 2017, 20:36#44
sharkbok
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 5952RE: Board poll on posting practice.
January 16, 2017, 20:06:56
it seems most of the people that chose option 3 are more right wing that those that chose option 1?
So right wing(conservative) is more open to free speach?...and the left pro sensorship? Who would have thought?
I'm actually quite liberal, meaning I respect almost all views, but I do object to mob rule.
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 5952RE: Board poll on posting practice.
January 16, 2017, 20:06:56
It could be a statistical anomaly-
But if you relate the poll table to politics (T-rum-p) and religion (one God):it seems most of the people that chose option 3 are more right wing that those that chose option 1?
So right wing(conservative) is more open to free speach?...and the left pro sensorship? Who would have thought?
I'm actually quite liberal, meaning I respect almost all views, but I do object to mob rule.
Captain49,914 posts
16 Jan 2017, 20:36
#45
16 Jan 2017, 20:36#45
Nope my preference is for a totally open Board, but as others are offended I am okay with 2. You will find my vote in the first posting of this string. As for the other votes they are on two other threads. The total is 17 to 8.....this sounds like the Wisconsin recount.
Pro4,003 posts
16 Jan 2017, 20:39
#46
16 Jan 2017, 20:39#46
In any case, there is no censorship.
Captain26,388 posts
16 Jan 2017, 20:40
#47
16 Jan 2017, 20:40#47
Yes, I'm also for 3, but will conform to the wish of the many as long as it's adhered to by all and everyone is treated evenhandedly.
sharkbok
Captain23,261 posts
Captain23,261 posts
16 Jan 2017, 20:43
#48
16 Jan 2017, 20:43#48
@Moz The vote in this thread is what counts.We are using quantitative data that is objective and can be measured.
Are you trying to be crafty by splitting the threads up, so you can add some extra votes?
@DraadAll individual freedom is restricted by the freedoms of others.
I have freedom of movement. However, it does not mean I can swing my arms around right by someone else- as this would be infringing on their freedom of movement.Totally freedom can be anarchy. This is why we have laws and rules- to protect the rights of others.
Are you trying to be crafty by splitting the threads up, so you can add some extra votes?
@DraadAll individual freedom is restricted by the freedoms of others.
I have freedom of movement. However, it does not mean I can swing my arms around right by someone else- as this would be infringing on their freedom of movement.Totally freedom can be anarchy. This is why we have laws and rules- to protect the rights of others.
Captain49,914 posts
16 Jan 2017, 20:53
#49
16 Jan 2017, 20:53#49
Why dont you just look at the three threads involved and tell me who is being intellectually dishonest.
Captain49,914 posts
16 Jan 2017, 21:07
#50
16 Jan 2017, 21:07#50
But to make life easy, Blikkies, Blob, Mo, AJ, Gavi, and Bok BF on other threads have voted 3. I voted 3 on this thread and you missed Admit One on this thread who also voted 3. That makes it 17 votes for 3, 8 votes for 1 and one vote for 2.
sharkbok
Captain23,261 posts
Captain23,261 posts
16 Jan 2017, 21:08
#51
16 Jan 2017, 21:08#51
Copy and paste of voters poll result onto this thread will be permitted in this instance to ensure we are dealing with a single data source.
However, for the purposes of context and accuracy, let's keep all data on this thread.
There has to be concrete evidence of each vote on this thread to be counted.
2 other threads exist.I have included these below to work with a complete dataset.
Each post has 1 extra vote for option 3. These are now updated in the table above).
1. Poll results (BokBF = 3)
2. Posters that still have to vote (Mo = 3)
However, for the purposes of context and accuracy, let's keep all data on this thread.
There has to be concrete evidence of each vote on this thread to be counted.
2 other threads exist.I have included these below to work with a complete dataset.
Each post has 1 extra vote for option 3. These are now updated in the table above).
1. Poll results (BokBF = 3)
2. Posters that still have to vote (Mo = 3)
Captain26,388 posts
16 Jan 2017, 21:10
#52
16 Jan 2017, 21:10#52
Shark, I'm well aware of the responsibility around freedom and human rights in general, but from where I'm standing Beeno is well within the normal accepted boundaries of free speech. Having said that, it does not mean we can't ask him to be more accomodating to the wishes of other members...he did give his cooperation in the not so distant past. It's a whole different kettle of fish if we demand it from him, but condone others doing the same, just because their views are more mainstream.For myself, I try not to get drawn into futile religious and political arguments. I enjoy both topics emmencely , but I've learned that it's almost impossible to have a civil discussion on these topics on the internet. I bite every so often, refrain from getting too involved most of the time.Like I said, I'm for 3, but 1 will probably be better in the long run. 2 is subjective horse manure and the line will be different for everyone.
Captain12,893 posts
16 Jan 2017, 21:26
#53
16 Jan 2017, 21:26#53
Here, for the sake of reason let me meet you halfway...yes?
How can you say that Beeno is within the "normal accepted boundaries of free speech" when he and he alone publishes volumes of copy and pastes......seriously now, are you drunk? Point me to any one poster who copies and pastes in the manner he does? Just one..thank you.
If his postings were within the accepted norm then there wouldn't be the current debate...that my friend is exactly the point.
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see....go ahead and justify what you call the accepted norm while I rest my case.
How can you say that Beeno is within the "normal accepted boundaries of free speech" when he and he alone publishes volumes of copy and pastes......seriously now, are you drunk? Point me to any one poster who copies and pastes in the manner he does? Just one..thank you.
If his postings were within the accepted norm then there wouldn't be the current debate...that my friend is exactly the point.
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see....go ahead and justify what you call the accepted norm while I rest my case.
Captain49,914 posts
16 Jan 2017, 23:28
#54
16 Jan 2017, 23:28#54
Okay update for postings below.
Captain49,914 posts
16 Jan 2017, 23:34
#55
16 Jan 2017, 23:34#55
blobbok
Status: Bok regular
Posts: 1810RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 11:59:05
bluebok
Status: Senior player
Posts: 2476RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 12:00:01
bluebok
Status: Senior player
Posts: 2476RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 12:01:27
Denny
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 4345RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 12:32:01
Blikkies
Status: Squad member
Posts: 586RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 16:44:05
MO(NH)
Status: Baby Bok
Posts: 245RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 17:04:35
mozart
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 18462RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 17:08:13
Edit postDbDraad
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 4811RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 18:09:00
xavi
Status: Baby Bok
Posts: 272RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 18:25:17
Arthur John
Status: Bok regular
Posts: 1249RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 18:26:56
Mozzie I will apologize for the remarks made by a fellow blogger to your late family member.
Disgusted and ashamed to see us go so low........
But thank you to all who served.
Forever grateful and respectful.
Status: Bok regular
Posts: 1810RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 11:59:05
3 ................. & a F.U. to Sonny
bluebok
Status: Senior player
Posts: 2476RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 12:00:01
I second that Blob!
bluebok
Status: Senior player
Posts: 2476RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 12:01:27
Sonny, you've made your point. Please stop messing up the margins, we have nearly got the rugby vs non-rugby post thing finalised.
Denny
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 4345RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 12:32:01
Another disgusting post directed at family who are no longer with us......it's one thing hating another poster but it's a sad and low day when it's regarding a family member who is no longer with us.
Blikkies
Status: Squad member
Posts: 586RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 16:44:05
3 for me ........... but perhaps more important a tighter control over spammers (not referring to Beeno's posts) and also a software upgrade which will allow private messages.
MO(NH)
Status: Baby Bok
Posts: 245RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 17:04:35
I am happy with the board as it is.
mozart
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 18462RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 17:08:13
I'll interpret that as a 3 Mo, thanks.
Edit postDbDraad
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 4811RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 18:09:00
There are 70 topic slots in the top section. If it's really a bad topic it will drift to the bottom eventually, but a few off topic threads won't push current rugby topics out of view. It seems that this debate is used to squash certain views. Where's the tolerance ?
xavi
Status: Baby Bok
Posts: 272RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 18:25:17
What Blikkies said. 3 For myself.
Arthur John
Status: Bok regular
Posts: 1249RE: The implications of rugby only posts....
January 16, 2017, 18:26:56
3 for me.
Mozzie I will apologize for the remarks made by a fellow blogger to your late family member.
Disgusted and ashamed to see us go so low........
But thank you to all who served.
Forever grateful and respectful.
sharkbok
Captain23,261 posts
Captain23,261 posts
16 Jan 2017, 23:44
#56
16 Jan 2017, 23:44#56
I now see those and will update the sheet.
You have now written another three threads for what should have been contained within this thread. - With three different pitches to change the context of what option 1 and option 2 is- and used this to gain sympathy. Votes. I read through them seeing you asking people for votes.
One of the posts is saying that option one is not allowing people to argue- because it is non-rugby....... or that does not promote freedom of speech etc. Constant spamming of the likes of Tr-ump is abusing freedom of speech.
This is just confusing people. Mo could be moved to number 2, or even number 1. It is clear that Mo has made two different votes- on separate threads. One leaves it as it is- the other is number 3.
The bottom line is that if everyone starts constantly posting non-rugby stuff, it would be clear that this is not a good option.
You have now written another three threads for what should have been contained within this thread. - With three different pitches to change the context of what option 1 and option 2 is- and used this to gain sympathy. Votes. I read through them seeing you asking people for votes.
One of the posts is saying that option one is not allowing people to argue- because it is non-rugby....... or that does not promote freedom of speech etc. Constant spamming of the likes of Tr-ump is abusing freedom of speech.
This is just confusing people. Mo could be moved to number 2, or even number 1. It is clear that Mo has made two different votes- on separate threads. One leaves it as it is- the other is number 3.
The bottom line is that if everyone starts constantly posting non-rugby stuff, it would be clear that this is not a good option.
Captain49,914 posts
17 Jan 2017, 01:08
#57
17 Jan 2017, 01:08#57
Simply put, if it's all rugby almost every string has illegitimate postings. We have posted freely for 15 years without issues. The vast majority of posters are okay with things as they are, with the exception of Beeno's posts. That said many other posters have participated in those strings. And the strings I have started on Climate Change are also off topic.....as are many posts on non rugby topics.
..........
With regard to this vote, I posted on several strings, one to clarify the issue, secondly to show we had reached a conclusion. You have tried to turn that into some form of conspiracy....ignoring other stuff like Urinal declaring victory after only a few posts.
............
I'm not sure exactly why you decided to be so belligerent about this, but you need to grow up, you made your argument and lost ...,,now please update your misleading summary.
Pro3,977 posts
17 Jan 2017, 08:38
#58
17 Jan 2017, 08:38#58
Guys, I voted 1 not 3.
sharkbok
Captain23,261 posts
Captain23,261 posts
17 Jan 2017, 13:51
#59
17 Jan 2017, 13:51#59
Some people appear to have voted for option 1, option 2 or 3, due to all the confusion that has been created wth 4 different threads- yet they have conveniently been classified as option 3. This a perfect example of screwing up this board which is going downhill fast.
The different threads created for the same thing- that are a distortion/lie of what the options are, to try trick people into voting for something that they don't want.
A few years ago the board was much better than it was now. Now it is just a place for farts to fill the board up with non-rugby spam and talk about their holidays and piles. Maybe there should be an upload section to upload our Facebook details of ourselves, our holidays etc, etc
I think it might be time to find a new posting board that focusses of rugby.
Pro3,977 posts
17 Jan 2017, 14:34
#60
17 Jan 2017, 14:34#60
Relax Sharkbok, there is just no rugby on at the moment, so the folks here are bored. Give it a week or three and then we can all get back to biatching about how kak our teams are in Super Rugby.
Captain49,914 posts
17 Jan 2017, 17:35
#61
17 Jan 2017, 17:35#61
So you plan to leave your misleading summary uncorrected? Blue you are a 1? Fine. It doesn't change the picture
Here are the
votes for 3:
Mozart
.
Mike
.
Plum
.
Beeno
.
Matey
.
Cloudy
.
Admit One
.
Truth
.
Mo
.
Blikkies
.
Xavi
.
Blob
.
AJ
.
Bok BF
.
Shark you have turned this into a conspiracy when every nuance is up on the Board. I think DA also voted for 3, but it may have been a throw away comment. Some of the posters voted under other strings because of hacking. It's all above Board. But you aren't even Man enough to correct your obviously misleading summary
It's hilarious how some supposedly liberal people simply can't accept one man one vote and freedom of speech. Nobody is calling for it, but if you must depart go quietly and close the door behind you.
Pro4,671 posts
17 Jan 2017, 20:25
#62
17 Jan 2017, 20:25#62
...Yeah i think Sharkbok may have a valid point that multiple posts about the same poll has just added confusion, not weight to any incorrectly perceived result..
...for instance someone's 3 vote ( let take Mozarts for example) with a caveat about political posting is contradictory and not actually a 3 vote at all ... therefore should'nt really be counted as such because the 3 option was post absolutely anything you like...
...how many are there like his with caveats due to the poorly worded poll question we don't know for sure and does'nt matter how many recounts you have it won't tell us how many dont want a political forum because that part was'nt included in the question...coveniently or otherwise
...perhaps if it had been made clearer that a 3 vote meant post anything excluding political posts then more would have voted for 3 and we would have less caveats......that is maybe why Sharkbok is saying that people were misled and has invalidated the poll as a bogus one and not representitive of what forum members actually want...
...for instance someone's 3 vote ( let take Mozarts for example) with a caveat about political posting is contradictory and not actually a 3 vote at all ... therefore should'nt really be counted as such because the 3 option was post absolutely anything you like...
...how many are there like his with caveats due to the poorly worded poll question we don't know for sure and does'nt matter how many recounts you have it won't tell us how many dont want a political forum because that part was'nt included in the question...coveniently or otherwise
...perhaps if it had been made clearer that a 3 vote meant post anything excluding political posts then more would have voted for 3 and we would have less caveats......that is maybe why Sharkbok is saying that people were misled and has invalidated the poll as a bogus one and not representitive of what forum members actually want...
Captain18,117 posts
17 Jan 2017, 20:42
#63
17 Jan 2017, 20:42#63
"that is maybe why Sharkbok is saying that people were misled and has invalidated the poll as a bogus one and not representitive of what forum members actually want..."
Pretty much what you'd expect from a "poll" run by the board's resident manipulative and deceitful snake.
As I said on another thread, the poll is utterly meaningless. We don't have any rights here, it's the admins decision as to how many forums we have and what they're called. Right now I'm seeing one called "Rugby", one called "Other Sports" and one that was specifically created for non-sport discussions. As long as that is the case or unless the admins say otherwise, I will continue to post accordingly.
The day the admins do away with the Other Sports Forum or the Beeno's Tr(*)mpet section is the day I start posting everything in the one section . . . not because of some stupid poll run by a self-important old fool where sad losers with three or more identities get to vote three or more times.
Pretty much what you'd expect from a "poll" run by the board's resident manipulative and deceitful snake.
As I said on another thread, the poll is utterly meaningless. We don't have any rights here, it's the admins decision as to how many forums we have and what they're called. Right now I'm seeing one called "Rugby", one called "Other Sports" and one that was specifically created for non-sport discussions. As long as that is the case or unless the admins say otherwise, I will continue to post accordingly.
The day the admins do away with the Other Sports Forum or the Beeno's Tr(*)mpet section is the day I start posting everything in the one section . . . not because of some stupid poll run by a self-important old fool where sad losers with three or more identities get to vote three or more times.
Captain26,388 posts
17 Jan 2017, 20:49
#64
17 Jan 2017, 20:49#64
If you only want to argue about the things you like, fine! IGNORE the other stuff. There is enough rugby content on here regardless. I like to consider other posters most of the time, but those who think they can mold a open forum on the internet to suit their specific needs need to get their heads examined . If the site owners decide to go with minimum moderation, no poll or vote will change anything. Self moderation has worked well for the last 5 or so years. This site have a good mix, why try to change it? We might end up with something we like less, regardless of our good intentions .
Captain18,117 posts
17 Jan 2017, 21:00
#65
17 Jan 2017, 21:00#65
Ummm . . . Draad, who is your comment addressed to?
Captain26,388 posts
17 Jan 2017, 21:06
#66
17 Jan 2017, 21:06#66
Everybody opposed to any of my views.
Rooi, it was a general response to the topic.
Rooi, it was a general response to the topic.
Captain18,117 posts
17 Jan 2017, 21:13
#67
17 Jan 2017, 21:13#67
Just checking Draad, because if it was aimed at me I was going to ask how my attempts could be construed as moulding the board to suit my own needs.
Pretty much everything I've said on this topic has been supporting using the categories that the admins have created for us. They must have done it for a reason. The least we can do is respect their wishes.
Pretty much everything I've said on this topic has been supporting using the categories that the admins have created for us. They must have done it for a reason. The least we can do is respect their wishes.
Captain26,388 posts
17 Jan 2017, 21:24
#68
17 Jan 2017, 21:24#68
Rooi, I agree with you and I try my best to follow those guidelines, but I will respond in off topic threads. I simply think its impossible for the posters to enforce anything with a vote, unless someone is prepared to use the bugs to censor the board....constantly. I'm not too worried , I think will sort itself out eventually.
sharkbok
Captain23,261 posts
Captain23,261 posts
17 Jan 2017, 21:49
#69
17 Jan 2017, 21:49#69
I am still waiting to include the votes of admit1, admitone, admit2, admit3.
Pro4,671 posts
17 Jan 2017, 21:57
#70
17 Jan 2017, 21:57#70
...haha Sharkbok maybe not just the question but the criteria for voting needs a complete overhaul...nobody said you could'nt vote ten times..
Captain49,914 posts
18 Jan 2017, 00:00
#71
18 Jan 2017, 00:00#71
Keep at it chaps you will eventually convince yourselves the Board hasn't just overwhelmingly rejected your attempt to supress discussion. Ceradyne has just voted 3 while Sharkbok can't bring himself to correct his lie.
Pro3,977 posts
18 Jan 2017, 08:00
#72
18 Jan 2017, 08:00#72
Moz, please explain how the following is misleading "For me the logical vote would be 3, because I don't mind a little of this and that provided the majority of the posts are rugby related, but unfortunately we have Beans spamming us non stop with non-rugby posts which gets annoying. If he could offer some restraint in bombarding us with his copy and paste bore fests, I would vote 3, but he cannot, therefore I vote 1."
It is pretty straight forward really. Obviously my language wasn't simple enough, so let me make it simplerer. I would vote 3, but because of one idiot, I vote 1.
Also, why is voting 1 suppressing discussion? It is simply a different means of organising the location of a given thread. By the way, you are just another pleb on the site, even though, according to your posts on this thread, you think you are something more.
It is pretty straight forward really. Obviously my language wasn't simple enough, so let me make it simplerer. I would vote 3, but because of one idiot, I vote 1.
Also, why is voting 1 suppressing discussion? It is simply a different means of organising the location of a given thread. By the way, you are just another pleb on the site, even though, according to your posts on this thread, you think you are something more.
Captain18,117 posts
18 Jan 2017, 08:21
#73
18 Jan 2017, 08:21#73
Indeed. In Moffie's typically manipulative, underhand and deceitful manner, he's implying that those of us who want to comply with the board admin's format are trying to suppress free speech.
The puffed up old fossil really is beneath contempt.
The puffed up old fossil really is beneath contempt.
Pro7,008 posts
18 Jan 2017, 08:25
#74
18 Jan 2017, 08:25#74
Says the resident compulsive liar who thrives and gets great satisfaction from ridiculing posters who have mentioned their deceased family members
Sick fcuk you are..... just sick
Pro1,044 posts
18 Jan 2017, 09:09
#75
18 Jan 2017, 09:09#75
If vote for anything that keeps the ramblings of Beeno out of plain sight, 1 for me.
Captain12,893 posts
18 Jan 2017, 12:35
#76
18 Jan 2017, 12:35#76
We have posted freely for 15 years without issues.
Incorrect. If it was so then the ED would have had no need to create a unique Tr.umpet section.
Incorrect. If it was so then the ED would have had no need to create a unique Tr.umpet section.
sharkbok
Captain23,261 posts
Captain23,261 posts
18 Jan 2017, 13:37
#77
18 Jan 2017, 13:37#77
Unbelievable, now Mozart is trawling through the board waiting for people to have arguments- and then asking them to "vote" whatever the other side is.
As if Lying about what options 1 or 2 entail is not enough, now he is trying to enlist people who are having arguments to take the "other" side- just because it is different to that of who they are arguing with.
Mozart saw that he was losing and has created three more threads to lie about what the options are to manipulate people into voting for incorrect options.
It is very sad to see someone steep so low, with such as blatant disregard for the truth. Usually, people who claim to be good with numbers are honest people- that is one of the reasons they are good with numbers. A doctrine in lying and distorting numbers and facts.
(Mozart has already changed his own comments earlier on this thread- as one of his main arguments supported option 1 or 2. (Referenced above in the paraphrased comments made Brycy- which Mozart has now deleted.)
This snake in the grass- has no problem changing his own comments to support his lies.
rooinek
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 4442RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 17, 2017, 20:09:18". . . I have never left a board in a hissy fit."
Never, Ceradunce?
Hmmm . . . your last post on this thread looked a lot like someone having a hissy fit and flouncing.
Ceradyne
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 5772RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 17, 2017, 20:55:44
Rooinek
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 4442RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 17, 2017, 20:58:05
Out of interest, Ceradunce, how long after that post before you returned?
mozart
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 18473RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 18, 2017, 00:02:04
Ceradyne
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 5772RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 18, 2017, 01:17:23
mozart
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 18473RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 18, 2017, 01:30:10
Just_win
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 14311RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 18, 2017, 03:05:22
In the beginning it was not stated that option 1 included censorship my understanding was that we would simply respect "a guideline" and not post a non-rugby posts with exceptions here and there (other sports, etc). Option 1 would also include banter and the tit-for-tat that goes on between you and CleverMike for example (most of this is somewhat rugby related).
The main objective of option 1 is to ask posters not to post political, religious posts and posts on topics like climate change in the rugby section but to do this in the Beeno section. Frankly this type of posting doesn't happen much except in he off season when there is not much to discuss rugby-wise anyway. Even Beeno has followed this pretty much until the rugby season ended & then of course he lost control completely.
You can call it whatever option you like but IMO posters should be asked to respect a guideline and no one should be censoring the forum. My recollection is that this was what was agreed last year.
As if Lying about what options 1 or 2 entail is not enough, now he is trying to enlist people who are having arguments to take the "other" side- just because it is different to that of who they are arguing with.
Mozart saw that he was losing and has created three more threads to lie about what the options are to manipulate people into voting for incorrect options.
It is very sad to see someone steep so low, with such as blatant disregard for the truth. Usually, people who claim to be good with numbers are honest people- that is one of the reasons they are good with numbers. A doctrine in lying and distorting numbers and facts.
(Mozart has already changed his own comments earlier on this thread- as one of his main arguments supported option 1 or 2. (Referenced above in the paraphrased comments made Brycy- which Mozart has now deleted.)
This snake in the grass- has no problem changing his own comments to support his lies.
rooinek
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 4442RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 17, 2017, 20:09:18". . . I have never left a board in a hissy fit."
Never, Ceradunce?
Hmmm . . . your last post on this thread looked a lot like someone having a hissy fit and flouncing.
Ceradyne
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 5772RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 17, 2017, 20:55:44
I'm still here.
Rooinek
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 4442RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 17, 2017, 20:58:05
Yes you are, but it does contradict your earlier claim.
Out of interest, Ceradunce, how long after that post before you returned?
mozart
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 18473RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 18, 2017, 00:02:04
Vlag why not vote....we are thrashing Rooinek and his lying cronies by almost 2 to 1.
Ceradyne
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 5772RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 18, 2017, 01:17:23
TBH, I really couldn't care less. For all I care we could have only one section. That would be a laugh. It would force these pedantic clowns to ignore the topics they're not interested in. So, I guess my choice would have to be no 3 then.
mozart
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 18473RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 18, 2017, 01:30:10
Thanks Vlag...censorship needs to be resisted. HasBeen has been a gadfly. But to be honest Chabal has said many of the same things about religion and not drawn the same anger. The vitriol directed at a guy who has been posting with us for years is puzzling. Why does HasBeen threaten these lefties so much.
Just_win
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 14311RE: Posters that still have to vote......
January 18, 2017, 03:05:22
Mozart, you have now defined option 1 so that it's undesirable to me.
In the beginning it was not stated that option 1 included censorship my understanding was that we would simply respect "a guideline" and not post a non-rugby posts with exceptions here and there (other sports, etc). Option 1 would also include banter and the tit-for-tat that goes on between you and CleverMike for example (most of this is somewhat rugby related).
The main objective of option 1 is to ask posters not to post political, religious posts and posts on topics like climate change in the rugby section but to do this in the Beeno section. Frankly this type of posting doesn't happen much except in he off season when there is not much to discuss rugby-wise anyway. Even Beeno has followed this pretty much until the rugby season ended & then of course he lost control completely.
You can call it whatever option you like but IMO posters should be asked to respect a guideline and no one should be censoring the forum. My recollection is that this was what was agreed last year.
Captain12,893 posts
18 Jan 2017, 13:52
#78
18 Jan 2017, 13:52#78
Sharkbok, I'm pretty much done with the nonsense, the reaction I've received is pretty spot-on to what I've anticipated. I've repeatedly stated that my objections to Jihadi Beeno which is not dissimilar to those of others, it's the sheer volume of his cut and pastes. It's painfully obvious that the owner of the site felt exactly the same hence the reason he created a special section for Jihadi Beeno. No-one has asked for him to be censored.
Captain26,388 posts
18 Jan 2017, 14:07
#79
18 Jan 2017, 14:07#79
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 4355RE: Board poll on posting practice.
January 16, 2017, 21:26:59 Here, for the sake of reason let me meet you halfway...yes?
How can you say that Beeno is within the "normal accepted boundaries of free speech" when he and he alone publishes volumes of copy and pastes......seriously now, are you drunk? Point me to any one poster who copies and pastes in the manner he does? Just one..thank you.
If his postings were within the accepted norm then there wouldn't be the current debate...that my friend is exactly the point.
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see....go ahead and justify what you call the accepted norm while I rest my case.
Captain26,388 posts
18 Jan 2017, 14:08
#80
18 Jan 2017, 14:08#80
Sorry Denny, I missed the response above. I did not imply that I'm ok with spamming with coppy and paste posts, I tried to imply that it's not illegal. I thought this poll was about deciding to forcefully blocking all non rugby posts in the rugby section, That's why I voted 3. If everybody respected the relevant sections, I would have voted 1. IMHO, it looks like some posters don't mind off topic stuff as long as it's not one of Beeno's. We can't have different yardsticks for different posters and topics. It's either 1 or 3. ATM it looks like it's gonna be 3, but if that's the case, I'm still gonna ask Beenz to tone it down a bit. I think mutual respect will stand us all good.
↓ LOAD MORE (page 3 of 4)
