ot/Switch Kilroy On
-
magoo
Re: o/t Re: Deletion
Is he? You could have fooled me. Are you sure you are being even handed between me and Spunkhouse?
I shall save wear and tear on my fingers then by not posting until you tire of this random deletion nonesense.
But then you will probably delete this.
I shall save wear and tear on my fingers then by not posting until you tire of this random deletion nonesense.
But then you will probably delete this.
-
woodgnome
Re: o/t Re: Deletion
nope - i deleted a post by bs the other day. he was sufficiently annoyed to state that he was never going to darken the forum with his presence again. i guess he had a change of heart, much like yourself.
-
magoo
Re: o/t Re: Deletion
OK. But you are forgeting one major difference between me and bs` motivation for posting on this forum. I post because I am interested in porn videos and because I enjoy the forum. BS is very unlikely to turn his back on the forum because he advertises his sites here. I on the other hand have no financial interest to keep me posting. So who do you think is most likely to keep posting despite the deletions? Surely the person who gains financialy.
-
jj
Re: o/t Re: Deletion
Not this nonsense again.......and you didn't deign to address my earlier comment that, if truly random, you were just as likely to delete something of interest to us all as a piece of silliness, thereby doing a disservice to us all.
This apparent capriciousness reflects ill on you personally and the forum....and please don't trot out the line about 'my house, my rules': a host ought to have a duty to his guests, as well as vice versa.......I do not vomit on the carpet of someone I visit (unless of course requested so to do)- by the same token I do not expect to be unexpectedly bludgeoned around the head with a kipper during the petit-fours and coffee.
Wouldn't it be simpler just to delete the stuff that breaches the FAQs, providing if necessary an explanation? Or is that just too reasonable? Or, if your intention is to drive these individuals off the forum permanently, at least have the courage to say so unequivocally.
This apparent capriciousness reflects ill on you personally and the forum....and please don't trot out the line about 'my house, my rules': a host ought to have a duty to his guests, as well as vice versa.......I do not vomit on the carpet of someone I visit (unless of course requested so to do)- by the same token I do not expect to be unexpectedly bludgeoned around the head with a kipper during the petit-fours and coffee.
Wouldn't it be simpler just to delete the stuff that breaches the FAQs, providing if necessary an explanation? Or is that just too reasonable? Or, if your intention is to drive these individuals off the forum permanently, at least have the courage to say so unequivocally.
-
woodgnome
Re: o/t Re: Deletion
this hasn't come out of the blue: and you've made provocative posts directed at BS since then, using your regular name and as "HM Spam Master General".
why you or BS post here is irrelevant when you're not both causing a mess that someone else has to clear up. annoying isn't it, being gratuitously annoyed?
why you or BS post here is irrelevant when you're not both causing a mess that someone else has to clear up. annoying isn't it, being gratuitously annoyed?
-
woodgnome
Re: o/t Re: Deletion
is it too reasonable to expect individuals to get into line, when they HAVE had it made clear to them that disruptive threads on the forum are not acceptable? if your capacity for forgivenss extends to overlooking someone repeatedly vomiting without permission on your carpet, then homage must duly be paid to your magisterial beneficence in these matters. we aren't that saintly, i'm afraid and believe it or not, we get pissed off with being repeatedly treated like chumps.
your accusation of capriciousness is redundant, as the link in my reply to magoo shows. no one has been "unexpectedly bludgeoned", unless they blithely assumed us to be all mouth and no trousers and that nothing would ever come of it. the deletions are random in the sense that magoo and BS don't know which one of their literary jewels is headed for the trash can (one more of each, probably). consequently, no threads of interest to the forum have been trashed and none will be.
plenty of trolls have been barred from this forum and plenty more will be. magoo and BS are not trolls but regular and legitimate (by and large) contributors who, unfortunately, have taken an intense dislike to each other and not spared the rest of us the details. we are entitled to draw a line in the sand when that animosity starts affecting the ambience of the forum. on the other side of the pond they'd probably call it 'tough love'.
i think you could have made your points well enough without resorting to insults about lacking 'courage'.
your accusation of capriciousness is redundant, as the link in my reply to magoo shows. no one has been "unexpectedly bludgeoned", unless they blithely assumed us to be all mouth and no trousers and that nothing would ever come of it. the deletions are random in the sense that magoo and BS don't know which one of their literary jewels is headed for the trash can (one more of each, probably). consequently, no threads of interest to the forum have been trashed and none will be.
plenty of trolls have been barred from this forum and plenty more will be. magoo and BS are not trolls but regular and legitimate (by and large) contributors who, unfortunately, have taken an intense dislike to each other and not spared the rest of us the details. we are entitled to draw a line in the sand when that animosity starts affecting the ambience of the forum. on the other side of the pond they'd probably call it 'tough love'.
i think you could have made your points well enough without resorting to insults about lacking 'courage'.
-
jj
Re: o/t Re: Deletion
So at last we get an explanation: the deletions are not random at all, but nuanced. Fair enough. Also that it's directed at the mutual abuse between the two parties concerned. Again, fair enough.
I'd still contend that deletion of the entire argy-bargy as soon it became offensive would have been less labour-intensive on your part, and more effective, than the solution you adopted. But, whatever........
As to my speculation about motives: in the heretofore absence of a more comprehensive explanation for your actions than you gave in the original thread referred to above, you can hardly blame me for assuming the worst. Sorry for the calumny- with the humble suggestion that in future you explain your actions more fully, for those of us less than quick on the uptake.
What particularly exercised me in this instance was the thought that I'd have to 'self-censor' any future posts I made in case they might get me into the same hot water as did M and BS'.....
...not that a little pre-posting 'reconsideration' is a bad thing, and bearing in mind that free speech needs regulating in any orderly grouping......but the possibility that the forum might be a little less interesting and entertaining should such spontaneity be completely eradicated is not one I relish.
I'd still contend that deletion of the entire argy-bargy as soon it became offensive would have been less labour-intensive on your part, and more effective, than the solution you adopted. But, whatever........
As to my speculation about motives: in the heretofore absence of a more comprehensive explanation for your actions than you gave in the original thread referred to above, you can hardly blame me for assuming the worst. Sorry for the calumny- with the humble suggestion that in future you explain your actions more fully, for those of us less than quick on the uptake.
What particularly exercised me in this instance was the thought that I'd have to 'self-censor' any future posts I made in case they might get me into the same hot water as did M and BS'.....
...not that a little pre-posting 'reconsideration' is a bad thing, and bearing in mind that free speech needs regulating in any orderly grouping......but the possibility that the forum might be a little less interesting and entertaining should such spontaneity be completely eradicated is not one I relish.
-
alec
Re: o/t Re: Deletion
jj wrote:
>
> I'd still contend that deletion of the entire argy-bargy as
> soon it became offensive would have been less
> labour-intensive on your part, and more effective, than the
> solution you adopted. But, whatever........
It was so deleted, as soon as it was seen if not as soon as it was posted, and, having had to delete similar threads myself, I can attest that it is very labour intensive, as each post has to be removed individually. In a long thread that can take some time, especially when the net is busy. A bit of deterrent might reduce the need for such labour-intensive work in the future. And I'm not saying that the revenge aspect is not sweet either.
>
> I'd still contend that deletion of the entire argy-bargy as
> soon it became offensive would have been less
> labour-intensive on your part, and more effective, than the
> solution you adopted. But, whatever........
It was so deleted, as soon as it was seen if not as soon as it was posted, and, having had to delete similar threads myself, I can attest that it is very labour intensive, as each post has to be removed individually. In a long thread that can take some time, especially when the net is busy. A bit of deterrent might reduce the need for such labour-intensive work in the future. And I'm not saying that the revenge aspect is not sweet either.