egafd.com

Your normaly a very verbose individual so any comment on the threads of last night? Like picking on the "educationaly challenged" No? Mmmm I thought not. If you delete this then you will look like a fascist. Obviously you are not a fascist and despite our disputes I often defend you as I share some of your views and regard you as a decent chap. Lets face it anyone who lived through Mrs T and the GLC (hi Ken) must be OK deep down. So I was amazed to see you bullying a daft lad.

So stop picking on daft people! Pick on the nasty twats not the thick heads.

hey magoo,not so much of the daft just different from the rest,shy,awkward, lacking confidence,introverted! thats what the schools said about me

in my own words im not like evreybody else!

im sure if we all met we would get on fine its all words really

Your charitable attitude does you great credit.
But why did you assume Magoo was referring to you?
There are a couple of far better-educated posters here, with FAR sillier opinions.........

I second that jj, nice to see Stephens inoffensive remark of 'its only words'. That line would do justice in a lot of songs from supergroups like U2 and REM

Is this the same magoo who has never lost his temper on the forum?

But cheap cracks aside, I want to point out that wading through the relentless tide of twaddle that has been flooding the forum recently is not conducive to low blood pressure and good humour. If we could group posts and threads together and zap them to oblivion with a single click of the mouse, then there would be a lot more space on the server. The reason this rubbish has not been removed is because individually most of these posts are harmless, sometimes even amusing. However, their cumulative effect is not harmless. There have been at least two threads in recent days which could be interpreted as complaints, or at least faint misgivings, about this - the one about a 'Forum clique'


and the one about 'Is porn chat dead?'.


There was also the one Matt started and later retracted.


I share your gut feeling about the person you are defending, but, similarly, though most of his posts are harmless, their cumulative effect is annoying, and again people have begun to post comments in mild complaint.


In addition four of his recent posts have not been harmless. One touched on a matter and named a name and therefore had to be removed. The other three were racist, perhaps unwittingly so, and one marginally, but racist nevertheless. Eventually this had to be pointed out to him, even though he probably would not understand the point. Having been on one of these things and suffered the tedious and patronising statements of the obvious by the politically correct, I hesitate to recommend it to anyone else, but a racism awareness course is called for in this case.

If you walked into your local and found the pub bore standing at the bar, would you
(a) go up to him and engage him in conversation, or
(b) do a smart about turn and go to another pub?
I wish I knew the way to get rid of a pub bore, or make him interesting, but I don't. I do know that polite hints do not work. Maybe rudeness won't either. Apply this to the forum and whether people want to visit it.

So, Stephen, you will obviously read this. Since you posted in apology to woodgnome you have actually increased the frequency of your posts. I suggest you cut down the number of your posts by about 90%, and make them relevant to the purpose of this site. If you have a passing thought it is not essential to share it with the rest of us. In other words give us all a bit of a rest.

You first test is this - DO NOT REPLY TO THIS POST.

magoo wrote:
>
> Your normaly a very verbose individual so any comment on the
> threads of last night? Like picking on the "educationaly
> challenged"

i didn't realise i was picking on you. sorry!

re. the slow reponse time: sadly, my sleeping bag is currently at the cleaners and i am unable to kip in front of the pc, as per usual, to provide the immediate reponse you so rightly expect. happily, bgafd moderators will soon have a specially designed forum chip squidged into their cerebral cortices, which will ensure that they are able to reply instantaneously, via kinetic thought transference, even as they sleep the dreamless sleep of the undead moderator. in the meantime, i'm at the mercy of time consuming, everday annoyances such as having a social life, doing the shopping, picking on small children, etc.

No? Mmmm I thought not. If you delete this then
> you will look like a fascist. Obviously you are not a fascist
> and despite our disputes I often defend you as I share some
> of your views and regard you as a decent chap. Lets face it
> anyone who lived through Mrs T and the GLC (hi Ken) must be
> OK deep down. So I was amazed to see you bullying a daft lad.

i'm not a fascist? that's nice! tell me what i've i done right since last week? (fortunately, i suffer from a rare condition called 'reverse paranoia' - i.e. even when people ARE talking about me, i'm convinced that they're not. very useful in this line of work, i can tell you).

> So stop picking on daft people! Pick on the nasty twats not
> the thick heads.

'thick head'? 'daft lad'? the language of compassion has rarely sounded so sweet! yes, i have been direct in my comments towards stephen doran but i haven't patronised him - quite the opposite. he gets treated like anyone else and if he can't respond to requests to abide by the faq, then it's adios stephen doran because the forum comes first. i wonder how much experience of other moderated boards some users here have? this is one of the most lenient i know of, when it comes to tolerating off topic posts. that's fine and dandy but there's no point in practising tolerance if it renders the basic purpose of the forum redundant - i.e "the facilitation of the exchange of information pertaining to the British adult entertainment industry". maybe some users would be happy to see the forum evolve into the equivalent of 'an ace caff with quite a nice museum attached' but the forum faq is contingent upon the database, not the other way round, and that's how we moderate it.

there are boards accommodating every topic under the sun, some of which are well thought out, many others which are not - but those which thrive are always based upon a clear set of precepts, to which they expect every member to adhere. the forum is not a public right of way, as some seem to think: it is private property, much like a gated community - albeit, one open to outsiders. unlike many boards we don't have a registration process, so those with an interest can just drop in and post using whatever name they like and without providing an identifying email address. consequently, we get people posting enquiries who would not otherwise do so. the down side to this arrangement is that the forums open-endedness is regularly abused by individuals who feel no obligation towards the integrity of the forum. they happily create and use false names/ multiple names, coupled to misleading posts, malicious posts, etc. this requires a degree of vigilance because the only way in which the current set up can continue to work, is through the setting down of ground rules and enforcing them in the interests of the forum as a whole.

i've got no idea whether stephen doran is a special case, or whether he's merely an elaborate gamester. the point is, it's irrelevant in the context of moderating the forum. perhaps he's got a sob story for every day of the week (or whenever he gets pulled up) and perhaps all of the biographical details he spins out are true - i don't know. and neither does anyone else and that's why it's irrelevant. if someone continually blizzards the forum with endlessly irrelevant trivia, he either stops doing it when asked, or he finds somewhere else to park his record collection/video archive.

upon reflection, i could have spared myself churning out all of this verbiage by simply adding a link to buttsie's post (apologies buttsie, for adding more grist to the mill of those who would mark you down as a patsy, rather than someone with their own mind). he puts it more succinctly that i ever could: it's all about "the postings not the person". unless every forumite meets the moderators in person, it will always boil down to assumptions based on evidence, experience and gut instinct, acted upon in accordance with the faq - or as near as dammit!

anyhoo, i'm off to collect my sleeping bag. just hope they haven't buggered up the zipper again!

LOL.