Meldy! Meldy! Meldy!

2

Comments

  • Not sure that we do need to move on yet...

    I saw the thread title and thought 'spam', but the actual post was something along the lines of 'it's free on the BBC, without adverts, innit?'... no links, no advertising, nothing, so fairly obvious after a cursory inspection that it wasn't spam, but a joke.

    I also thought it was moderately amusing. (DYSWIDT?)

    I'm not happy about having hair-trigger deletion; I'm really not. Poor briefing of appointed mods by RW, poor execution by Jeepers (though kudos for owning up to it)

    I am not Zhang Wee or anyone even remotely similar.

     

  • Crash Hamster wrote (see)

     

    I'm not happy about having hair-trigger deletion; I'm really not. Poor briefing of appointed mods by RW,    


    It wasn't poor briefing - their instructions were very clear.  The mistake was mine in marking as spam a thread that wasn't.

    Crash Hamster wrote (see)

    .

       poor execution by Jeepers (though kudos for owning up to it) .  

    I'm sorry that you think that it was poor execution.

    Crash Hamster wrote (see)

     

     so fairly obvious after a cursory inspection that it wasn't spam, but a joke.  

    And that's the point that I'm trying to make, it might have been obvious to you, but it wasn't to me, I didn't realise that it was a joke.  If I had, then I wouldn't have done anything.

    I'm not paranoid about being an Aspie, and hope that it doesn't come across that way, I'm just trying to explain why I thought that it was spam when everyone else seems able to see that it wasn't.

     



     

  • Crikey, it's no big loss to the forum is it? I am not surprised someone thought it was spam, it looked like spam, in fact it was designed to look like spam. If whoever posted it wants to do it again they can ...


    I for one am grateful that people like Meldy and Jeepers are prepared to spend time to keep the forum from getting overrun like it did last weekend. Everyone makes mistakes sometimes, there is no suggestion here that someone acted with other than the best of intentions. Let those without sin and all that... happy spam- free weekend people <img src='https://us.v-cdn.net/6027274/uploads/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif' />

    Edit: I mispelt Meldy!
  • B wrote (see)
    Crikey, it's no big loss to the forum is it? I am not surprised someone thought it was spam, it looked like spam, in fact it was designed to look like spam. If whoever posted it wants to do it again they can ...

    Well, if they do, I'll now know to leave it beimage.

  • B wrote (see)
    Crikey, it's no big loss to the forum is it?

     

    Yes, I think that it is. Once you start allowing forumites to acquiesce to the deletion of someone else's post because the content is 'no great loss', you might as well scrap the forum altogether; the original post was certainly not Voltaire-style important, but the principle of the deletion being the start of erosion of free speech certainly is.

    I'm also not convinced that RW's instructions could have been that clear; if they'd defined 'spam' as 'something containing a link to another site, a malicious URL or similar' there would have been no prospect of Jeepers making a mistake; there was no link in the removed post.

    It's the thin end of the wedge, I tell youimage


     

  • A weekend without spam..   image

    Result...!

    Well done to the new super-mods...  

  • Yep, what he said ... I was just pointing out a minor glitch, not out to start a fight.

    Forum's a much better place now.

  • If this is the thin end of the wedge, then I for one like it......



    Well done to Jeepers and M..eldy (and any other mods we have???) I think it's great that we have people who are willing to spend their time trying to make this place better, and I think it sucks that you're being criticised and sniped at.



    I didn't see the thread that is being referred to, but kudos to Jeepers for admitting to a mistake, and (with all respect to those who feel differently) I think it sounds like a massive over reaction to try and turn this into a battle against free speech FFSimage



    Crash Hamster- I liked the "moderately amusing" line.... image
  • Oh good. A Meldy thread!
    Now I know where to come for shoe shopping advice!  image

  • I do think it is nice that we can have discussions about freedom  of posting and speech and what USAians would call first amendment riights, without resorting to posting youtube clips of cats. I think we're finally ...

    ...oh

  • what shoes should i wear to support at Outlaw???

  • lol bos1, the cat vid is the best bit of this thread image
  • Seren - wellies ?
  • cougie wrote (see)
    Seren - wellies ?

    good call.but left them at the caraavan......might go looking for some new ones.....as i think it will be needed.its lashing it down again

  • Its going to be boooootiful at the Outlaw ...

  • It bloody better be.


    I'm having my Welles customised with speedplays just in case.
  • Doesn't everyone in Wales wear wellies all the time anyway?

    Profiling at it's best - image

  • I thought the reason they wore wellies was it was easier to put the sheeps feet in them to hold them still!!

    Next 'rebuild' of the Forum, is it possible to have a 'Like' button?  

    It's a better place with the Forum Mods.  Well done and keep up the good work!

  • At the risk of bringing the thread back to topic, and for over bearing a point most of you disregard ........

    Crash Hamster wrote (see)
    B wrote (see)
    Crikey, it's no big loss to the forum is it?

     

    Yes, I think that it is. Once you start allowing forumites to acquiesce to the deletion of someone else's post because the content is 'no great loss', you might as well scrap the forum altogether; the original post was certainly not Voltaire-style important, but the principle of the deletion being the start of erosion of free speech certainly is.

    I'm also not convinced that RW's instructions could have been that clear; if they'd defined 'spam' as 'something containing a link to another site, a malicious URL or similar' there would have been no prospect of Jeepers making a mistake; there was no link in the removed post.

    It's the thin end of the wedge, I tell youimage


     

    I was going to be crass and quote Martin Niemöller but even I think that's OTT for a running forum.


    I posted the following elsewhere.  It's not a dig at Jeepers (thank you for taking a poisened chalace) but it sums up my view;


    <span data-jsid="text">My opinion is clear - this is the wrong way to go.
    1. RW need to sort this out themselves.
    2. It's not fair on the chosen mods (would you like to go to the site and see a thread saying "Oi you, do your free, unpaid job"?)
    3. People get things wrong;
    a) technically
    and
    b) ethically.

  • Taking the thread off topic again...

    Prince Siegfried wrote (see)

    I thought the reason they wore wellies was it was easier to put the sheeps feet in them to hold them still!!

    Oh, I soooooo wanted to say that, but didn't have the guts image

  • If you can caz individual posts, there's one of them on the wife carrying thread
  • Whereabouts is it Hash?  

  • Last post on there sometime after midnight. There's a link on there too, and they've posted on a couple of other threads from looking at the profile
  • Ahh right ... already done that one Hash?

  • Oh yep, just realised.  Weird, if you just look at the clubhouse page he's still there as the last poster, and if you put his name in the search engine he's still there.

    I have a horrible feeling me bothering to stalk him suggests I was potty trained far too earlyimage

  • Hash wrote (see)

    I have a horrible feeling me bothering to stalk him suggests I was potty trained far too earlyimage


    imageimage

2
Sign In or Register to comment.