It seems that everyone one is entitled to their opinions except a moderator eh...because if a moderator puts forward an opinion then they ordering others as to what they should think.
So, for your benefit, I shall explain the problem. ITT said that I had accused others of saying that the copper deserved it for being a copper. This is blatantly untrue as anyone who takes trouble to read my post properly can see. I've no problem with him questioning what I said, it's the way that he goes about it: phrases like "get off your high horse"and "stop telling us what to write or think": hardly conducive to a happy and friendly forum is it? If he had made such comments to someone who was not a moderator then I would have considered removing them, especially considering the abuse that he handed out to certain forum members on a previous thread about the police.
Indeed, the remark "stop telling us what to write or think" is interesting, as if you examine the posts in question you might notice that I put forward my opinion of how this thread might be ill-used by some if it should go in a certain direction (thus I am not telling anyone what to what to think or write), yet it is ITT who is telling me what I should do, and hardly being civil about it at that.
But let's examine what your complaints are:
So because someone vehemently disagrees with another's opinion (rightly or wrongly) that is going to be moderated? Hardly an open forum then is it? I don't see what Ivor wrote as breaking the forum rules that you would think to remove it?
No, as I pointed out - it has nothing to do with him disagreeing with me. It is the manner in which he chose to do so - I'm perfectly happy to discuss how my comment might have been interpreted f people are willing to do so in a calm and civil way.
Si, as a point of order you were the one taking it upon yourself to interpret all members posts on this subject & from that suggest that they were making the discussion sound as if the copper deserved what he got. Is that not that in itself a criticism of the posters by your interpretation of their posts to imply such?(You could hardly call what you suggested as a non negative comment!)
Again, no. what I was actually saying was that I should hate for the criticisms on this thread to mount up to such an extent that it over shadowed the poor chap that was injured and could give lee-way for some to accuse forum members of saying that he got what he deserved because he was a copper. You will notice that at no point did I accuse anyone of saying that he he deserved because he was a copper. I think that you have to agree that the difference is pretty clear.
I myself don't see that for one instance. I believe that it was wrong of you to suggest such when there was little if anything in the posts to back up what you described. An annoyance at the perceived amount of time & effort going into the investigation due to the victim being a police officer comparative to Joe public is how I read it.
Mostly I don't disagree with that: hence my request for anyone who could show that this particular force had treated a similar event concerning a member of the public differently - surely such evidence is the only real way of telling if their were bias is it not? Although past evidence suggested that there is at least one poster on here who has a serious chip on their shoulder concerning the police - and insults directed towards police officers who use this forum have had to be removed in the past. Funnily enough, the same person likes to complain about moderation too, and insult moderators....I wonder if there some strange psychological thing concerning perceived authority figures here. Anyway, despite the insults and the breaking of forum rules we think that we have been more than generous in the amount of slack that we have cut this person...on many forums they would have been long gone by now.
That Ivor disagreed with your reading of the discussion and his annoyance that you had labelled posters into that bracket of intimating that they thought a copper got what he deserved(as you had suggested in BOLD ITALICS SO THAT NO_ONE MISSED IT) gave rise to his post, for what it's worth, I agree with him.
But I didn't accuse anyone of saying the copper deserved it so it's a moot point. However, you, Tonyf, are able to respond to a post that you disagreed with in a reasonable manner so I am more than happy to enter into a friendly discussion with you and explain my point of view. Indeed, if you thought that I was accusing someone of saying the copper got his just deserts then I'm even happy to apologise for accidentally giving the impression that I had to some people. You see, that's what it is all about - being able to communicate in a civil and respectful manner, rather than immediately going on the war path and getting all aggressive.
pete75 wrote:Tony I suspect Ivor's "crime" is not disagreeing with another's opinion but disagreeing with Si's opinion. One and the same you or I might say but SI thinks differently.
I think that I have explained already what the issue was with ITT's post was, indeed, I have made such explanations to you a number of times already concerning your actions in threads that I have had no input to, so you can hardly say that it was down to someone disagreeing with me. So again, here it is: disagreement - fine, aggressive posts and insults - not fine. By all means, take an opposing point of view to some one, but discuss things in a friendly and polite manner.
Si tries to be both gamekeeper and poacher which none of the other mods seem to attempt. A board moderator shouldn't really get involved in heated discussions and certainly not get close to personally commenting on other posters in the way Si sometimes does.
Which means that we will be closing down the forum. Moderators are voluntary. We do it because we enjoy using the forum. If we are barred from contributing to threads then enjoyment will disappear as will we. No moderators no forum - because when the forum was not moderated certain disruptive posters caused most threads t disintegrate into shouting matches and most other users to leave. Simple as.