12259 Oh no yo don't, not this time..

[quote=juliancoll;118257]You're not getting away with it that easily this time Marc. No way.

Marc has locked the thread I was posting in about all the goings on behind the scenes with the abuse of the PM system and he has also deleted my last post there and left his usual comment of "attacking another member", as the reason for deletion.

Well, I aint having it this time Marc, no way am I letting this drop until there is some firm open committment from the Admin team to sort these problems out once and for all.

Tusk was well aware of the thread, people (not me) have PM'd him (and the rest of the Admin team which obviously included you) about "the situation" and Tusk responded. So if he did not see fit to lock or delete that thread, why have you?

Your Mod status is on level pegging with Tusk (and Garda - but I accept she is not around), so since when does your authority as a Mod overide Tusks? It doesn't does it?

I was not attacking xxxxxx - I was telling her straight that she needs to stop doing what she has been doing - 'cus if she doesn't - she will keep on getting what she has always got.

And Im also saying you (by "you" I include all the Admin team) really need to get on the case and take the correct actions on the correct people. I remember a while back Marc deleted a post from me "as attacking another member" and all it said was "don't throw your old shoes away" - but because it was in Italian and perhaps he didn't understand the relevance of it as an old Italian proverb, he decided I was "attacking another member"! Prattish, imbalanced and unfair behaviour - and only one example.

The reasons given for locking the current thread are biased and unbalanced. Perhaps I should write (IMHO) here to allow me to have such an opinion - it sure seems to let everyone else off the hook!

You are locking the thread because it has gone "off topic"? You're 'aving a larf aint ya? Every ruddy thread on this forum goes "off topic" - so unless you go and lock all of those threads - this is not a valid reason.

The other reason you say you have locked the thread is because "things are being said that would be better said in PM's."

What planet are you on Marc? This is what the whole problem is about.

Are you really encouraging the very same problems I and others are complaining about to continue?

Then you say

Yes, lets be straight about this; the PM system exists for one reason only does it? Sure, it allows members to communicate without revealing true life identities (and posts dont? duh!) and, as you say, it is open to abuse.

Does this mean members must continue to suffer this abuse? You have now OPENLY been made aware of the problem and you should act on it. Must members suffer the abuse because the Admin team cant be arsed to put heads together and work out a solution?

Well, I'll do it for you then - here it is - a simple, very fair and easily workable idea that would suit everyone who has been abused by xxxxx and her misuse of the PM system. Here it is - plain and simple and one that can be done at the flick of a switch and took me no more than two seconds to think up!

Remove the ability of xxxxxxxxx to use her PM facilty. Simple.

Give her one week to contact those members that she considers to be her friends to exchange email addresses with them and then close down her PM access. If in the future she would like to contact another (possibly new) member, she can contact the Admin team by email and request a message be passed on to the member she wishes to contact, giving her email address as that point of contact.

Or if you still consider that is harsh and think she should be able to contact Admin by PM - modify the settings so she can ONLY contact Admin through the PM system.

Will you not do it because I am requesting it? Ah, now how much truth is there in that I wonder? But here's the crux - I'm not the only one who is saying to you that there is a problem, am I? So you may think it is funny to ignore me - but do you believe others will let you think it is funny if you ignore them also?

Admin were quick enough to impose all types of moderation on me in the past so I know it's easily done. And I bet a squillion quid you would impose it on me in a flash if a member told you that they were being abused by me sending obnoxious PMs all over the forum - wouldn't you? :yes:

No, you may not ask members not to allow dispute bleed-through on to the forums anymore. We have tried it "your way" for years and it doesn't work. So perhaps it is time now to try it our way and see if it does.

I accept you don't have the time or capacity to follow the history of these problems (and possibly not the inclination either), but you should at least read the whole thread from start to finish before locking and/or deleting.

You're are very welcome to all the affirmative and helpul posts members make and you are damn right that our work is far more constructive than that of the Mods at the moment!

Sort it out please Admin - get together and please sort it out!

Perhaps put it to the vote and lets see if the majority of those who wish to vote want the PM facility of Sally Donaldson to be removed/heavily restricted or if people still want her to be able to continue spreading her nastiness, spite and malicious rumours forever.

We have shown you the problem and offered a solution - can you now show us you will make the right decision?

[CENTER] ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~[/CENTER]

[COLOR=Indigo][U][I]Now, who wants to know the real story of what went on that upset me so much that I felt sick and withdrew from the best thing that has ever happened on this forum?

Who wants to know how an attempt to contaminate something pure was made? Who wants to see how one member attempted to spoil and manipulate the forum fund - and what I had to put up with "in the background" to make sure it did not happen?

Tell me, where should I post that story - or would that also just be deleted as "attacking another member"? [/I][/U][/COLOR] :laughs:[/quote]

Is [COLOR=Indigo][I]this[/I][/COLOR] what all the pussy footing around has been about JC? :rollingeyes: Where you've confused us all with your ambiguous posts, to avoid the supposed wrath of Admin etc?

Well, as a donor to the Abruzzo Earthquake Fund and thus an interested party (as all donors are) I feel I/we have the right to know just 'what' it is that has been going on, that could be so terrible, and to demand an explanation!

Like many other IM members, I have [U][I]willingly[/I][/U] donated my time and quite a bit of my pension to the Fund, so ably run by you, and to one or two of the 'sub funds' run by others. So you bet that I want to know if things have been going on behind the scenes that do not reflect the heartfelt sentiments of every donor!

I think it's our [U]right[/U] to know and I bet every other donor feels the same.

You are right JC I haven't been around much but your post here was reported (and I receive reported posts) and noticed my "name" when checking my email so thought I'd log in and respond while the bambina is asleep.

Firstly, I don't want to speak for Tusc but on my own behalf, I usually only intervene on threads or posts where spam and advertising is concerned, for disputes between people I feel too much like the new kid on the block (on the moderator team that is) to make important decisions so tend to leave it to either Marc (who has been a mod much much longer) or Ronald to sort out.

But seeing as I did agree to take on the job, I should step up I suppose...

Just went to check the forum rules, and it clearly states that abuse or harassment via the PM system should be reported to administration. I assume that means that abuse and/or harassment via PM is not permitted. I take harassment via PM to include malicious and/or abusive messages being sent to third parties, not just direct to the person being abused. Therefore, if anyone feels that this rule is being contravened, please feel free to forward the offending PM to me. If it seems clear that there is a genuine harassment going on then I will take it to "admin" and try my best to do something about it. BTW, I haven't received any PMs about the "problem" so far otherwise I would have responded.

If anyone thinks this is a bad idea, just say so - there is certainly nothing in it for me. It's just that I agree that behind the scenes "campaigns" against particular people, by either "side" are simply not fair - if you have something to say, just say it in an intelligent, non-insulting manner - and I am willing to try to help sort it out.

Oh, and if it all gets too much for me, I reserve the right to withdraw this offer!

Hiya Garda - didn't mean to disturb you from watching bimba when when I said you weren't around - everyone knows she keeps you far more happily entertained than us mottley crew here - even when she's sleeping.

But before I reply to the rest of your post I just want to take Marc to task once again.

Marc, you have now edited my first post in this thread - it doesn't matter anyway as everyone who is reading this thread knows who I am talking about, so let me ask you this; why didn't you just do exactly the same thing in the thread you locked?

Why didn't you just edit out Sally Donaldsons name from my post there instead of deleting it and then locking the thread?

Now that you realise that you could have easily done this on the other thread (as you have done it here) are you prepared to reinstate my post, edit out Sally Donaldsons name as you have done here and reopen the thread?

I bet ya don't - but so what - it's was kinda funny! Wanna know why I'm chuckling? Cus you didn't edit out Sally Donaldsons name from CaroleB's post where she quoted my original post in full until just now! :bigergrin:

Duh! What does that show? It shows you were either not paying attention or biased against things only I post. Which one is it? :laughs:

I'm angry with you Marc - for protecting the guilty.

Anyway, back to Garda

Abuse and harassment via the PM system has been reported to Admin - it has been reported to Ronni - with no response - but people do not always want to be thought of as a 'grass' and it seems clear that people do not keep this type of PM - they delete them.

Even when the PM's have been forwarded to me, I have deleted them after reading them - mainly because I get so angry and upset with the contents and I do not want to keep such items.

So if the evidence does not exist anymore, does that mean nothing will happen? Does that mean you will not be able to believe not only me, but also others who have said they have received this type of PM? Does that mean Sally will get away with it again?

If so, I will have to keep banging on and on about it until something is done - because I don't know how I can allow this type of thing to continue without protest. I can not do it - I can not sit in front of my computer for another single second and think that "behind the scenes" she is still able to do this without fear or consequence.

You know me well enough to know that I drone on and on about things that I believe are either right - or wrong. This is one of those times where I truly believe this situation is wrong and must be adressed.

I have tolerated her behaviour for a long time and it is time for it to stop - right here and right now! I have satisfied myself by just having a dig at her in the past, because I was not angry enough to challenge in the way I am now doing.

I am angry enough now - and I think you can see that here - because the latest batch of PMs circulating the forum are outrageous lies from someone who has no idea of the true story of why Russ and I fell out.

How she claims to have her information bewilders me as I certainly have not provided it to her, so if she does have knowledge of it, then it must have come from Russ and he must have fed her a load of garbage - or she has made it up.

I don't want to prove what went on - but I do have all the evidence on that subject and as I said, it involves the forum fund - which I swear no one needs to worry about as nothing happened - because I wouldnt let it.

Sorry to sound so angry - you know it isn't directed towards you Garda and I'm really very grateful you have stepped up to the plate and are willing to at least try to sort things out.

Thank you for that. :yes:

[FONT="Century Gothic"]Hello JC

At the risk of pouring gasoline on the fire in the immortal words of David I would like to make a contribution.

Please do not take this the wrong way.

Over the years (especially over the last 6? Months) I have watched you go from a very helpfully (and probably in my projections) happy go lucky poster who has started some especially wonderful threads (like Naples) to someone who almost appears to be waging a war and constantly spending a hell of a lot of time on posts that are nothing like your old posts. Surely at one stage or another you have to do a cost benefit analysis and decide if posting on the forum in this way really brings as much or more energy into your life as it takes to compose these posts (as well as all the stress it brings to your life). At the moment it is difficult for me to see how that could be true. If you are expending excess energy surely you should review the situation?

Again, please don’t think I am attacking you but for a long time you have been alluding to publishing information (about certain UK based inmprorieties, how the fight giot started etc etc ) here that will get you banned. Why not just go ahead and start your own blog with this information instead of letting the negative influences and this information bring you down? Surely no-one can ban you from this forum for opinions you express in your blog? I am sure your blog address would do the rounds even if you didn’t post it in the forum. (I see [url]http://www.juliancoll.com/[/url] is not taken)

All I am saying is, do you really think that your life is in balance now? If not how will you get it in balance? Carrying on in the same vein is surely not to your personal benefit? What is your benefit in allowing someone else to bring you off balance?[/FONT]

JC. [b]Any[/b] further post you make on this thread that mentions the name of the person you have a grievance against will be deleted in its entirety, regardless of whatever other content it contains. Just stop it.

Hang about Marc. The post just before yours, from Caveman, could be seen to be pretty offensive to juliancoll. On the basis of 'equality of treatment' I'm bemused as to why you haven't - at a minimum - deleted the reference (by name) to juliancoll. It is utterly irrelevant to this consideration that Caveman might be completely correct in his psycho-analyis: it could be construed as offensive. Maybe if juliancoll were to PM you........

[quote=Charles Phillips;118350]Hang about Marc. The post just before yours, from Caveman, could be seen to be pretty offensive to juliancoll. On the basis of 'equality of treatment' I'm bemused as to why you haven't - at a minimum - deleted the reference (by name) to juliancoll. It is utterly irrelevant to this consideration that Caveman might be completely correct in his psycho-analyis: it could be construed as offensive. Maybe if juliancoll were to PM you........[/quote]

Sorry Charles, you are totally wrong. I did not write this in any way in an offensive spirit. Quite the opposite

[quote=Charles Phillips;118350]Hang about Marc. The post just before yours, from Caveman, could be seen to be pretty offensive to juliancoll. On the basis of 'equality of treatment' I'm bemused as to why you haven't - at a minimum - deleted the reference (by name) to juliancoll. It is utterly irrelevant to this consideration that Caveman might be completely correct in his psycho-analyis: it could be construed as offensive. Maybe if juliancoll were to PM you........[/quote]

Pouring gasoline on the fire will be far more dangerous to the pourer, could burn far more than his fingers!:eeeek:

Crumbs! I thought it just seemed like new age sort of calming west coast wisdom!

I'd take it as well meaning, friendly advice. Positive vibes man...:yes:

I think Charles was making the point that JC MIGHT have been offended not that she was, it's a parity thing D'Uno

[quote=CaveMan;118341].....[FONT=Century Gothic]and decide if posting on the forum in this way really brings as much or more energy into your life as it takes to compose these posts (as well as all the stress it brings to your life). ..[/FONT]

[/quote]

I do understand that Caveman had posted in a good helpful spirit - but don't you think the above quote could be read as 'take a break from the forum and give yourself and us a bit of relief'?

How many time have I read the same sentiments expressed, by other entirely well meaning members, about a different pestilential poster?

Moxie is right - it is more about the perception of those posted about, and the reactions of the administration to their howls of anguish......anyway, 'nuff said....life ain't never fair!

Your point is Moxie? :winki:Looking for a fight? See you down the clubhouse!:smile: What happened to " We are Marche and we care"?:bigergrin:

I know a poem about that [URL="http://planetsmilies.net"][IMG]http://planetsmilies.net/sign-smiley-438.gif[/IMG][/URL]

For David Uno

[quote=Charles Phillips;118363]I do understand that Caveman had posted in a good helpful spirit - but don't you think the above quote could be read as 'take a break from the forum and give yourself and us a bit of relief'?[/quote]
No, because he didn't say "posting on the forum". He said "posting on the forum [b]in this way[/b]".

He's not saying "take a break from the forum". Rather, he's saying "decide if posting on the forum [b]in this way[/b] really brings as much or more energy into your life as it takes to compose these posts (as well as all the stress it brings to your life)."

Every statement has a context- without the context, it no longer has the same meaning.

"moved to italiauncovered.co.uk"

I understand your frustration, Torchiarolan, and to reveal the identity of a member without his/her consent is very serious. I do not want to see anyone banned, cornered, or muzzled. Variety is what makes a forum interesting. But I am starting to be concerned about the hidden forum, the PMs.

Torch's post made me look- here's the thread from last year referred to:[url]http://www.italymag.co.uk/forums/circolo-di-conversazione/8468-looking-towards-2008-a.html[/url]

"moved to italiauncovered.co.uk"

I agree Gala. I didn't realise until recently that so much seems to go on behind closed doors.... the PM facility. It seems that most of the forum problems are created because of the PM facility. We have seen far too many people banned in the past or have stopped posting who were brilliant contributors and I'd hate to see any more going, forcibly or by choice. OK some people's comments may have gone a bit far sometimes but compared with their contributions, knowledge and expertise offered, for me it's worth it, at least it's always done in public on the forum. [B]We all have a bad day every now and then[/B].

While I appreciate that many people have friends and use the facility to contact each other, on balance, would it be better to remove the PM facility? (at least for a trial period to see if it helps). Or maybe there's a way to forward PM's to moderators to pass on to someone when they want to send information, an address, telephone number etc because they prefer not to do it on the forum or maybe just find a way to limit the amount of information anyone can write on a PM to a tel number and an address/email/website. People who want to contact each other, because they are friends for a chat could always use their own emails (or even the Circolo di Conversazione).

This is a public forum and if anyone disagrees with someone else's post they should reply on the forum and the moderators are there to ensure that replies/comments are fair and not abusive. Before anyone shouts what about freedom of speech! there's no such thing. You can of course more or less say what you want but it's unacceptable to directly or indirectly abuse or hurt others or cause trouble by using PM's. It's only private if it stays private, ie between two people but obviously that doesn't always stay that way. The answer is not to say "just ignore the post or the person posting" You'd need some serious will power and it's a bit like saying to a child you can't open that Christmas present until the 1st January. I know that in life we all, one way or another, talk about or even slag others behing their back but I think we would all agree that we wouldn't necessarily want that conversation to get back to the person being talked about and clearly in does on this forum.

There are thousands of members on this forum but only about 30 or so that regularly (daily) freely provide advice and information often to new or occasional posters who have an urgent problem or concern and need help. This is where the forum has it's most important use. If those 30 or so people stopped posting, this forum would indeed die or be very boring and a lot of people including me would be deprived of a very good way of getting advice, information or ideas on whatever question or problem they have very quickly usually on the same day.

Or am I being naive and really have no idea on what's really going on?

Anyway, that's me exercising my freedom of speech and hopefully, I haven't hurt or offended anyone. :smile:

Thanks for your explanation, Torchiarolan. I'd be the first to admit that the moderation system is not always perfect. Frankly, its asking a lot of the Mod team to manage these complicated forensic investigations (we cope much better with squashing deviant posts advertising 'Ugh Boots' or whatever) so we depend on members to moderate each other and themselves. On the whole, it works, but sometimes we have to use the big hammer on posts which step over the fuzzy grey line of acceptability. As long as we can keep polite and rational dialogue going, I'm happy to take a back seat.

Caveman - no offence taken nor perceived. I clearly understood your comments and agree my forum life is not in balance at the moment due to the long term problem of one particular person abusing their PM facility. How I will bring things back into balance is by trying my best to make sure the problem is fully addressed and resolved by the Admin team. :smile:

Marc - thank you for reinstating my deleted post - appreciated.

Charles Phillips - understand the point you were making, but I really do not feel anyone naming "JulianColl" in any post is offensive.

D'Uno - no fighting with Moxie in this thread - create your own fight club. I'm on a mission here. :yes:

Moxie - bash D'Uno for me.

Nielo - Why would I be banned (again)? For being open and truthful? No, no, I have enough trophies on the mantlepiece now thank you! Admin and I have both ruffled each others feathers - but there is (I believe) a possibility of understanding now that things are out in the open and others are also backing up my claims that I'm not quite the lunatic some like to portray me as.

Lollie - Poetry? What a talented dark horse you are!

Campfield - Oh tell me about it - context is so important

Torch - I remember that thread well.

Gala - Do not be concerned, but it's good that you are realising there is a flip side to the coin. :smile:

Noma - Good Bill Hunting? Will you accept a promotion to head thread hunter? :bigergrin:

I've run out of smilies now - but not out of steam.

Steam on baby, steam on!

Looks like you might be making progress - let's all hope that it is indeed daylight you are sensing at the end of the tunnel.

Biagio - there is NO need to remove the PM facility from EVERYONE. :no:

However, there is a need for Admin to seriously consider removing access to the PM facility from ONE person and this long term and ongoing problem would be completely solved! :yes:

I have already suggested the following (ever so slightly reworded to keep Marc happy) :bigergrin:

Give "the person" one week to contact those members considered to be friends to exchange email addresses with them and then close down the persons PM access. If in the future the person would like to contact another (possibly new) member, the person can contact the Admin team by email and request a message be passed on to the member the person wishes to contact, giving the persons email address as that point of contact.

Or if that would be considered too harsh and Admin think the person should be able to contact Admin by PM - modify the settings so the person can ONLY contact Admin through the PM system and no one else.

[quote=Marc;118423]Thanks for your explanation, Torchiarolan. I'd be the first to admit that the moderation system is not always perfect. Frankly, its asking a lot of the Mod team to manage these complicated forensic investigations (we cope much better with squashing deviant posts advertising 'Ugh Boots' or whatever) so we depend on members to moderate each other and themselves. On the whole, it works, but sometimes we have to use the big hammer on posts which step over the fuzzy grey line of acceptability. As long as we can keep polite and rational dialogue going, I'm happy to take a back seat.[/quote]

Marc - I (we?) don't want you to take a back seat - I (we?) want you to get up off your back seat and take an active role in trying to sort this problem out now that you are aware of what has been going on.

We all appreciate the Mods can not know every single detail about everything, but there are clear statements here in this thread (and elsewhere on the forum within other threads currently active) from many others who claim the same problem exists and always stems from the exact same source.

You dont think we are all lying - do you? :nah:

The Mods are our only real [B]collective[/B] link with Ronni - the final decision lies with him - we all understand this, but if he is unaware of what has really been going on (just as you were until this thread appeared) he is unable to make a clear balanced judgement- so it's down to you, Garda and Tusk, as our caped SuperMods to present BOTH sides of the dispute clearly to Ronni so he is able to weigh up everything and make the right decision.

Perhaps a pm to all the Mods. from those who have been affected by any malicious pms would help.:yes:

In this way they and Ronald would be able to put together what has really been going on.:yes:

[quote=Aretina;118437]Perhaps a pm to all the Mods. from those who have been affected by any malicious pms would help.:yes:

In this way they and Ronald would be able to put together what has really been going on.:yes:[/quote]

That's a very good idea Aretina - it is time for those affected to help Admin to help them by reviewing facts. I think Gardahomes has kindly offered to be act as the entry point into Ronald for copies of anything viewed as "unsavoury" - so what's the delay?

The delay is it is lunchtime!

I'm off to stoke the engine. :bigergrin:

Oh mamma mia - are you all still at it? I'M OFF - Ciaoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Why not just create a members only invite group. Call it the Obnoxious PM group and there you can copy and paste everything that needs discussion out of the open forums. If needed an independant voluntary member or moderator could oversee the content and give comments as required..
I must admit that seeing the number of valuable contributing members that are now thinking of leaving due to hostile posts, immature postings, PM's etc, despite what they have contributed in fundraising and other activities is unbelievable.
Please grow up and act like adults, those that want to stay in the Kindergarten can, but please take it off the main forums. We had all these problems about 6 months ago, but once again it rears its ugly head.
Congratulations to all the fundraisers, for what you have done and are still continuing to try to achieve. Ignore the cr***tins that are trying to destroy your good work.

I think that the problem with PMs comes from a deep misunderstanding of what a PM is. It is a PRIVATE message between two members where the sender is not giving the addressee any authority to divulge its contents to another party or a group of people. Unless the original sender has specifically authorised this. Private messages should not be quoted or forwarded to anyone else. By doing this, there is a high risk of taking comments out of context, alienating people and creating difficult situations which we should avoid. If we all apply this basic rule, there should not be any problems.

["moved to italiauncovered.co.uk"

[quote=Gala Placidia;118532]I think that the problem with PMs comes from a deep misunderstanding of what a PM is. It is a PRIVATE message between two members where the sender is not giving the addressee any authority to divulge its contents to another party or a group of people. Unless the original sender has specifically authorised this. Private messages should not be quoted or forwarded to anyone else. By doing this, there is a high risk of taking comments out of context, alienating people and creating difficult situations which we should avoid. If we all apply this basic rule, there should not be any problems.[/quote]
I do agree Gala, in many respects, but you have the same problem with emails, where the sender can BCC others with what they have posted and therefore the recipient does not see who else has the content. The whole point of the matter is that some have received PMs which do degrade or attack the recipient, so even though a PM it can be abusive. I can see no reason why that person should not show it in its full context by whatever means, if it is from someone who is just malicious. Let a jury of our peers decide.

Perhaps PM's should have this added as on my emails!!!
Il contenuto di questa e-mail e dei file allegati è RISERVATO e da considerarsi utilizzabile solamente dalla persona o dall'ente cui è indirizzato. Se avete ricevuto questa e-mail per errore, siete pregati di rimandarla al mittente e di eliminarla (Legge italiana 196/2003).
The content of this e-mail and any files is CONFIDENTIAL and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please return it to the sender and delete it. (Italian Law 196/2003)

[quote=Gala Placidia;118532]I think that the problem with PMs comes from a deep misunderstanding of what a PM is. It is a PRIVATE message between two members where the sender is not giving the addressee any authority to divulge its contents to another party or a group of people. Unless the original sender has specifically authorised this. Private messages should not be quoted or forwarded to anyone else. By doing this, there is a high risk of taking comments out of context, alienating people and creating difficult situations which we should avoid. If we all apply this basic rule, there should not be any problems.[/quote]

Gala I agree with you on out of context, but not if you have issues with passing so called malicious messages onto to Admin for a ruling. Sender beware I say. Don't know what the rules are, but why the big fuss about permissions - if you don't write it, it can't get referred on.

Pm's wing their merry way around the system. I try to use them to build relationships and make (as is my style) stupid, hopefully humourous comments to someone I either know quite well (virtually) or think is wired up in a similar way. If, and it hasn't happened yet, sonmeone pm'd me to say ****** off you git I've had enough of your pm's then I would stop. Stop immediatley and apologise.

We cannot really work on the basis that a) people will stop behaving badly if asked to and b) it is enough to disable a capability a for a problem to be resolved. Many users have proven that it is dead simple to sidestep any limitation, restriction, etc and happily keep going on.

I have not taken any action against anyone in these forums (except outright spammers) for a very long time (despite repeated claims by many, including many in this thread that their banning was imminent) and I don't intend to change that. The "person" in question should by now realise that they should not PM other people that are unhappy with the messages they received so far and I hope they act accordingly. If they continue to harass and further proof is shown we will then banned/restricted in the hope that they at least will not sidestep and restart.

Please don't take this not really caring - we care very deeply. However, the solution needs to be far more drastic than simply removing PM facilities to one person and we are working on that.

Fights tend to blow over until the next time and I think everyone has had the chance to air their grievances. I for one hope that JC will get back to what she clearly does best - getting us to cough by money for good causes!

[quote=ronald;118548]We cannot really work on the basis that a) people will stop behaving badly if asked to and b) it is enough to disable a capability a for a problem to be resolved. Many users have proven that it is dead simple to sidestep any limitation, restriction, etc and happily keep going on.

I have not taken any action against anyone in these forums (except outright spammers) for a very long time (despite repeated claims by many, including many in this thread that their banning was imminent) and I don't intend to change that. The "person" in question should by now realise that they should not PM other people that are unhappy with the messages they received so far and I hope they act accordingly. If they continue to harass and further proof is shown we will then banned/restricted in the hope that they at least will not sidestep and restart.

Please don't take this not really caring - we care very deeply. [B][I][U]However, the solution needs to be far more drastic than simply removing PM facilities to one person and we are working on that.[/U][/I][/B]

Fights tend to blow over until the next time and I think everyone has had the chance to air their grievances. I for one hope that JC will get back to what she clearly does best - getting us to cough by money for good causes![/quote]

Hi Ronald

Sounds like you are getting to the bottom of the problem - thank you.

Any chance of any specifics on the highlighted text? If not details or dates, then broad concepts would be much appreciated.

Geo and Gala both give fair cases - however I respectfully ask all not to veer too far "off topic" with this thread (yes I know we all do so Im being a hypocrite here) but I started this thread to deal with ONE specific problem, that being the abuse by ONE member who consistently and continually abuses the PM system with malicious intent often against ME. It is purely a coincidence that it has come to light how widespread this problem has been as others have now come forward to validate these claims.

If you have not received PM's that you consider abusive, whether directly to and about you or about others that were unwelcome or unsolicted and you have other issues you would like to air - please do so in another thread. I ask all to kindly refrain from "muddying the waters" on this thread.

I am sure the Admin will have enough trouble wading through my claims and the other persons possible counter claims without any further confusion. Please, just for once, can we deal with one problem at a time and keep any other problem separate?

Please note, I did not say this ONE person has EVER directly sent me a malicious or abusive PM, only that I am aware of this ONE person sending this type of PMs to others - which has now also been verified and I believe the Mods are now also aware of other PMs sent from this ONE person that are also abusive.

I have no intention of publishing on this forum any abusive PM copy I have received - simply because I do not have any - I said earlier, that, like others, any I have received from people forwarding PMs they have received from this ONE person have already been deleted by me.

And I do not believe it is in anyones interest to publish PMs here - even if they are from this ONE person. If you have received such PM's and still have them, forward them to Gardahomes, Marc, Tusk and Ronni so they all get a copy. If you have received such PM's and do not still have them, you can still write a PM to the admin team and tell them all about it if you would like to.

If you want to publish a PM that Harpo sent to Groucho that abuses Chico - go do that on a new thread - good luck, but I'm not interested in that just at the moment - I'm being selfish because I'm trying to preserve my "persona" on this forum.

If I get banned for doing this then I want it to be because I did not present my case clearly or was lacking in some other area to prove my claim - I do not want it to be because someone posted something that confused the issue and the Mods gave up in total bewilderment and despair.

If you have or know of any other people sending/receiving abusive/malicious PMs that do not relate in any way to the ONE person who is the topic of this thread and you want to raise that issue - please, I ask again, do it elsewhere. This is my thread and my battle - and it's the only time in all the thousands of posts I have made over the years on this forum that I have ever requested everyone to think about what I am trying to achieve here, so please, consider how relevant any further comment you make on this thread would actually be to what has already been said.

Can we leave it where it is for now - and give Admin time to work it out? We need to remember that Admin appear to have been totally unaware of this situation until I started bleating on and on about it. They need to be able to get to the bottom of the story and look at the full picture presented from BOTH sides before they can make a balanced decision.

Lets give them that time - 'cus it's my forum neck on the line here. :swoon:

Drat and blast!! Trust me to cross post with Ronni! :laughs:

Grrrrrrrr.. now I have to read it and post again! :bigergrin:

[quote=ronald;118548]We cannot really work on the basis that a) people will stop behaving badly if asked to and b) it is enough to disable a capability a for a problem to be resolved. Many users have proven that it is dead simple to sidestep any limitation, restriction, etc and happily keep going on.

I have not taken any action against anyone in these forums (except outright spammers) for a very long time (despite repeated claims by many, including many in this thread that their banning was imminent) and I don't intend to change that. The "person" in question should by now realise that they should not PM other people that are unhappy with the messages they received so far and I hope they act accordingly. If they continue to harass and further proof is shown we will then banned/restricted in the hope that they at least will not sidestep and restart.

Please don't take this not really caring - we care very deeply. However, the solution needs to be far more drastic than simply removing PM facilities to one person and we are working on that.

Fights tend to blow over until the next time and I think everyone has had the chance to air their grievances. I for one hope that JC will get back to what she clearly does best - getting us to cough by money for good causes![/quote]

Hmmm..

A bit of a cop out Ronni. The complaint is not about what goes on OUTSIDE the forum walls - it is only about what goes on WITHIN these walls (wasn't that a TV programme with Googie Withers?).

I don't care who emails who or what is said - it is way beyond anyones control or my desire to attempt to curb the actions of "the person in question" with what they do outside the forum.

However, I do care what they do inside the forum by abusing the PM system and there is a workable method available to stop the abuse if you remove access to the PM facility from this person.

I accept it will not stop them from sending emails, but it sure as hell will stop them from sending PM's and therefore, it completely stops the problem I and others are complaining about. Everyones happy - except "the person in question".

Do you think "the person in question" did not already know that they should not abuse the PM system in this way before I decided I had had enough and starting screeching about it? Come on, you know they knew that - "the person in question" has always known because I have PMd "the person in question" several times and asked her to stop. I have even told "the person in question" that others have forwarded "the person in questions" PMs to me.

Please, can you explain your reluctance to remove "the person in questions" PM facility?

It is a workable solution and if you gave "the person in question" time to contact those considered as friends to exchange email addresses before restricting access - what does "the person in question" actually lose? Nothing.

"The person in question" would still be able to stay in contact with those people and still be able to abuse and be as malicious as ever about me and possibly many others, so there is no loss to the "the person in question."

If you do not remove or heavily restrict "the person in questions" ability to access the PM system then everyone loses because all this has been in vain and the abuse WILL continue because there are no checks or Moderation of the PM system.

I know you can moderate "key words" within PMs to or from "the person in question", but do you really want to do that and as you say that is not a real solution as "the person in question" is quite capable of not using certain key words and so, wont trigger the alert.

For example, if you were to set up a key word of lets say "JC" all "the person in question" would have to do to bypass the alert would be to use the word "that cow" instead.

It's unworkable. The only solution is to at the very least, restrict "the person in questions" PM facility so "the person in question" can ONLY use it to PM you (:bigergrin:) or remove it completely.

Now, if you can possibly - with the greatest of respect - (how much grovelling is required here?) see your way clear to at least seriously reconsidering restricting "the person in questions" PM facility, then in exchange for your gracious and fair consideration, I might just get back to drumming up a bit of business by trying to help all the others who are still valiantly battling on and try to get everyone back on track with a positive mindset and remotivated to get the fund up to ten grand - by lets say.. erm.. next Wednesday - but whatever you decide, I hope you know what a massive psychological boost it was for everyone when you tipped the fund over the two grand mark. :yes:

"moved to italiauncovered.co.uk"

Oh, I really wouldn't be too sure about that Torchy - especially now, after I've just finished reading the new thread posted by "the person in question" called "No more please".

"moved to italiauncovered.co.uk"

[quote=Torchiarolan;118611]Ah now JC, thats not a great negotiating tool really cos we all know you are itching to help raise more money.
:yes:[/quote]
Don't know if this has been suggested yet, but why not combine this dispute with the fundraising effort? I envision a steel cage, no-holds barred, hair-pulling and fingernail- gouging allowed, full-blown catfight. Video tape it and post it on the forum. All proceeds go to the earthquake fund.

Any takers?

[quote=Campfield;118645]Don't know if this has been suggested yet, but why not combine this dispute with the fundraising effort? I envision a steel cage, no-holds barred, hair-pulling and fingernail- gouging allowed, full-blown catfight. Video tape it and post it on the forum. All proceeds got to the earthquake fund.

Any takers?[/quote]

One would take, the other would run off and whinge. Won't work!

Can I sell the popcorn :yes:

Who the hell is gonna but popcorn off a grizzly faced cat? :bigergrin:

[quote]One would take, the other would run off and whinge. Won't work![/quote]
No running from the steel cage. Even if they did run around inside, we could possibly take bets on how many laps they'd last, with winnings going to the fund. It's a win-win situation.

"moved to italiauncovered.co.uk"

[quote=Torchiarolan;118657]Wasn':yes:t going to mention it myself but I didnt know the Good Lord made things that looked like that cat of yours Lollita ![/quote]

Well the Good Lord made lots of things that should have stayed at the design stage :winki:

[quote=Lollita;118661]Well the Good Lord made lots of things that should have stayed at the design stage :winki:[/quote]

Not unlike the Triumph TR7. :yes: How that particular design ever made it off the back of the envelope beggars belief....:swoon:

"moved to italiauncovered.co.uk"