Question.

[Gedanken]

Originally Posted by Thani

why havent any mods replied untill now?

Maybe because members like Martin and Adrian have already introduced the judgement and sense that make this forum what it is, Einstein.

[Thani]

Originally Posted by Gedanken

Maybe because members like Martin and Adrian have already introduced the judgement and sense that make this forum what it is, Einstein.

hahah Einstein? nice one such a classic from a person like you

[Art161]

Originally Posted by Gedanken

Maybe because members like Martin and Adrian have already introduced the judgement and sense that make this forum what it is, Einstein.

I think that remark is rude.

[Gedanken]

Originally Posted by Art161

I think that remark is rude.

I hear what you're saying, Art, and over and above what I've just written in response to Mike above, I'll just leave it at saying that Thani's "why haven't the mods responded" question has more than the ostensible meaning behind it.

[Trurolexer]

All I want to say is...I will miss Thani...
That's it, don't want get involved in this problem.

[Gedanken]

Yes, I expect you'd take that as a genuine compliment, wouldn't you? Now pipe down and let the adults go about their business.

[Thani]

Originally Posted by Gedanken

Yes, I expect you'd take that as a genuine compliment, wouldn't you? Now pipe down and let the adults go about their business.

i would ask you to say please if you want to say something to someone, or dont say it at all.. Since your the Mod who you want people to look up to... at the moment people have been looking way down..

[Gedanken]

Originally Posted by Thani

Since your the Mod who you want people to look up to...

Wrong. I'm not as shallow as you to care about how people look at me. My role here is to keep folks from kicking up a ruckus, which is what you're doing now. That's six points.

Now I do believe this infraction puts you over the limit of 12, following the last ruckus you kicked up by trying to dictate to Mailman about how he should behave as a mod. Good bye.

[Lol-x]

O.K. can I just clarify a few issues:

1. Chip (SLRdude) no one including me got their panties in a bunch over your post.
2. None of the information contained in your post was removed, all that happened is that the photo was changed from a visible image to a link url, so those who wish to see the image can do so by clicking the link.
3. If a thread is created, and whether at the start or at some stage during the course of the thread, there is material that 'some people' may consider inappropriate, then the title of the thread can be amended to warn people that the thread may not be suitable for office viewing. Again it's no big deal, it doesn't change the material in the thread, it just gives a friendly warning. Some people view the forum in situations where if a photo is shown of a naked woman or semi-naked woman in a sexually provocative position (which is what your photo consisted) then it may be very embarrassing or uncomfortable for some to view that image, as others in the workplace, or at home, or in public at a cafe, may believe the person is viewing sexually related (even pornographic) material. It is about 'perception', and a member doesn't want to have to go the trouble of necessarily explaining "This is actually a guy making a joke about a remote control", and hope that their wife, friend, stranger is prepared to believe that to be so.
4. As for being treated equally, there are about 1000 posts made on this forum per day. I can't read every post. So if a post is reported then it will be considered.
5. If a photo does contain nudity or scantilly clad people, men or women it is always best to post those photos as 'URL' links. That way everyone can enjoy and no-one can claim to be offended.

[abigsecret]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

O.K. can I just clarify a few issues:

1. Chip (SLRdude) no one including me got their panties in a bunch over your post.
2. None of the information contained in your post was removed, all that happened is that the photo was changed from a visible image to a link url, so those who wish to see the image can do so by clicking the link.
3. If a thread is created, and whether at the start or at some stage during the course of the thread, there is material that 'some people' may consider inappropriate, then the title of the thread can be amended to worn people that the thread may not be suitable for office viewing. Again it's no big deal, it doesn't change the material in the thread, it just gives a friendly warning. Some people view the forum in situations where if a photo is shown of a naked woman or semi-naked woman in a sexually provocative position (which is what your photo consisted) then it may be very embarrassing or uncomfortable for some to view that image, as others in the workplace, or at home, or in public at a cafe, may believe the person is viewing sexually related (even pornographic) material. It is about 'perception', and a member doesn't want to have to go the trouble of necessarily explaining "This is actually a guy making a joke about a remote control", and hope that their wife, friend, stranger is prepared to believe that to be so.
4. As for being treated equally, there are about 1000 posts made on this forum per day. I can't read every post. So if a post is reported then it will be considered.
5. If a photo does contain nudity or scantilly clad people, men or women it is always best to post those photos as 'URL' links. That way everyone can enjoy and no-one can claim to be offended.

Thank you Steve for clarifying this, it makes perfect sense to me!
And thank you to whomever deleted the provocative, discriminating pictures on the other thread Chip is talking about!
You guys do a fabulous job at keeping this forum somewhat decent...

[Lol-x]

Please remember the moderators can't be everywhere all the time, they all have their own jobs and lives.

I too have personal commitments, and although it might seem that you are waiting hours to get a reply, and that you are deliberately being ignored, you are not. I've replied and taken action within minutes of it coming to my attention.

I only found out about this thread because I was pointed in the direction by another moderator.

There are days when I will not be on the forum, let alone being able to read 1,000 posts per day. No one gets paid to moderate or monitor these, but the moderators (who get very little credit or thanks) do the best they can to cover problematic situations.

Please remember this is not a commercial forum, and we all have our business and family commitments.

It isn't really fair to say 'Why haven't the mods responded?" when you didn't PM me, it is less than 24 hours and I didn't even know the post/thread exists until about 30 minutes ago.

I do think members are treated equally, but I don't look at the jokes section very much, also that forum has generally been considered to be more explicit than other sections, and this is apparent in the nature of the topics and subject matter. In any event if a post is brought to the attention of a moderator then some more specific attention can be directed towards a post.

I'm not pointing the finger at anyone when I make the above comments, just saying patience is a virtue.

[Lol-x]

Chip (SLRdude) please confirm that none of the material in your post was removed, it was a change from a visible image to a link to the same image.

Some people reading your post may wrongly get the impression that material in your post was removed. This was not the case, it was just that it was changed into a different format i.e. a link to an image rather than the image itself appearing in your post.

So it wasn't really as if censorship was applied by the deletion of any material, it just meant that if someone wanted to see your photo then they had to click on the link.

What I mean is all the .... down the side of your post might look like editing marks by me, but hey are actually what you posted, no material was deleted.
.
.
.
.
.
.
http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...915#post682915

[Letsgodiving]

I generally don't like to get involved in these things but I'm not sure I understand the banning of Thani whom I have no relationship with at all. It comes across to me as a personal animus unless there is something I'm missing. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Sorry James but I don't get the justification for this.

[Gedanken]

Originally Posted by Letsgodiving

I generally don't like to get involved in these things but I'm not sure I understand the banning of Thani whom I have no relationship with at all. It comes across to me as a personal animus unless there is something I'm missing. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Sorry James but I don't get the justification for this.

There's no personal animus, Mike. I'm not sure if you remember the last time Thani kicked up a stink, and not getting into too much detail here, but it started out like this and ended up with him coming in and saying that the forum "sucks" (that's a quote) and demanding that Paulie (mailman) take a lot of grief from another member for no justification, and then accusing all the mods of sidestepping the subject when he got answers he didn't want to hear. The pattern was right there again and we just got to the bottom line a lot quicker this time round.

Hope that clears things up.

[folexhater]

I think this is Deja Vu but correct me if I am wrong, was this thread posted in another watch forum? I am quite sure I read this on TKeperFum or TZ

[padi56]

Well guys its quite simple and posted in most forums the rules about posting certain pictures etc.And the rules are there for all members to read and fully understand.


http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=3003

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=3008

[Jimbits76]

Hey guys...goofball J here to weigh in.

I remember the Thani posts concerning mailman and he came awfully close to being banned then.

In light of the new forum etc, there is no real need for the animosity towards the mods...you want to play the "I'll say what I like because if you don't like it I'll take my bucket and spade and play in the other sandbox" tactic then expect to be told Goodbye.

As for Chips and David's threads, I can understand with both sets of images how they may offend certain individuals...All Chip was asking for was that the same rules be applied to everybody across the board and eventually that happened.

Personally I see no problem here, let's all have a nice cup of tea and get on with business....

J

[Trurolexer]

Originally Posted by Jimbits76

Personally I see no problem here, let's all have a nice cup of tea and get on with business....

J

I'm with you, Ol' Pal!!!

PEACE!!!

[OYSTERMANN]

Originally Posted by Trurolexer

I'm with you, Ol' Pal!!!

PEACE!!!

Agreed, TR and Jim

[Gedanken]

Originally Posted by Jimbits76

Hey guys...goofball J here to weigh in.

I remember the Thani posts concerning mailman and he came awfully close to being banned then.

In light of the new forum etc, there is no real need for the animosity towards the mods...you want to play the "I'll say what I like because if you don't like it I'll take my bucket and spade and play in the other sandbox" tactic then expect to be told Goodbye.

As for Chips and David's threads, I can understand with both sets of images how they may offend certain individuals...All Chip was asking for was that the same rules be applied to everybody across the board and eventually that happened.

Personally I see no problem here, let's all have a nice cup of tea and get on with business....

J

Cheers, mate - absolutely spot-on!

[Terry Newton]

Jim:

You always have such a nice way of saying things.

Terry Newton

[redshirt1957]

Geez, Steve went one step further and requested that all my comments be posted via 'URL' links.

[Welshwatchman]

Originally Posted by redshirt1957

Geez, Steve went one step further and requested that all my comments be posted via 'URL' links.

Just visit www.badstasteinmymouth.com to reply to Joe.

Thinking about that you'd better not, that site is bound to be operating and it won't be pretty.

[Jimbits76]

Very lame Chip, I expected more from you

http://www.timkeperforum.com/viewt...st=0&sk=t&sd=a

I noticed the thread went up there over the weekend and ignored it, as I've pretty much ignored the flaming that Joe got there recently.

I clicked the link following Mireyna's post and noticed the protagonist's reply to the comments she had recieved during the TKF thread.

I'm not aware of whom "Pickled" is but I have my suspicions and I applaud her for a reasoned and balanced explaination of the complaint concerning the post in question. I also applaud 'Pickled' for her honesty and downright bravery to admit that it was her who contacted the mod team.

Looking at this from a sensible point of view, we post on a sterile medium where people meet from all over the world. There are folks here with different views on sexuality, race, creed, politics, economics and history.

Can we try and be sensitive to other's needs and personal beliefs?

I goof off, hardly post anything technical or historical to do with watches because there are guys here who know vast amounts more than my miniscule experience of Rolex or Omega or Panerai or whatever. I joke and kid around and try to make people laugh and would never, ever want to upset any fellow members. Sometimes though, even if it is in my best interestes to make my friends laugh, there may always be the time when somebody may take exception to what I have said. It isn't intentional, more accidental.

One member here, whom I would consider to be one of the nicest, funniest and most intelligent guys I have experienced in my life admitted to me via PM that he was unsure of me, my humour and my posts but eventually he realised that to me the whole kit and caboodle is pretty much a big joke. If you can't have laughter, what can you have right?

I'm aware that Chip was asking for a maintained balance of the rules, that some members should not have more rights than others and he was right! It was sorted out and the door should now be shut on the topic.

Although this weekend I saw chip's thread at TKF and originally questioned his motives, I realised that he has been a member for a long time here and forged relationships with guys that have now moved on. Chip has the right to maintain his friendships with these
guys as many others here do. I like and respect Chip and will continue to. What he does and where he posts has little to do with me. As a forum buddy, I just want to see him happy, the same as I do all of my friends on here.

If you pi$$ me off, I'll let you know. If I do the same to you, please let me know.

We don't need this whole interforum moaning thing.
As I posted earlier, if you aren't happy, there is a new place for you to go. Don't expect to rock the boat and be begged not to leave!
The grass always looks greener but I have noticed this past week or so, the same issues here are causing threads to be shut down there...guns etc.

As TR said so plainly...peace.

Let's respect other's opinions, beliefs and also let's not forget their families!

We are all not like Joe with his child proof Rolex Forum/Bad-taste-in-my-mouth.com fortress of a basement!!!!! Some of us have our families around.

It it ain't safe for work, it ain't gonna be safe for kids!!!!

Let's all get on, if this continues, am I gonna have to break out the guitar and tamborine, team up with Martin and start singing campfire songs????????

Cheers all

J

[Uncle-AJ]

Excellent post Jim, I applaud you.


Please don't start the camp fire songs.

[Carolina]

The "forum war" thing is getting a bit old. Go ahead and insist that there isn't one, but I disagree.

[Lisa]

Originally Posted by Carolina

The "forum war" thing is getting a bit old. Go ahead and insist that there isn't one, but I disagree.

[Carolina]

Originally Posted by Lisa

*snort* <--sorry, that wasn't very ladylike.

[2careless]

Jimbo, well said o' boy!