Resurrection ????

[President]

Help me finish this. When was he banned?

[astcell]

I do not see this as much of an "Atomic" issue but rather as a determination of where the line is that he crossed. We know we do not have free speech here like we do in the real world. But how much do we have. 10%? 50%? 99.99? We need to understand the limits of the Moderators in order to survive.

[mrbieler]

Originally Posted by Avalon

Regular mods can't change poll results, but according to this discussion on the vBulletin forum the Admin and "Super mods" can alter vote results. I'm not saying that is happening here, but it is possible according to the people at vBulletin.

http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showt...=206636&page=2

Talk about not wanting to stir up shit.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

[Earl]

Robert, it's not so much the freedom of speech here but, more so concideration of others. The word Tosser has been used on this forum since day 1 in many many forms. Why is it now that the people who were not offended are now, did they find Jessus? You have me scratching my head on this :But how much do we have. 10%? 50%? 99.99? We need to understand the limits of the Moderators in order to survive."? Robert, you do? How many people here have received these citatations or demerits for their speech? How many people have been banned due to their speech? only 1 person really that was Atomic for the befor mentioned reasons.

Earl

[astcell]

Demerits, bans, violations, all that is new to me. I never give it a thought. Like if I walk down the street and see a police officer, I never in a million years will think he is watching me.

I have no idea how many people have received what. I know I get private emails stating that a post here or there may be out of line, for all I know, everyone gets them.

If we have said TOSSER from Day One and now someone complains, are we to change the entire forums just for them? Maybe THEY need to take a hike and stop trying to change what has always been. What else will we change? What will we devolve to? How about locking the board for new posts on Sundays since that is a day of rest?

You can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time, but that is what you are trying to do. Banning atomic pleased some people and not others. It has to stop sometime, and someone is going to be left holding the proverbial bag.

[Mink]

Originally Posted by Avalon

Now that is the funniest thing I have read in this thread yet!

Yep, move along people, no agenda to see here.....LOL! Thanks for the comic relief!

Al;

Since you liked my humor so much, I'll indulge you with a second helping!

<this is the funny part - I'm about to tell you stuff that the mod staff are to kind, respectful, and diplomatic to say>

Your long, circuitous, meandering, semantically hair splitting posts seem to suggest that there is a certain lack of clarity as to why JA was banned. Here's the 411 - John got banned because he spit in the face of authority and authority spit back. It's that simple - really. Get over it and live with it - it ain't gonna change.

The fastest way to get banned from any internet forum of any kind it to be disrespectful to the staff (there are others). John's usual MO is that he, at some point or another, develops an attitude and has a little hissy fit / melt down bashing everything in sight - usually over the some "principle" or other - forgetting that he is talking to people who had until that point considered him a friend. The people taking the brunt of his tirade usually feel that they deserve a little more respect and an little less contempt from an alleged "friend" and are thus doubly offended. The situation deteriorates from there and surprise, he gets banned.

In terms of all that feel John is a great guy - it's unfortunate but we are frequently remembered most for our most recent actions, especially if they are negative. It's not fair, it's just the truth. A doctor who saved 1000 lives over the course of a 40 year career and the day after he retires kills his wife with an axe will forever be remembered as Dr. XXX "the axe murderer" not Dr. XXX "the great healer". The 1000 lives he saved doesn't make him any less of a murderer although for those who ascribe to the Karma theory of the universe - he's better off than the murderer who never saved any lives.

For those concerned over "where does the "line" lie" so as to not step over it - stop worrying, if you are the average forum visitor, the line lies far beyond what you would consider reasonable. It's not about language at all, but rather common decency. If you happen to put a toe over the line, the staff will probably try to gently correct the problem. If you heed the warning, you'll be fine. Throw the bird to the warner and your done!

From the discussion here, it seems that some feel that the moderation here is somehow draconian. I feel the opposite - I think it is far to light handed and lenient. As someone who visits several internet forums, I can tell you that there are things tolerated here that would be slapped down elsewhere in a heartbeat. As an example - in a post recently on another forum I mentioned, in the context of an appropriate contribution, my BS degree. The forum software automatically deleted "BS" and substituted "**". I was immediately issued a stern warning and given 4 demerit points (if you accrue 12 - you're banned!) for my inappropriate "language". I had to PM the "super moderator" to explain my actions before the 4 points were removed (we laughed afterwards)! After that little incident I came away with the understanding that my visiting their forum was a privilege and that they were serious about certain language issues. My choices were play by the rules or play somewhere else and they didn't really care either way. I still visit and contribute to that forum on a regular basis although I mind my Ps & Qs!

Lastly, I think the best way for John to never be banned from another forum is for him to steal a page from the John Holbrook playbook and start his own forum (yes, I know how funny that sounds). Holbrook was banned from 3 or so Rolex forums (including here) but since he now runs his own forum, he is free to propagate whatever BS he sees fit safe from moderation - and I am free to not go there.

Ten cuidado,

- Mink -

P.S.: In terms of that poll at the top of the page - who cares if the ballot box was "stuffed" or not. It doesn't matter, the outcome won't change anything.

Hey Mink,

I won't quote it all, because "that's a lot of typing!"

Your arguments would make a lot more sense if you knew the facts. You are right that a lot of what happened between him and "the authority" was about principle.....the principle that all here should be treated equally.

Now on a couple of your other points....

- I don't expect Atomic to be reinstated...never said I did expect that (I didn't start this poll).

- My long posts (you should talk ) are aimed at clearing up what I see as an attack on someone who is not able to come here and defend themselves by stating the facts. If they stop attacking, I'll stop replying!

- I have no idea if the mods are manipulating polls here, but a mod said that it wasn't possible, which isn't true.

- Not really a question for you, but if the demerit points system is so straightforward, why not let everyone know about it rather than let them find out by getting an infraction? And so you know, the first time John saw or heard of demerit points, 60% of what we are all allocated were gone. And unlike the other forum you participate in this is what one of the mods said to John about him asking about the points:

"If moderation is taken against you, or any other person, you have no right to comment on that to either the moderators or to make a public statement on the forum."

And then followed it up with this:

"You need to understand that members are not in a position to say (certainly publicly) what is or is not fair or what is right or wrong on this forum."

So even though you say this other forum is much more strict (and maybe it is) the way things are handled here isn't all roses either.

And just for the record I have been on the receiving end of some communication from mods here (one in particular) that certainly did not fit the definition of "kind, respectful, and diplomatic."

As I've said before, it is what it is.

Thanks, Al

[Lol-x]

Avalon I wish you could say something nice about the forum or any member, because I just keep seeing very negative things directed in all directions by you.

Many moderators or administrators would have taken steps by now if they were not so relaxed, this is a watch forum. Management decisions have to be made, not all people can be pleased all of the time.

Your repeated accusations are that I am so very dishonest, well I don't agree. I'm interested in watches, I thought you were too.

I'm just using Atomic own words when he said for months he "only used the forum to speak to his small group of friends, who he had now stolen away". I thought you believe what Atomic tells you. Now I'm accused for being dishonest for accepting Atomics own words.

I don't feel it is productive injecting anymore negative energy in this matter, I've said what I said and I stand by it. You can come back again and again, the answer is the same, the reasons are the same, and it seems you will be the same.

[Launch Mini]

Steve,
I didn't think I was going to open this Pandora's box here.
Can we lock this one down now & move on?

[C.J.]

Originally Posted by Avalon

Hey Mink,

I won't quote it all, because "that's a lot of typing!"

Your arguments would make a lot more sense if you knew the facts. You are right that a lot of what happened between him and "the authority" was about principle.....the principle that all here should be treated equally.

Now on a couple of your other points....

- I don't expect Atomic to be reinstated...never said I did expect that (I didn't start this poll).

- My long posts (you should talk ) are aimed at clearing up what I see as an attack on someone who is not able to come here and defend themselves by stating the facts. If they stop attacking, I'll stop replying!

- I have no idea if the mods are manipulating polls here, but a mod said that it wasn't possible, which isn't true.

- Not really a question for you, but if the demerit points system is so straightforward, why not let everyone know about it rather than let them find out by getting an infraction? And so you know, the first time John saw or heard of demerit points, 60% of what we are all allocated were gone. And unlike the other forum you participate in this is what one of the mods said to John about him asking about the points:

"If moderation is taken against you, or any other person, you have no right to comment on that to either the moderators or to make a public statement on the forum."

And then followed it up with this:

"You need to understand that members are not in a position to say (certainly publicly) what is or is not fair or what is right or wrong on this forum."

So even though you say this other forum is much more strict (and maybe it is) the way things are handled here isn't all roses either.

And just for the record I have been on the receiving end of some communication from mods here (one in particular) that certainly did not fit the definition of "kind, respectful, and diplomatic."

As I've said before, it is what it is.

Thanks, Al

O.K., Al, I was trying to keep out of this all together, but you simply won't let this die. You have an amazing way of manipulating the facts and warping them into some fictional version that suits your needs and wants, very much like that of a child, IMO.

Personally, I have no idea of who Mink is, but it certainly sounds as though he knows John (Atomic) very, very well, unlike most of those who have been paying this ridiculous tribute to him (you excluded of course).

You mention in the quoted post that all should be treated equally, I agree. But, as I said, you warp this into what best suits you and Johns needs. Neither of you showed a mutual respect nor very much consideration toward others on this forum, ever. You were usually snide and pompous. If any member agreed with either of you in any way, whatever the subject may have been, yes you were usually courteous. But, if anyone didn't agree a nasty, demeaning or selfish response was almost guaranteed. So, it was basically Johns and your way, or the highway. Where is the mutual respect and equal treatment there?

Mink summed this up quite neatly in his version of why John was banned. He continuously jabbed at JJ over and over again. He was warned by moderators, over and over again. I even sent him PM's asking asking him to lay off, but no, there was principal involved. What principal? The principal that John couldn't do exactly as he wanted...period. There was no consideration for JJ or this forum, only JOHN and that's not what this place is here for. So he was banned...and he deserved it. So do you, in my opinion, but the moderators are much more lenient that I.

As for the rest of you that want to pay tribute to John, let's be sure you all know exactly who you're paying to. As I recall, a lot of you weren't here when some of this all began. Once I explain things away, I'd like to see just who still keeps their tribute going. That will explain to me a lot about who I speak with here.

You see, way back when this forum was small with a core group of members making most of the posts. This place was a blast, non stop ball breaking all day long. But, the members here would rally for each other and provided good, knowledgeable answers to any and all questions.

Back then it was common place for us to make jokes and prod at each other about almost anything. It was done in the spirit of fun and always taken as just that and yes, John (Atomic) and Al (Avalon) were quick to get in on the FUN!. We would joke about many, many racy subjects some of which are as follows; prostitutes, some with teeth but most without, sex with sheep (of course) the penis size of certain members (mainly one) being tall, being short (yes, that was me) narcotics use and shipping, Countries of origin ( mainly Fransie, who always took it like a champ) and a plethora of other colorful subjects. Bear in mind this was always openly accepted and laughed at.

Now, one day JJ decides to make a post about two watches having a go at each other. Then a short time later, he decides to ask what attire members choose to sleep in. Now, considering the topics mentioned above, I really don't think these two are so extraordinary. Yet, with these two topics combined with the pending purchase of a TT blue submariner and worries by John and Al that too many pictures would be posted of this watch they went to the moderators here and complained about JJ, totally behind his back, never a PM was sent to him. That's fair and equal treatment, right? No, I didn't think so either.

I was surprised at this. Surely this had to be a mistake, the John I knew wouldn't do such a thing. So, I PMed him and asked why. His response was that he was hosting the big GTG in Toronto and was asking companies for handouts, as well as, inviting them to visit our site. Bear in mind, this GTG was initially John (Atomic), Al (Avalon), John (launch-mini) and me all meeting up for a few beers and fun. Somehow, John decided to make it into a mainly Panerisit GTG and advertised it on several forums. A little EQUAL treatment would have been him making me aware of the change of plans, but, I think we understand John and AL's idea of equal now, at least I do. Anyway, John was concerned that if someone were to visit this site they would see these threads by JJ and not take him seriously enough to provide handouts. So, he chose to go behind his his back and tattle tale on him to the mods. Hell of a guy, huh? Somehow, he believed that these two threads would somehow outshine all of the other ridiculous subjects we poked fun at here It was a self centered and selfish act IMO. Two traits that seem to be popular among John and Al.

Yes, John and I were friends. We spoke on the phone often, we exchanged gifts, we shared family problems and we laughed... alot. But, when I told him I believed he was wrong in the way he was treating JJ and that his posts were becoming rude and disturbing to TRF..I stopped being Johns friend. This is what happens when you don't blindly and totally agree with John. Equal, huh? No, just selfish.

Also, He knew damn well that he was treading on thin ice, he told me so. I told him to lay off and lay low. If he did this and they still banned him, I would fight with him and leave with him if he was banned for no reason, but no, he wouldn't he dared the mods to ban him and continued the behavior. So please, stop asking about the demerit thing and acting as if he didn't know it was coming, because he did.

I've said nothing on this subject thus far and have kept out of all these topics. I figured everything would work itself out eventually and Atomic and I would patch things up. Then I read a PM he sent to another member here. He referenced me as quite a few colorful words, behind my back, of course. So, with that, I finally realized his true colors would not change.

So, I warn all of you who are paying this tribute that if you decide to disagree with him you'll find yourselves on the bad guy list wondering where your equal treatment is. And, honestly, I just can't understand why you would choose to pay tribute to what I've just described. As I said, he knew damn well the ban was coming. He was told so in PMs by mods. John informed me of this fact he just chose to ignore it. Why hasn't he or you, Al or anyone of his other mouth pieces stated this fact rather then let all this continue? Now, is he still worth your tribute, people?

[Mink]

Hey Al;

Thanks for the reply. Yes my post was a little long but only a mildly meandering. I don't think it was circuitous or hair splitting at all though!

OBTW, where do I look to find my demerits? I wouldn't want to be smited off guard!

- Mink -

P.S.: FWIW, I agree that moderation generally isn't a topic for open debate and discussion - it's like trying to talk to an artist about his style while he is in the middle of creating a painting. Some issues might however be open for discussion based solely on the discretion of the mod.

Ten cuidado,

- m -

[walds11]

I don't know the whole story, but please let this issue die. This thread probably should of been locked or deleted a long time ago.

[Ashley]

Originally Posted by walds11

I don't know the whole story, but please let this issue die. This thread probably should of been locked or deleted a long time ago.

Why do people keep wanting to sweep this thread under a rug?
Obviously there is a reason that it hasn't been locked yet. I think it's good that people get to hear what happened.

Just my thoughts

[astcell]

Originally Posted by walds11

I don't know the whole story, but please let this issue die. This thread probably should of been locked or deleted a long time ago.

I think it is still here because what fuels the fire is the appearance of censure. If this thread dies slowly after everyone has said what they wanted, great, it is in one place and folks can skip reading it. I am sure many do. It will devolve to where no one posts to this thread and it will simply stagnate and all will be well again. People need to vent their feelings somewhere. If this thread is closed prematurely then it may appear that the mods are silencing the expression of others and it can be one big "here we go again."

Hi Craig,

I knew at some point you would show up in this thread to repeat your attacks on John and me. I conclude from your post that John and me are basically "bad people." Okay, let's start with that premise.

You talk about the complaints regarding JJ's posts (I will remind you I did not bring him into this discussion), and make the point that we did not contact him and ask politely for him to stop asking what we wear to bed. I will make the point that his refusal to stop posts about his watches having sex, and asking what people wear to bed were what ultimately lead to his banning from the other place. The mods over there claimed to have asked him in private before going public with their concerns about his posts, but he would not stop. Now, do I believe everything they say? Obviously not, but I do wonder if there is some truth to their claims. Some time ago JJ made a post about going for a pee in the middle of the night and playing with his watch when he went back to bed. Many chimed in with the cry of "Too much information!" and there was some normal ribbing that JJ took offense to
- I guess the thread did not get the response he wanted. He then went on a bit of tirade, and Gedanken posted this in response:

"JJ, I'd suggest you take a deep breath and take a look at what's happening here.

That was John asking, and he's not a mod here, is he? If he's uncomfortable with what you've written, he's 100% entitled to voice his reservations as are any of the other members. The fact is that whether you like it or not, you're encroaching other people's personal space by going into too much detail for their comfort. John's been good enough to stand up and be straightforward with you, and I applaud him for that.

As mods, we have to maintain a balance between your right to free speech and everybody else's right to not being faced with the discomfort of reading posts that offend their sensibilities. The fact here, as testified to by John's post, is that your posts has rubbed people the wrong way. I'll point out the obvious here, JJ - we like you, but that does not give you licence to do as you please without regard for others' feelings.

I put it to you that you've now twice trampled on people here - first by the initial post (which is something that we can get over), but now even worse, by telling people that you don't give a rat's ass about offending them. Nobody's here to serve you, JJ - everybody counts and I will not stand for you telling them that they don't.

I'm sorry if you feel that you're being oppressed here, but you need to have a good think about the effect of your posts on other people.

We've spoken about these issues in private before, and personally I would have preferred to keep it that way. However, if you're going to come out in public and accuse the mods of being like those from "the other place", and on top of that throw the gauntlet down by announcing that you "don't give a rat's ass" when you are clearly in the wrong, do not, I repeat, NOT, expect to get away with it. I wouldn't let this slide with anyone else, and I cannot afford to be impartial here."

So, if the mods had already discussed JJ's odd posts with him, and had to confront him openly on the forum because he kept on with them, do you really expect that a regular member saying "please don't post these things" is really going to make him stop?

Now I don't know what John complained about, but I complained about the thread asking people what they wear to bed. I personally find it to be an odd question - I found it odd when he asked people the same thing at the other place. In my view it's just not a normal question to ask people, and coupled with the fact that it was a major issue at the other place I thought JJ might have learned where to draw the line, but I guess not. So, when I saw him posting that same stuff here I thought "Oh no, here we go again!" and I expressed my concern to the mods that we didn't want to go down this path again, hoping that they would nip it in the bud. Now let's talk about twisting facts. Aside from the above, you failed to mention that the thread about what people wear to bed was pulled by the mods. I expect the mods here felt it was inappropriate as well, or they would not have pulled it. So are you twisting facts when you imply we were the only people who thought it was inappropriate? I think the answer is yes.

The underlying problem for you is who we took issue with. We dared to say we were fed up with some of the things JJ posts, and these days that is the ultimate sin at TRF. At one point the mods here chastised John for the number of Panerai related posts he had made, and yet JJ had posted more threads on one watch in a month than John had ever posted on Panerai the whole time he was a member here!

And by the way, the GTG John organized grew to something much bigger than it originally was because there were many TRF members in the Toronto area that he wanted to include. Ed even flew up from DC to join in. John worked quite hard to gather something like $3K worth of goodies to hand out to make sure everyone had something when they left. He has since sent Panerai stickers to people all over the world, yet you call him selfish because he didn't inform you of a change in the plans before making it public?

It's very sad that things have gone so wrong here. This place had so much potential in the beginning, and I looked forward to coming here and hanging out with my friends. I even offered to chip in to help buy this site when it was shut down after you threatened to leave TRF and the subsequent crapstorm happened. Like everyone else, I'm tired of all this......

[C.J.]

This is not an attack, Al. It's simply pointing out facts. Stop being so dramatic and do the same. Leave your speculation, drama and tall tales behind and simply respond to the facts with facts.

Let's forget about goings on in other past forums and direct our focus on TRF. As far as the thread you mention being pulled by the mods, it was done at the request of you and John and your continuous complaining about it. As far as the italicized quote you made, that was in response to JJ's saying he didn't give a rats a$$ if it offended anyone. Yes, that was wrong and that's what James chastised him for not the subject matter of the thread itself. Though, you weren't quite clear about that in your initial post.

You may not be aware of all that John told me, but the bottom line is he admitted that the only reason he made his initial complaints about JJ was because of the upcoming GTG and the invitation he extended to companies to visit here. He was concerned they wouldn't take us and most importantly, him seriously and he wouldn't get as many handouts. If these complaints were made for moral reasons, I could at least respect that. But they weren't, they were made only for self gain and selfishness. There's nothing to respect there and the fact that he's lying about it now and claiming it was done for other reasons is even more despicable. Then, when the mods disagreed with John and didn't do exactly as he wanted when he wanted, he got himself into a knot and pushed and pushed and pushed until he got himself banned.

You claim to not know why John made his complaints. I say you're a liar, there's no way you can make me believe you didn't have dialog with him prior to the complaints being issued, he made reference to that too in some of our PMs. You had no other reason for levying those complaints than to back up John. Come on, Al, take a step back and look at this thing in it's totality. Take a look at all of the threads and subjects therein. Take into consideration all of the topics we joked and prodded about and yes, you were involved in some too. You being an educated and intelligent man, tell me how you honestly selected these few subjects to be anymore disturbing or intrusive than the others which were discussed in the very same time frame.......... You simply can't. Nor, can you admit to being wrong, thus, I'm sure this will continue. But, I'm growing tired of it. So, when you come back with your next response, discuss it completely with John before hand. Remember, He told me many things about the GTG and I'm sure he remembers. I've mentioned nothing of them thus far as far handouts.....descriptions of it in other forums and one vendor in particular where a gift to him from me came from.

As far as the selfishness attributed to the GTG is concerned, my feelings on that are this. He advertised the GTG as a "mostly paneristi" GTG with people coming from as far away as Atlantic City and DC. It appears as though these GTG's are a big deal in the Panerai community and he wanted to be sure his looked good. A hot topic of some other GTG were the amount of give aways there were. He wanted to be sure he looked good by having a lot of give aways, Al. Again, lets be honest here. And, again, I know a little more about these than you may think, so please, let's end this part of the discussion here. Or, at the very least, carefully discuss this topic with John before you post anymore about this and place me in a position where I have to respond.

The bottom line here is that he chose to make personal attacks on JJ and you chose to back him up. His reasons for the attacks were in no way righteous, nor were yours. This has nothing to do with who the attacks were made on. The two of you were concerned that an overwhelming amount of pictures were going to be posted of a watch that the guy loved.....so what. You're a grown man, as is John. If you didn't want to see them you only needed to not open the threads.

As far as his not knowing the banning was coming..BS. He knew damn well it was coming, he was warned by mods and asked by me to lay off. But, John is John and how dare he not be allowed to do exactly what he wanted to do. You were so quick to point out how posts bothered you, why were others not entitled to the very same rights about Johns unending cheap shots at JJ and creating a hostile environment in so many threads?

He has all these members asking about demerit points, where the line not to be crossed is and whether enough notice was given before his banning. Step up, man and tell the truth. Drop the martyr act and be honest. He knew damn well where the line was. Hell, it was highlighted for him and his put his foot over it many, many times. He dared the mods to ban him and they FINALLY did.

As far as you mentioning the shut down. Well, I'm not surprised to see that from you, but I won't lower myself to your level and discuss that openly.

Originally Posted by C.J.

This is not an attack, Al. It's simply pointing out facts. Stop being so dramatic and do the same. Leave your speculation, drama and tall tales behind and simply respond to the facts with facts.

Funny, it sure seems like an attack to me.

Originally Posted by C.J.

Let's forget about goings on in other past forums and direct our focus on TRF. As far as the thread you mention being pulled by the mods, it was done at the request of you and John and your continuous complaining about it. As far as the italicized quote you made, that was in response to JJ's saying he didn't give a rats a$$ if it offended anyone. Yes, that was wrong and that's what James chastised him for not the subject matter of the thread itself. Though, you weren't quite clear about that in your initial post.

You seem to be so concerned with context, but only when it suits you. Leaving out what happened on the other forum is leaving out the context that lead me to complain about the thread. I've explained my reasons for what actions I took.

And regarding the italicized quote, well, read the thread yourself and decide if you think that was all JJ was being spoken to about.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=8752

Originally Posted by C.J.

You claim to not know why John made his complaints. I say you're a liar, there's no way you can make me believe you didn't have dialog with him prior to the complaints being issued, he made reference to that too in some of our PMs.

I am not trying to convince you of anything. However, the fact remains I had no dialogue with John before I sent in my complaint.

Originally Posted by C.J.

You had no other reason for levying those complaints than to back up John. Come on, Al, take a step back and look at this thing in it's totality. Take a look at all of the threads and subjects therein. Take into consideration all of the topics we joked and prodded about and yes, you were involved in some too. You being an educated and intelligent man, tell me how you honestly selected these few subjects to be anymore disturbing or intrusive than the others which were discussed in the very same time frame.......... You simply can't. Nor, can you admit to being wrong, thus, I'm sure this will continue.

Well, I've stated my reasons for what I did - I did not want to relive what I had already lived once on another forum. Neither you nor John lived through that. Whether you accept that or not is not under my control. Would I have done things differently, knowing where it all has lead to? Of course I would. Certainly it was not worth all of this. It's too bad that people can't have 20/20 hindsight, and the law of unintended consequences will come back and bite people on occasion.


In response to all your comments on the GTG that I've snipped.....

You may know more than me on what transpired leading up to the GTG. I don't frequent any of the Panerai communities, and never saw any of the others places this GTG was advertised. I'm sure you will now call me a liar again. If you wish to believe that John did everything he did for selfish reasons, then it's obvious that nothing I can say will change that. I am greatful that he organized it, and certainly had a good time with all the others there (regardless if they were TRF members or not).

Originally Posted by C.J.

The bottom line here is that he chose to make personal attacks on JJ and you chose to back him up. His reasons for the attacks were in no way righteous, nor were yours. This has nothing to do with who the attacks were made on. The two of you were concerned that an overwhelming amount of pictures were going to be posted of a watch that the guy loved.....so what. You're a grown man, as is John. If you didn't want to see them you only needed to not open the threads.

I've made my peace with JJ.

The botom line is, I do regret what has happened here. If you don't believe that, again that's fine with me. Is it partly my fault? Sure it is, but I share the responsibility with others (and not just John either).

We all make mistakes, and hope we can learn from them and move on.

[C.J.]

Originally Posted by Avalon

The botom line is, I do regret what has happened here. If you don't believe that, again that's fine with me. Is it partly my fault? Sure it is, but I share the responsibility with others (and not just John either).

We all make mistakes, and hope we can learn from them and move on.

Agreed, we've all played a part in this ugly scene. Let's leave it here, in what will soon become the past and move on

[Goodwatch]

Could this be a natural moment to close this thread? We all have had a chance to speak our peace. We could argue until hell freezes over but will that constitute to anything positive? This has hurt me more than I’m willing to admit, I can remember the time I stayed up until deep into the night to usher in 2006, a far cry from the atmosphere I’ve encountered lately.

Your friendly bartender.

[mrbieler]

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

Could this be a natural moment to close this thread?

Only if this will end here. Otherwise, it will just appear elsewhere.

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by mrbieler

Only if this will end here. Otherwise, it will just appear elsewhere.

It has ended......

[Launch Mini]

Go ahead and close it, You have my support.
Lock it down & throw away the key.

[roadcarver]

Close it, throw away the key, but don't remove this thread to serve as a reminder of our history so that we can all learn from it, and eventually be better people.

[Mink]

Originally Posted by Avalon

...You talk about the complaints regarding JJ's posts (I will remind you I did not bring him into this discussion), and make the point that we did not contact him and ask politely for him to stop asking what we wear to bed. I will make the point that his refusal to stop posts about his watches having sex, and asking what people wear to bed were what ultimately lead to his banning from the other place. The mods over there claimed to have asked him in private before going public with their concerns about his posts, but he would not stop. Now, do I believe everything they say? Obviously not, but I do wonder if there is some truth to their claims. Some time ago JJ made a post about going for a pee in the middle of the night and playing with his watch when he went back to bed. Many chimed in with the cry of "Too much information!" and there was some normal ribbing that JJ took offense to
- I guess the thread did not get the response he wanted. He then went on a bit of tirade, and Gedanken posted this in response:

"[I]JJ, I'd suggest you take a deep breath and take a look at what's happening here...

Al;

(I hope your sitting down) I agree with you completely - it's deja vu all over again - same stuff, different year, different forum. Its a bit surprising that is took the folks here about 25,000 posts to figure out what it took the folks at that other forum about 15,000 to figure out. But the message is the same and the conclusion will probably be the same as well - I feel it just a question of "when" not "if". If you're really luck and catch a break - maybe he'll give you a week or so of peace and stage another boycott... then again, maybe not - the first one didn't work out so well.

(Hope your still sitting) It's way past my bedtime and it has been a looooonnnngggg day - my brain is turning to mush so I'll end my post here (yes I know how short it is). Hang in there and good night.

Ten cuidado,

- Mink -

[mailman]

Originally Posted by Avalon

5/ I have no idea how the decision to ban Atomic was arrived at, and neither does he. That is the crux of the exchange you had with him and you refused to discuss it with him when he asked in his original email to you. I do know one of your moderators baited him in a thread, Atomic made a response (fairly tame as others have noted), the moderator admitted to baiting him, and by the next morning he was banned. If you had answered his questions we would not be having this exchange on TRF right now……


Personally I think he takes too much credit for this as I think the moderators here should get the credit for that. However, this is simply my opinion.

You know Al I sure did bait him and I publicly admitted it from the beginning. If he was stoopid enough to take it then that's his problem. I am one of the only ones that had kept him from being banned in recent times. In the end enough was enough.


Everybody's entitled to their opinions Al and yours are always welcome. Just remember that opinions are like ars#hol#s, everyone has them and some are full of sh!t more than others.