Resurrection ????

[Launch Mini]

Is there any way to bring back banned members???

[aawong]

I am new to the forum, hope this is a ok question but why was atomic banned?

[Langnam]

My guess is Atomic will remain banned and this thread will be smited shortly.

[mamas]

I hope that this banning is a joke or mistake or something. I guess that as with any internet discussion forum, the lifeline of the forum is the members. Without the members there is nothing to moderate the forum will die. If the members feel that they are being ignored and that their thoughts / concerns are not important to the moderators, then as has been often pointed out by a few.. participation is not compulsoryand therefore the members will leave. I was part of a watch forum a while ago, i wont mention names, but it was felt amongst the admin staff and several members that their concerns were not being addressed by the owner, posts were being deleted without explanation and that many members were being belittled. Admins and members left. That forum went from being one of the most active watch fora on the net to near death overnight.
I hope that this does not happen here.

[Welshwatchman]

Atomic's posts in the recent problem thread (condom porsche newbie) were fairly tepid though it appears that he has 'previous' and was walking on thin ice.

I don't care either way.

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by Langnam

My guess is Atomic will remain banned and this thread will be smited shortly.

This is no help, believe me

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by Launch Mini

Is there any way to bring back banned members???

Issues like these are always difficult. To be able to judge or to make any meaningful comment one has to know both sides of the coin so to speak. Do you? Because there is no reason what so ever to ban a member without cause, what remains, however unlikely, must be the truth.

[President]

Bring him back please!

[Alcan]

I would assume that there had been interaction between Atomic and a site moderator(s?) prior to the ban, and that the moderator felt that the ban was justified. However, having said that I'd like to make a couple of observations.

Atomic's posts for the most part were beneficial to the forums. If there were any percieved inter-personal animosities they should have been resolved in a professional and courteous manner through PM's or email, out of the forums, which is what any good site moderator should endeavour to do. Atomic felt that there was favouritism toward some site members, voiced his opinion, and got banned for it.

This is a privately owned site, and the owner can call the shots as far as directing the actions of the moderators. I've had several of my posts summarily deleted because a moderator who I consider to be over-zealous has decided that they weren't appropriate or in the best interest of the site. That's his decision, and although I absolutely do NOT agree with this action (with one admitted exception), I've chosen to stay and temper my posts.

Members who disagree with this site policy have the option of leaving, but at the end of the day it waters the site down. My vote is to reinstate Atomic.

[President]

Originally Posted by Alcan

I would assume that there had been interaction between Atomic and a site moderator(s?) prior to the ban, and that the moderator felt that the ban was justified. However, having said that I'd like to make a couple of observations.

Atomic's posts for the most part were beneficial to the forums. If there were any percieved inter-personal animosities they should have been resolved in a professional and courteous manner through PM's or email, out of the forums, which is what any good site moderator should endeavour to do. Atomic felt that there was favouritism toward some site members, voiced his opinion, and got banned for it.

This is a privately owned site, and the owner can call the shots as far as directing the actions of the moderators. I've had several of my posts summarily deleted because a moderator who I consider to be over-zealous has decided that they weren't appropriate or in the best interest of the site. That's his decision, and although I absolutely do NOT agree with this action (with one admitted exception), I've chosen to stay and temper my posts.

Members who disagree with this site policy have the option of leaving, but at the end of the day it waters the site down. My vote is to reinstate Atomic.

I, President, agree to the above.

[roadcarver]

I haven't been reading all the threads, and Atomic being banned is news to me.

[dman]

I don't post much anymore, but I will say one thing on this topic. John is a friend of mine, a real friend. We talk on the phone, we exchange emails and we have passions that are very similar. I also think of you as a friend John, but please don't assume that you know everything that has transpired. To be honest, I don't even know that. Not sure I really want to know, honestly. But this is not helping anything and I promise this is not and never will be a democracy.

Emails or PM's would be better suited IMHO.

Best,

Daren

[kingblackbolt]

I was surprised to see that Atomic was banned, I don't think I have seen this happen too many times before on this forum. John I can only assume that there were reasons behind the scenes we are not aware of and will never be. It was unfortunate to lose him but this is not a public forum it is owned and operated by moderators and they have made thier decision.

[steve-o]

A better poll query would be "Why?"

[Lol-x]

After Atomic was banned by the moderation team, he contacted me and in the course of our communications he expressed to me how happy he was that he had been banned and described this forum in very abusive language that I will not repeat, so you see he wasn't even enjoying being a member and participating.
Atomic also stated very vulgar and profan things in relation to the vast majority of members. I have never had any ill feelings or have at anytime made any personal comments towards Atomic, yet I found myself the subject of direct personal abuse.
The decision to ban Atomic wasn't made hastily, and occured after many months of observation, consideration, warnings and deliberations.
Given the feelings which Atomic has communicated about both this forum and the vast majority of forum members, the matter is now closed.

[astcell]

Even if we open the gate it does not mean he will come back, or if he does he may not be the same person he was. I liked the posts he made and do not know enough about the actions that caused him to be banned.

We have to remember the internet is public, but this forum is not. It exists here at the whim of its owner. He can take his toys and go home, or ban people at random like a god playing dice with our lives. We have no recourse, no rights, no say. We are all guests here.

Atomic's ban has lead me to not post as much. I have been admonished for some of my posts and though I may not always understand why, it reiterates the fact that I am playing in someone else's sandbox. I am a guest and must behave as one.

I have read the correspondence between Atomic and Steve in its entirety, and some of what Steve says is simply not true. In particular this accusation in Steve's post:

"Atomic also stated very vulgar and profan things in relation to the vast majority of members."

No such statement was made.

No doubt emotions run high when someone feels betrayed by people who once called themselves friends, and yes Atomic did call you an a-hole for refusing to tell him what he was banned for or discuss his banning at all (which is what he initially contacted you about). He also made comments about the mod staff and how they run this forum, but at no time did he take any shots at TRF membership.

I just wanted that to be clear.

[President]

Originally Posted by Avalon

I have read the correspondence between Atomic and Steve in its entirety, and some of what Steve says is simply not true. In particular this accusation in Steve's post:

"Atomic also stated very vulgar and profan things in relation to the vast majority of members."

No such statement was made.

No doubt emotions run high when someone feels betrayed by people who once called themselves friends, and yes Atomic did call you an a-hole for refusing to tell him what he was banned for or discuss his banning at all (which is what he initially contacted you about). He also made comments about the mod staff and how they run this forum, but at no time did he take any shots at TRF membership.

I just wanted that to be clear.

Thanks Avalon.

[hutchman]

How does someone get banned from an open forum for having an opinion? I have had the pleasure of meeting Atomic and he is a class act all the way!

A forum is only as good as its members and this forum just took a major hit!

[astcell]

Originally Posted by hutchman

How does someone get banned from an open forum for having an opinion?...

An open forum means you can post what you want. No one ever said that you would not be judged for it.

[hutchman]

Originally Posted by astcell

An open forum means you can post what you want. No one ever said that you would not be judged for it.

I understand why lesliecumslerper got banned! I read most posts on TRF but have never seen anything posted by Atomic that could warrant being banned!

[astcell]

Originally Posted by hutchman

I understand why lesliecumslerper got banned! I read most posts on TRF but have never seen anything posted by Atomic that could warrant being banned!

I think the threads that got him banned were deleted. But remember this is not OUR home. Evidence of misdeeds are not necessary to justify any moderator action. They just have to want to do it.

[Lol-x]

I'm sorry Avalon but I disagree with what you say.
I take it from your post that you do agree with everything else that I said in my post, except the statement that Atomic used profanity and vulgar terms towards the vast majority of members.
So:
1. You don't dispute that he abused me personally when I had never said anything of an abusive nature about or towards him.
2. You don't dispute that he stated that he was happy to be banned.
3. You don't dispute that he expressed contempt for the forum in vulgar and abusive language.
4 You don't dispute that he in effect wanted to destroy the forum.
5. You don't dispute that the decision to ban Atomic wasn't made hastily, and occurred after many months of observation, consideration, warnings and deliberations.
6. You don't dispute that Atomic stated to me that he ONLY used the forum to speak to a few "friends", which friends he had "stolen" away to another forum.
I didn't quote the words used, but stated my conclusion given the statement he made that I did not want to repeat here.
Sorry if you don't agree with my conclusion, the forum consists of the sum of its members, and given the foregoing, I come to the inescapable conclusion that he hates the forum and thus its members and expressed that in vulgar terms about all who did not fall into his small group of "friends" that he so proudly stated he had now "stolen away to another place".
I can't help but think that Atomic is giving you information and inciting you to be divisive with your posts in this thread. In all the circumstances, Atomic will not be coming back here. I'm also informed this isn't the first time he has been banned from a watch forum on the internet.

[amanda]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

I'm sorry Avalon but I disagree with what you say.
I take it from your post that you do agree with everything else that I said in my post, except the statement that Atomic used profanity and vulgar terms towards the vast majority of members.
So:
1. You don't dispute that he abused me personally when I had never said anything of an abusive nature about or towards him.
2. You don't dispute that he stated that he was happy to be banned.
3. You don't dispute that he expressed contempt for the forum in vulgar and abusive language.
4 You don't dispute that he in effect wanted to destroy the forum.
5. You don't dispute that the decision to ban Atomic wasn't made hastily, and occurred after many months of observation, consideration, warnings and deliberations.
6. You don't dispute that Atomic stated to me that he ONLY used the forum to speak to a few "friends", which friends he had "stolen" away to another forum.
I didn't quote the words used, but stated my conclusion given the statement he made that I did not want to repeat here.
Sorry if you don't agree with my conclusion, the forum consists of the sum of its members, and given the foregoing, I come to the inescapable conclusion that he hates the forum and thus its members and expressed that in vulgar terms about all who did not fall into his small group of "friends" that he so proudly stated he had now "stolen away to another place".
I can't help but think that Atomic is giving you information and inciting you to be divisive with your posts in this thread. In all the circumstances, Atomic will not be coming back here. I'm also informed this isn't the first time he has been banned from a watch forum on the internet.

I think it was 'Avalon' that made the original post you are referring too? Correct?

[Launch Mini]

Steve, I am trying to read Avalon & Your posts to make sense of some of the comments.

From what I get, Avalon just picked on one item, ie by his comment "in particular"
I don't think it was a complete rebuttal, just one point he wanted to make clear.


ps. I think there are quite a few members here that were banned from the other place

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by amanda

I think it was 'Avalon' that made the original post you are referring too? Correct?

Yes, that's correct, I was referring to Avalon, sorry Alcan.

[Launch Mini]

Steve
I do want to thank you for bring TRF back.
Like I mentioned in another thread, today felt like old times around here.

[Alcan]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Yes, that's correct, I was referring to Avalon, sorry Alcan.

As you should be. You did a masterful editing job on your initial post to me, deleting my name and substituting Avalon's, for which I thank you. The quote in the next post, however, still has my name attached to it. Please correct that forthwith.

[Lol-x]

Glad to be of service, (done within 5 mins).

[Launch Mini]

Very interesting on the voting, and how the tides have changed.
One only wonders, if all the mods voted NO, that still does not leave many other members voting that way.
I just say interesting, that's all.
Not going to make any assumptions based on the poll results. I would have to read the voters list myself to ensure I had all the facts.