EnviroLink Forum
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/

Discussion of Forum Rules
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5643
Page 7 of 8

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 9:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Vendetta or Financial Gain

jhawk wrote:
Donnie, why do you (and others) insist on 'picking ' on Grace? Her point of view is as valid to me as anyone else's here. I may not agree with her or you but I'll sure as heck defend her and your right to say it. Ok so we all divert a little from the straight path, that way anyone gunning for you has difficulty taking aim and shooting you in the back.

I would trust a straight-talking in-your face individual over one who goes complaining to 'teacher' behind your back.
I can cope with the extreme views of others without a character assassination, so why can't others ?

If you have any complaints about me, say so here in print and we can sort it out...not sending PMs. Need I say more ?

I hope this forum doesn't degenerate into over-polite exchanges between yes men or women. I try to air my views as if I was in the same room as all of you.
That's all for now, I need a cuppa.

:-# :-# :-# :-# :-#


Everyone's point of view is valid for them, but not the basis for a factual statement. Grace is more than wlecome to present her opinion WITHIN the rules of this board as are you and everyone else. If she or anyone else cannot follow those rules they will have to find another forum for their fighting. Josh has been very clear this is a DISCUSSION forum and if one cannot maintain a discussion without resorting to a street fight they need to work on thier interpersonal skills elsewhere.

Author:  jhawk [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 9:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Vendetta or Financial Gain

Wayne Stollings wrote:
jhawk wrote:
Donnie, why do you (and others) insist on 'picking ' on Grace? Her point of view is as valid to me as anyone else's here. I may not agree with her or you but I'll sure as heck defend her and your right to say it. Ok so we all divert a little from the straight path, that way anyone gunning for you has difficulty taking aim and shooting you in the back.

I would trust a straight-talking in-your face individual over one who goes complaining to 'teacher' behind your back.
I can cope with the extreme views of others without a character assassination, so why can't others ?

If you have any complaints about me, say so here in print and we can sort it out...not sending PMs. Need I say more ?

I hope this forum doesn't degenerate into over-polite exchanges between yes men or women. I try to air my views as if I was in the same room as all of you.
That's all for now, I need a cuppa.

:-# :-# :-# :-# :-#


Everyone's point of view is valid for them, but not the basis for a factual statement. Grace is more than wlecome to present her opinion WITHIN the rules of this board as are you and everyone else. If she or anyone else cannot follow those rules they will have to find another forum for their fighting. Josh has been very clear this is a DISCUSSION forum and if one cannot maintain a discussion without resorting to a street fight they need to work on thier interpersonal skills elsewhere.


********************************
Speaking for myself what you say is reasonable and acceptable.
So...if Grace comes back the back-biting will stop ? After all it means street fighting as you put it applies to one's replies to postings as well as the posters themselves...right ?

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Vendetta or Financial Gain

jhawk wrote:
Hi again Donnie.
What I have been trying to get across is should we allow graphic images on the forum ? I know that links are usually shown, but kiddies are far more computer literate than we give them credit for. Iam talking about such things as scary drawings and paintings, dead animals etc. I realise that we have all cleaned up our act in recent weeks.
I am just curious what you think should and should not be here, bearing in mind what you say about them being suitable for children.That is all I'm trying to squeeze out of you.


In the history of this board the most graphic inages usuially have come from those supporting the AR view in the attempt to prove the abuse they claim happens. We generally have tried to keep that to a minimum in any case, but if you know of any such images I would be happy to take a look at them to be sure. We have moderators to moderate, which means we try to keep things which are offensive to a minimum, but we cannot remove all possible offensive material because someone will always be offended by something. That is why we have a group of moderators so that we may discuss such issues and determine the more reasonable set of actions if there is a question. Some cases there are no questions and we can act more quickly. The case of copyright violations or spam posts for example are generally easy. We did leave one spam thread becuase it was actually a beneficial spam and generated some real discussion, but that decision had to go to Josh for the final word. It is Josh's forum and responsibility so we deal with his rules, which I believe are reasonable and as evenly applied as any forum you will visit. If we get a valid complaint of a rules violation we will, within reason and our guidance form Josh, apply those rules to all involved. Sometimes the enforcement is tightened up because of increasing abuse and sometimes we are allowed a bit more lattitude, but if there is a complaint it is investigated. If anyone feels they have been wrongly treated they can contact the other modes, but they probalby already know from our notice board, or they can leave feedback for the forum in the appropriate forum. I believe Josh has already made himself clear on this, but if there is any new discussion on the rules or enforecement it should go to the appropriate feed back forum. at this point.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Vendetta or Financial Gain

jhawk wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
jhawk wrote:
Donnie, why do you (and others) insist on 'picking ' on Grace? Her point of view is as valid to me as anyone else's here. I may not agree with her or you but I'll sure as heck defend her and your right to say it. Ok so we all divert a little from the straight path, that way anyone gunning for you has difficulty taking aim and shooting you in the back.

I would trust a straight-talking in-your face individual over one who goes complaining to 'teacher' behind your back.
I can cope with the extreme views of others without a character assassination, so why can't others ?

If you have any complaints about me, say so here in print and we can sort it out...not sending PMs. Need I say more ?

I hope this forum doesn't degenerate into over-polite exchanges between yes men or women. I try to air my views as if I was in the same room as all of you.
That's all for now, I need a cuppa.

:-# :-# :-# :-# :-#


Everyone's point of view is valid for them, but not the basis for a factual statement. Grace is more than wlecome to present her opinion WITHIN the rules of this board as are you and everyone else. If she or anyone else cannot follow those rules they will have to find another forum for their fighting. Josh has been very clear this is a DISCUSSION forum and if one cannot maintain a discussion without resorting to a street fight they need to work on thier interpersonal skills elsewhere.


********************************
Speaking for myself what you say is reasonable and acceptable.
So...if Grace comes back the back-biting will stop ? After all it means street fighting as you put it applies to one's replies to postings as well as the posters themselves...right ?


I cannot say there will be no back -biting, but there will be no fights as we have seen in the past. Grace has been baited into fights in the past and has done her share of baiting as well. The rules have been applied as evenly as possible, regardless of her personal belief to the contrary. For example, her complaints over avatars went to the extreme in her emotional belief of what may or may not have happened before or after a picture was taken. I understand she is an overly emotional person and that has been taken into consdieration in dealing with her. Some of those with which she disagrees sees that as preferential treatment at times just as she sees the similar considerations given those people as preferential treatment. In fact I know I am doing my job as a moderator when everyone is unhappy with me because I have not givne them the thought they are getting treated better than anyone else.

Author:  jhawk [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion of Forum Rules

Wayne...I posted a reply to you which follows. Suddenly it disappeared and I thought I was having a ' senior moment ' only to find you had moved some items to this topic.

My reply was...

I cannot remember the member who posted the graphic images but the ' artwork ' was in the main of screaming animals !I have had a quick search without luck. Someone will remember.

Author:  animallover [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion of Forum Rules

I have remained silent and bit my tongue for a time to in all fairness allow time for venting and for certain issues to die down which aparently isn't happening all that well.

The past is not an issue as to the present nor is it an acceptable defense for present and future behavior. Behaviors that occured on other boards is not an acceptable justification/defense as to present or future behaviors. We have decided to start on a fresh slate as of the posting of the rules. All issues from that point forward are the issues that will be dealt with and will be dealt with on it's own merits not on a basis of justification as to past behavior of others on this board or from other boards. Also the behavior of others is not justification for inappropriate behavior of ones self.

As for graphic content, I am probably more sensative than most on that issue and as of late graphic images have not been an issue. I am also realistic as to in what context an image maybe used. So, I feel that graphic content/images, which may be used at times and are not forbidden, will not be used in a manner that is inappropriate.

Having moderators, that combined, can look at all aspects/reasons/motivations of an issue ensures more fairness as to any actions that may need to be taken or not taken.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion of Forum Rules

jhawk wrote:
Wayne...I posted a reply to you which follows. Suddenly it disappeared and I thought I was having a ' senior moment ' only to find you had moved some items to this topic.

My reply was...

I cannot remember the member who posted the graphic images but the ' artwork ' was in the main of screaming animals !I have had a quick search without luck. Someone will remember.


Sorry about that, the artwork sounds like something Ante might have done or one of the other AR posters. If it was it was some time in the past and not really covered by the new setr of rules we have listed. the rules were updated and the links reinstalled with the return of this style of forum template. The enforcement was clearly indicated to start with that new baseline and to that end AL tried to give friendly notice before any official actions were taken. I do not know how we could have been any more clear on that aspect.

Author:  jhawk [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion of Forum Rules

animallover wrote:
I have remained silent and bit my tongue for a time to in all fairness allow time for venting and for certain issues to die down which aparently isn't happening all that well.

The past is not an issue as to the present nor is it an acceptable defense for present and future behavior. Behaviors that occured on other boards is not an acceptable justification/defense as to present or future behaviors. We have decided to start on a fresh slate as of the posting of the rules. All issues from that point forward are the issues that will be dealt with and will be dealt with on it's own merits not on a basis of justification as to past behavior of others on this board or from other boards. Also the behavior of others is not justification for inappropriate behavior of ones self.

As for graphic content, I am probably more sensative than most on that issue and as of late graphic images have not been an issue. I am also realistic as to in what context an image maybe used. So, I feel that graphic content/images, which may be used at times and are not forbidden, will not be used in a manner that is inappropriate.

Having moderators, that combined, can look at all aspects/reasons/motivations of an issue ensures more fairness as to any actions that may need to be taken or not taken.


******************
Do the non-moderators have any say as to what they think appropriate for this forum, or do a select few get to act on their own particular judgements ?
This is not criticism...just a question.

Author:  animallover [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:21 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion of Forum Rules

jhawk wrote:
animallover wrote:
I have remained silent and bit my tongue for a time to in all fairness allow time for venting and for certain issues to die down which aparently isn't happening all that well.

The past is not an issue as to the present nor is it an acceptable defense for present and future behavior. Behaviors that occured on other boards is not an acceptable justification/defense as to present or future behaviors. We have decided to start on a fresh slate as of the posting of the rules. All issues from that point forward are the issues that will be dealt with and will be dealt with on it's own merits not on a basis of justification as to past behavior of others on this board or from other boards. Also the behavior of others is not justification for inappropriate behavior of ones self.

As for graphic content, I am probably more sensative than most on that issue and as of late graphic images have not been an issue. I am also realistic as to in what context an image maybe used. So, I feel that graphic content/images, which may be used at times and are not forbidden, will not be used in a manner that is inappropriate.

Having moderators, that combined, can look at all aspects/reasons/motivations of an issue ensures more fairness as to any actions that may need to be taken or not taken.


******************
Do the non-moderators have any say as to what they think appropriate for this forum, or do a select few get to act on their own particular judgements ?
This is not criticism...just a question.


If you have a concern or a complaint you are encouraged to post it in the feedback section and it will be looked at. Absolutely, you are allowed to have an question, an opinion and a view.

Author:  jhawk [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion of Forum Rules

The forum now is more pleasant...but less exciting !

:wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:

Author:  animallover [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion of Forum Rules

I really don't expect to much to change as far a heated debates, arguement, etc. as many people are passionate about certain issues. It just won't be excessively abusive, that's all. The key word being "excessively". :wink:

And if Grace wants to return, no one is stopping her. No one asked her to leave. She doesn't have to watch from the sidelines. She is welcome to continue posting as long as she tones certain things down a bit. That's all. It is and always has been her choice.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion of Forum Rules

jhawk wrote:
The forum now is more pleasant...but less exciting !

:wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:


Yes, and it will again get more exciting and less pleasant in the future, I am sure. We just have to keep the pendulum from hitting the extremes at either end of the spectrum.

Author:  jhawk [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 2:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion of Forum Rules

animallover wrote:
I really don't expect to much to change as far a heated debates, arguement, etc. as many people are passionate about certain issues. It just won't be excessively abusive, that's all. The key word being "excessively". :wink:

And if Grace wants to return, no one is stopping her. No one asked her to leave. She doesn't have to watch from the sidelines. She is welcome to continue posting as long as she tones certain things down a bit. That's all. It is and always has been her choice.


*******************
Why mention just Grace ?

Author:  animallover [ Sun Dec 02, 2007 2:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion of Forum Rules

jhawk wrote:
animallover wrote:
I really don't expect to much to change as far a heated debates, arguement, etc. as many people are passionate about certain issues. It just won't be excessively abusive, that's all. The key word being "excessively". :wink:

And if Grace wants to return, no one is stopping her. No one asked her to leave. She doesn't have to watch from the sidelines. She is welcome to continue posting as long as she tones certain things down a bit. That's all. It is and always has been her choice.


*******************
Why mention just Grace ?


Because all games aside, as I am not really into games to begin with, she is who has been referred to throughout, indirectly, as has been your intent in protecting her position the past few days. Which is fine and I understand that. Second she is the only one that has "chosen" to to quit posting herself and instead has taken a sideline position.

Author:  jhawk [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 3:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion of Forum Rules

animallover wrote:
jhawk wrote:
animallover wrote:
I really don't expect to much to change as far a heated debates, arguement, etc. as many people are passionate about certain issues. It just won't be excessively abusive, that's all. The key word being "excessively". :wink:

And if Grace wants to return, no one is stopping her. No one asked her to leave. She doesn't have to watch from the sidelines. She is welcome to continue posting as long as she tones certain things down a bit. That's all. It is and always has been her choice.


*******************
Why mention just Grace ?


Because all games aside, as I am not really into games to begin with, she is who has been referred to throughout, indirectly, as has been your intent in protecting her position the past few days. Which is fine and I understand that. Second she is the only one that has "chosen" to to quit posting herself and instead has taken a sideline position.


Ok AL, just to put the record straight, I'll defend ANYONE who I think is being singled out for unfairness. That is my way.
From the sidelines, you get a good idea of what is going on in a ' game ' , more than the players.
If people don't like me defending (not protecting) anyone then tough !

So let's move on .

Page 7 of 8 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/