Advanced Driving Hub

Posted: **Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:37 am**

jont- wrote:
TripleS wrote:
waremark wrote:It would have seemed quite normal to me had the original offending post been moved to a new thread with a comment that that had been done because it represented excessive thread drift. I don't think that would have generated the sort of discomfort which simply deleting it without explanation has done.

Exactly. Thank you, Mark.

FFS. Alistair has already said his plan was to explain the removal, but life got in the way. He's since apologised. What else is it reasonable to expect?

Now, time to lock this thread too...?

I dislike the tone of that post. To answer your question neither I nor Dave (I think) expects anything else.

Posted: **Sun Jun 26, 2016 4:12 am**

waremark wrote:
jont- wrote:
TripleS wrote:
waremark wrote:It would have seemed quite normal to me had the original offending post been moved to a new thread with a comment that that had been done because it represented excessive thread drift. I don't think that would have generated the sort of discomfort which simply deleting it without explanation has done.

Exactly. Thank you, Mark.

FFS. Alistair has already said his plan was to explain the removal, but life got in the way. He's since apologised. What else is it reasonable to expect?

Now, time to lock this thread too...?

I dislike the tone of that post. To answer your question neither I nor Dave (I think) expects anything else.

Agreed. I think feelings are running a bit high at the moment, perhaps on account of rather more serious subject matter elsewhere.

While I'm pleased (and suprised) by 'the result', I am well aware that Jon will be very unhappy about it, but I hope things work out OK in the end.

Posted: **Sun Jun 26, 2016 11:13 am**

akirk wrote:I think it could be fun to start a thread (with no intention or desire for seriousness) for forum rules...

other than that there are no rules - anarchy in a constructive sense is good fun and moves communities forward!

I would like the forum to be closer to usenet with moderation for legality and extreme stupidity only. There should also, IMO, be no banned words - although I reserve the right not to use them.

I have a feeling, although I could be wrong, that you are probably more in agreement with me than the other mods. I'm only really going on the moderation on ADUK, which I felt was a bit excessive at times. For example, my use of the word "pikey".

Some fora reserve a section in the members only area where anything goes, within the bounds of legality. That then leaves the rest of the forum a more inviting place for those with thinner skins.

Posted: **Sat Jul 02, 2016 2:56 pm**

There are several people I take issue with, one is a moderator, whom I find to be overly sensitive. The one person I really can't see issues with is TripleS. But even if I did, I'd have the gumption to say so out loud, within the forum.

Oh, and people who say "wtf" and "FFS" should be criticised. The "F" word is generally considered to be foul language and really doesn't have a place on a forum like this. I'm sure the guilty parties will leap to defend themselves with various excuses :soap:

Posted: **Sat Jul 02, 2016 4:05 pm**

One of my many pet hates is people who self censor when speaking. Instead of saying "F***!" (censored for tender minds) or "S***!), they instead use a similar letter word such as 'fudge' and 'sugar'. That not only satisfies them, because they *know* it's not right to swear - but tells us that they actually know the full repertoire.

Of course, they probably still say "Cor" and suchlike when impressed - perhaps not knowing (or caring? ) that it derives from 'God blind me '. Oh, am I allowed to say 'G**'? Or Jehova?

Posted: **Sat Jul 02, 2016 4:19 pm**

Imsensible wrote:Oh, and people who say "wtf" and "FFS" should be criticised. The "F" word is generally considered to be foul language and really doesn't have a place on a forum like this. I'm sure the guilty parties will leap to defend themselves with various excuses

May I refer the honourable poster to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram.

Posted: **Sat Jul 02, 2016 4:20 pm**

Horse wrote:Or Jehova?

Posted: **Sat Jul 02, 2016 4:21 pm**

Horse wrote:Oh, am I allowed to say 'G**'? Or Jehova?

Only if you are referring to the piece of halibut that you had for your supper.

ETA: Bugger, beaten to it.

Posted: **Sat Jul 02, 2016 5:41 pm**

Strangely Brown wrote:
Imsensible wrote:Oh, and people who say "wtf" and "FFS" should be criticised. The "F" word is generally considered to be foul language and really doesn't have a place on a forum like this. I'm sure the guilty parties will leap to defend themselves with various excuses

May I refer the honourable poster to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram.

Refer me to what you like, I won't be going out of my way to look. I'm too busy moving my soapbox and polishing my halo.

Posted: **Sat Jul 02, 2016 6:02 pm**

Pet hates? Nah - one of my fave films!

Advanced Driving Hub

Censorship and derailment

Re: Censorship and derailment

Re: Censorship and derailment

Re: Censorship and derailment

Re: Censorship and derailment

Re: Censorship and derailment

Re: Censorship and derailment

Re: Censorship and derailment

Re: Censorship and derailment

Re: Censorship and derailment

Re: Censorship and derailment