PDA

View Full Version : "They have lost out"?


buckleb
05-09-2008, 16:02
So you think it was the anti-phorm campaigners that 'lost out' when they were baited, banned, and effectively silenced by CF moderators? I'd say CF 'lost' a huge amount of credibility, especially a couple of the moderators. Look at your clumsy attempts to rewrite history by locking any thread that mentions Phorm (while stating that you are 'working hard' to bring the subject back on to the boards... yeah right). The only people who made it a fight between the anti-phorm brigade and CF were the moderatos who finally killed the thread off. I am very disappointed with CF.

Andrewcrawford23
05-09-2008, 16:08
So you think it was the anti-phorm campaigners that 'lost out' when they were baited, banned, and effectively silenced by CF moderators? I'd say CF 'lost' a huge amount of credibility, especially a couple of the moderators. Look at your clumsy attempts to rewrite history by locking any thread that mentions Phorm (while stating that you are 'working hard' to bring the subject back on to the boards... yeah right). The only people who made it a fight between the anti-phorm brigade and CF were the moderatos who finally killed the thread off. I am very disappointed with CF.

it had been many times that people where diverting fromt eh topic, teh mod try to get it back on course but people became abusive when they done there jobs quite frankly they ad no other choice but close it. But the subject of phorm was out of control in more aspect that one i mean the thread was unbearable you wher enot able to get information from it so th mods done the right thing an hopefully they come up witha new solution that works

zing_deleted
05-09-2008, 16:24
389 members visitied the forums today
nearly 14 000 visitors not including any bots or the like .
48,697 Total number of members

Help us anti phorm members we so dearly need you (sarcastic mode off)
Yeah this place is really in a lot of trouble isn't it

peanut
05-09-2008, 16:29
389 members visitied the forums today
nearly 14 000 visitors not including any bots or the like .
48,697 Total number of members

Help us anti phorm members we so dearly need you (sarcastic mode off)
Yeah this place is really in a lot of trouble isn't it

Too true, just wished out of those 48,697 members the other 90% actually post here. ;)

Raistlin
05-09-2008, 16:31
To true, just wished out of those 48,697 members the other 90% actually post here. ;)

Or that some of the people that do choose to post here could post something slightly more constructive.....

zing_deleted
05-09-2008, 16:34
as a source for information this forum is an excellent resource. IMO it shows people are using the search feature finding the help they need without having to ask questions. That in itself is an accolade to the format :)

You imagine a member looking for a concise review of phorm and they would have been greeted with a massive thread to read which contained a lot of bickering fighting and a general lack of respect for this forum and would not have easily found the information they required

Raistlin
05-09-2008, 16:35
as a source for information this forum is an excellent resource. IMO it shows people are using the search feature finding the help they need without having to ask questions. That in itself is an accolade to the format :)

You imagine a member looking for a concise review of phorm and they would have been greeted with a massive thread to read which contained a lot of bickering fighting and a general lack of respect for this forum and would not have easily found the information they required

Couldn't have put it better myself.....

[Cue the endless stream of 'Hate-PMs' that seems to accompany anybody who even dares to suggest that the old Phorm thread (and the people posting in it) were anything less than perfect ;) ]

peanut
05-09-2008, 16:46
Or that some of the people that do choose to post here could post something slightly more constructive.....

Haha, I wished I could filter the non constructive rubbish out myself but there you go, it's part of a forum.

Still, was a nice kick up the backside for speaking out, and expected nothing less. :tu:

Andrewcrawford23
05-09-2008, 16:48
Couldn't have put it better myself.....

[Cue the endless stream of 'Hate-PMs' that seems to accompany anybody who even dares to suggest that the old Phorm thread (and the people posting in it) were anything less than perfect ;) ]

I had said prior to it shutting down something needed done but no one seemed to listen much, here hoping you guys find a way to do it.

Although personal i think you need multi threads one to do general phorm, one for phorm news, one for phorm updates, one for bt phorm, one .... i think you need at least 20 different phorm threadds to cover everything basically

Russ
05-09-2008, 16:49
Cf existed long before Phorm was a problem, the mass exodus that was promised has not (and I dare say, will not) occured. Someone said by taking the Phorm discussion elsewhere they'd turn CF in to a 'ghost town'.

Ain't seen it happen yet.

Raistlin
05-09-2008, 16:53
Still, was a nice kick up the backside for speaking out, and expected nothing less. :tu:

Interesting to note that you automatically assumed that it was aimed (either wholly, or in part) at you..... ;)

peanut
05-09-2008, 16:58
Interesting to note that you automatically assumed that it was aimed (either wholly, or in part) at you..... ;)

Well as the way you worded it in reply to my post, it really didn't take much working out did it.

Still, good to know you're part of those that don't post anything other but constructive material. :tu:

Saaf_laandon_mo
05-09-2008, 17:04
Whats Phorm?

Russ
05-09-2008, 17:20
Whats Phorm?
:bsmack:

Toto
05-09-2008, 17:24
Whats Phorm?

LOL.

I for one don't miss that thread, I really lost track about 50% in, and could barely keep with with the legitimate discussions, once I was able to remove all the smack talk.


All-in-all I think the mods dealt with the situation with aplomb, particularly the newer guys, hats off to 'em I say. :)

joglynne
05-09-2008, 17:24
I read the Phorm thread from day one when it was started by one of the CF team but as the tread progressed any descenting voices or any attempts at debate were met by name calling or personal attacks. Most attempts to moderate the thread in the latter weeks seemed, to the reader, to be either ignored or argued with.

IMO CF provided a very large audience to the subject of DPI and also, because of CF's standing, provided the anti-Phormers with a good platform for launching their views into the public eye.

I do not see how it can argued that CF has lost any credibility when the forum can patently still be seen to be drawing new members and functioning as normal.

Finally, I would like to put on record that I was proud of the way the CF team handled the main Phorm thread and was only surprised that it carried on for so long once the prime movers decided that their thread was more important than the forum it was on.

peanut
05-09-2008, 17:34
LOL.

I for one don't miss that thread, I really lost track about 50% in, and could barely keep with with the legitimate discussions, once I was able to remove all the smack talk.


All-in-all I think the mods dealt with the situation with aplomb, particularly the newer guys, hats off to 'em I say. :)

Saying that, there was a thread a while ago saying there will be a discussion here again soon, as at the moment everything about Phorm is just speculation etc. That's ok and I can't disagree with that, but it seems like CF will only be willing to talk about it when a decision has been made by the powers that be. Which for a major cable / ISP discussion forum to some might seem a little too late and it would leave a sour taste which I must admit is understandable.

And I can't disagree with closing the original thread either, it was impossible to follow let alone moderate and I don't think I gained anything from it personally, and I see there's no way you can have a quiet discussion here either as it'll end up like the first one. So it seem CF can't win this time.

As for people leave this site, then I haven't noticed anything different, the same old usual posters are posting, it feels like nothing has changed. But even if they have lost a few new posters I'm sure there are more lurkers now than ever before so that's a good thing.

If I've got it wrong then I apologise. I hope that was constructive enough. :)

Paul
05-09-2008, 18:00
So you think it was the anti-phorm campaigners that 'lost out' ...Yes, they lost out. They had a big audience due to a popular thread on a well visited site. Now they have virtually no audience on a little visited site.

... when they were baited, banned, and effectively silenced by CF moderators? Baited ? - what planet is that on ? Banned ? - only one was banned I think, for sending an abusive PM. The rest (about 3 or 4) were deleted when they decided to leave permanantly.

All by the Administrators btw, not the moderators.

I'd say CF 'lost' a huge amount of credibility, especially a couple of the moderators. Look at your clumsy attempts to rewrite history by locking any thread that mentions Phorm (while stating that you are 'working hard' to bring the subject back on to the boards... yeah right).Lost a huge amount ? - I dont think so - we have had as many members congratulate us on our stance as we have had moaners. The site continues as it always has.

Id love to know how closing a thread "re-writes" history. Surely we would have to edit the thread to do that ......

The only people who made it a fight between the anti-phorm brigade and CF were the moderatos who finally killed the thread off.
Nope, the members who chose to ignore our rules and warnings finally killed it off. Sadly they were a very small minority who spoiled it for the rest.

I am very disappointed with CF.Well you are entitled to feel as you wish.

Chris
05-09-2008, 18:07
So you think it was the anti-phorm campaigners that 'lost out' when they were baited, banned, and effectively silenced by CF moderators? I'd say CF 'lost' a huge amount of credibility, especially a couple of the moderators. Look at your clumsy attempts to rewrite history by locking any thread that mentions Phorm (while stating that you are 'working hard' to bring the subject back on to the boards... yeah right). The only people who made it a fight between the anti-phorm brigade and CF were the moderatos who finally killed the thread off. I am very disappointed with CF.

Oh, another one of the hat3rz. :zzz:

If you lot despise this place so much, why do so many of you keep coming over here and starting threads to bleat about how rubbish CF is for locking your pet topic?

Ah, hang on, could it be because you don't have anywhere to go grandstanding any more? Alex's blog is hardly alive with posters, is it. :rolleyes:

Do run along there's a good chap, we will cover Phorm in our own way and in our own time, not in yours. If some of you had borne that in mind from the start, the Phorm thread would probably still be open.

JackSon
05-09-2008, 18:48
The arguments aside, it seemed appropriate for the topic to be closed/postponed on here because it became apparent that Phrom is currently a political issue rather than a technical one. Should Webwise be introduced across VM's network then I would presume a topic to appear/continue on here for the then relevant discussion.

For now, as a political issue, the campaign is being held in a more appropriate place, and should have migrated there a bit sooner really (it's lengthy stay was in part due to hard work behind the scenes at CF as well as by the campaigners I am aware; but I suppose it got there in the end. And, it is easy enough for me to read and dabble on both sites still :) I not feel as if I lost anything (apart from all the time following it which I won't get back - will have to bill Kent for that ;)).

Rchivist
06-09-2008, 00:15
Yes, they lost out. They had a big audience due to a popular thread on a well visited site. Now they have virtually no audience on a little visited site.

Some figures just to keep it factual.
the forum [Link removed] in question has been open for 21 days, with 1133 posts, averaging out at about 55 posts per day. Membership is currently 131. Page rank using www.top25web.com is 4

Checking the locked Webwise/Phorm thread it had about 14,211 posts, averaging about 71 posts per day over the 199 days since it opened. Using the same page rank tool, the VM locked thread also has a page rank of 4.

Best wishes to all.

Admin edit (Chris T): The 'forum' in question will not be linked to from this website, as you are very well aware. Please DO NOT attempt to circumvent this by using alias URLs or any other means. Post edited.

zing_deleted
06-09-2008, 00:22
But you have lost thousands of views and thousands of people seeing the news and it is down to posters in that thread as to why

come back in 178 days and see if its the same ;)

just noticed your figures are flawed . Your 1133 posts are spread over 126 topics . The 14000+ in the monster thread was just one topic how can you say that relates? and 189 of them posts were slagging off cableforum

Chris
06-09-2008, 00:34
Some figures just to keep it factual.
the forum [Link removed] in question has been open for 21 days, with 1133 posts, averaging out at about 55 posts per day. Membership is currently 131. Page rank using www.top25web.com is 4

If we're keeping it factual, why don't you mention that most of those posts, and members, were carried over from the previous version of Alex's 'forum', which was open for considerably longer than 21 days. What does that do to your batting average, eh? :dozey:

And once you discount the 200-odd posts in a single thread devoted to bitching about this website, the stats look even less rosy. :monkey:

xspeedyx
06-09-2008, 00:42
I gave up on the phorm thread too many pages

Rchivist
06-09-2008, 11:48
If we're keeping it factual, why don't you mention that most of those posts, and members, were carried over from the previous version of Alex's 'forum', which was open for considerably longer than 21 days. What does that do to your batting average, eh? :dozey:

And once you discount the 200-odd posts in a single thread devoted to bitching about this website, the stats look even less rosy.

Thank you for that additional information. On the forum you mention above, the CF discussion died down pretty quickly (and took place in an Off Topic thread last posted to on August 20th). Yet here it's still going on even though the original thread was closed to avoid that sort of hassle. I am genuinely confused to see a discussion like this still raging HERE after about three weeks which you seem to be keeping going all by yourselves. I've leave it there.

Wild Oscar
06-09-2008, 11:59
It was a monster thread and I a bit of a nightmare to mod I'm sure, but I thought things were mostly OK .. till christ put the boot in! That spoilt things for everybody.

Maggy
06-09-2008, 12:03
Christ???

I don't remember seeing any deities on CF...;)

Raistlin
06-09-2008, 12:20
It was a monster thread and I a bit of a nightmare to mod I'm sure, but I thought things were mostly OK .. till christ put the boot in! That spoilt things for everybody.

So, in your opinion what 'spoiled things for everybody' was one person (and the son of God at that ;)) having a valid opinion (which they were entitled to) and then sharing it?

Wrong.....

What actually spoiled things for everybody was as follows:

1. A topic that was almost impossible to follow, constantly dragged off topic and diluted as it was by those people who supposedly had the best interests of the Anti Phorm Movement (I'll call it APM) at heart.

2. A thread where anybody with a contrary opinion to the APM was harrassed, on the receiving end of abusive PMs and Rep points, and generally barracked to the point where they didn't bother to post any more.

3. A thread where, because of 2. above, people with contrary views were afraid to post, even people that were essentially within the APM have expressed the fact that they are happy that the thread within its current Phorm (see what I did there?) closed. Where people within the APM have found it necessary to communicate their opinions to us behind the scenes because they were obviously worried about the harassment they would get if they were to post publicly.

4. A thread where some of the main posters, the vocal minority if you will, frequently felt the need to try to tell the owners of this forum how it should be run and who (when the thread was finally shut) proceeded to cry foul at every opportunity, claiming the closure of the thread as 'proof' that they were whiter than white and that CF was somehow biased, whilst they proceeded to send harassing, bullying, and abusive messages, full of foul language and crazy theories, behind the scenes to such an extent that there was no choice but to ban them.

5. A thread that continued to generate discussion with seemingly no other purpose than to drive down the share prices of organisations concerned with Phorm, which thereby put this forum at some legal jeopordy - especially galling as that same topic of conversation was banned at at least one of the APM's own forums.

6. A thread which was aimed at raising awareness of, and putting a stop to, invasions of people's privacy via the Internet, but which continued to encourage people to harass named individuals within Phorm - publishing email addresses, reposting copyrighted WhoIs information for domains, piecing together great webs of information on individuals and corporations the only purpose for which was to make life as difficult and miserable for those people as was possible.

That's my opinion, I don't expect you to agree and frankly I don't care if you do or not.

On a personal level I would love to see an informed and appropriate discussion of Phorm develop on this site. When it does I will be there to support it, moderate it as necessary, and to help those with a genuine interest to get the very most out of the discussion.

What I won't be party to, and what I will do my very best to stop happening, is for that discussion to become the uncontrollable wasteground of CF that the last one did: a discussion where people were afraid to post their true opinions; a discussion that had no direction and (seemingly) no limitations; a discussion where a minority of posters thought that they were all that mattered, that they were beyond the rules and terms of use of this forum, that their egos were more important than debate, and that they had the ultimate say in all matters and that anybody who didn't agree and capitulate was fair game for abuse, accusations, and torment.

Hugh
06-09-2008, 12:25
:clap::clap:

Very true - it appeared that if one wasn't in total agreement with some posters, one was "against" them, and then guilt by association seemed to arise, so if one was "against" them, then one was "for" Phorm and all kinds of nasty stuff, therefore one was "fair game" for abuse and invective.

btw, I was a bystander in the Phorm thread, as I have seen the way strong emotion can sometimes overwhelm reason, so decided to view, not participate, so was not on the rx'ing end of any of the diatribes.

It was a shame (imho), as a lot of valuable information was published and it raised awareness - unfortunately, fanaticism overtook discussion (again, imho).

Horace
06-09-2008, 12:37
Phorm was always going to produce emotive and contentious debate, there's too much at stake, financially to the companies involved and personally to the clients but forums live and die by how they handle difficult subject matter. Unfortunately CF has got it wrong on this occasion. Better luck next time.

dilli-theclaw
06-09-2008, 12:38
CF did NOT get it wrong - the stupd few who ruined it for EVERYONE else DID.

xspeedyx
06-09-2008, 12:45
I didnt really read the phorm too much however a forum is to speak your mind and I do admit gets a little annoying but maybe the CF mods could have chose to do things alittle more popular like let people rant and if they go far ban them and you will be left with members that want to argue but in a debate way.

Thats just my 2 cents (dont ban me I kind of like CF)

Hugh
06-09-2008, 12:47
Phorm was always going to produce emotive and contentious debate, there's too much at stake, financially to the companies involved and personally to the clients but forums live and die by how they handle difficult subject matter. Unfortunately CF has got it wrong on this occasion. Better luck next time.
I think CF got it right - some of the Phorm posters were the drunks in the bar; they had to be asked to leave for being disruptive.

They may have thought they were being sensible, reasonable, just having fun, and not upsetting anyone - annoying drunks usually do.;)

Sirius
06-09-2008, 12:49
:clap::clap:

Very true - it appeared that if one wasn't in total agreement with some posters, one was "against" them, and then guilt by association seemed to arise, so if one was "against" them, then one was "for" Form and all kinds of nasty stuff, therefore one was "fair game" for abuse and invective.

btw, I was a bystander in the Forum thread, as I have seen the way strong emotion can sometimes overwhelm reason, so decided to view, not participate, so was not on the ring end of any of the diatribes.

It was a shame (imho), as a lot of valuable information was published and it raised awareness - unfortunately, fanaticism overtook discussion (again, imho).

I ended up on the end of the "you like phorm now you traitor " section, and received a couple of pm's to prove it, I deleted them because they were complete rants and not worth the storage space they took up. I hate phorm and what it can do but i decided to step back when the twilight zone type posts started and i had no intention of joining the tin foil hat type posts that started to emerge after that. The fact i pointed them out was what then put me on the end of said pm's :waving: to the 2 who sent those pm's hope you have taken your medication today :)

I wait for the news that VM have started to test "in which case i move providers" or they have decided to dump the system, Until that day i have far more important thing i can be doing with my time .

May i ask the mods and admins not to start up a new thread until such time as there is concrete evidence that things have moved forward or that phorm have started testing again, Other wise we will just end up going around in circles with the same few posters posting the same few bits of information just to keep the thread alive, Or posting strange and wacky connections that they think they have found which are funny at first but tend to drag down the seriousness of the topic down after a while, and just move the debate in the wrong direction

Bonglet
06-09-2008, 12:59
I think some points are wrong here, yes SOME of the posters posted stuff which was way off topic and could have been ticked off about at some stages but most of it was goading by the phorm pr puppets by direct quotes off other members to goad the main phorm opposition and this went too far at times and the temp 1-2 day bans never worked they just came back and back with the same misquotes and never answered anything but were here just to dilute and cause conflict.

Some people did post way off topic stuff which just did not need to be posted when there was no news and trying to make some and there was certain elements who for reasons only known to a few did not want any phorm thread existing to show VM in a bad light.

It was/is still a good subject look at what the isp's are doing with the dpi kit now shapping and application throttling then we just all rollover and before you know it function creep/application creep/more shaping creep will occur who then will defend your rights as a internet user?.

Horace
06-09-2008, 13:01
CF did NOT get it wrong - the stupd few who ruined it for EVERYONE else DID.

It would make more sense to delete posts and suspend members rather than affecting everyone else who wants to continue the debate..I mean that's what we're all here for isn't it?

dilli-theclaw
06-09-2008, 13:06
You obviously didn't read the thread then.

And you don't know WHAT actions were taken behind the scenes.

---------- Post added at 12:06 ---------- Previous post was at 12:04 ----------

Also we are about for debate yes - but there wasn't any of that happening at the end, just plums going off topic and sending abusive pm's to members.

In the end if a select few have to act like 4 year olds we have to deny them the place to do it.

Sirius
06-09-2008, 13:07
It was/is still a good subject look at what the isp's are doing with the dpi kit now shaping and application throttling then we just all rollover and before you know it function creep/application creep/more shaping creep will occur who then will defend your rights as a internet user?.

Agreed

Some people did post way off topic stuff which just did not need to be posted when there was no news and trying to make some and there was certain elements who for reasons only known to a few did not want any phorm thread existing to show VM in a bad light.

I wish i had saved the pm's now so i could have shown just how far some will go to support the wacky idea's that are out there and the level of goading that can and did go on.

Its was a very good thread until the information flow dried up and then it was just a daily repeat of old news with the odd weird and crazy connection type post to keep it flowing :).

Phorm is the biggest threat to privacy on the internet at this time, The biggest threat to the anti Phorm campaigners are the few in there ranks who live in the twilight zone and are making a mockery of the hard work that has gone into the debate so far.

Maggy
06-09-2008, 13:12
It would make more sense to delete posts and suspend members rather than affecting everyone else who wants to continue the debate..I mean that's what we're all here for isn't it?

You saw what happened whenever a moderator would just ask for people to stay on topic..they were totally ignored time and time again.It was totally disrespectful.

Plus you can't just report a post because you don't agree with the opinions expressed in that post and when the post hasn't broken any of the sites T&C's.

Agreed there were many who did ask their fellow posters to stay within the bounds and to obey the T&C's but they too were totally ignored.

But what really annoyed me the most was the total disinclination of many of the phorm posters to even participate anywhere else on the site despite the fact that there were many who had certain expertise that would HELP others on this site.

---------- Post added at 12:12 ---------- Previous post was at 12:09 ----------

Agreed



I wish i had saved the pm's now so i could have shown just how far some will go to support the wacky idea's that are out there and the level of goading that can and did go on.

Its was a very good thread until the information flow dried up and then it was just a daily repeat of old news with the odd weird and crazy connection type post to keep it flowing :).

I've got ALL of the pms I received...I'm going to make a scrapbook eventually of every abusive and every praiseworthy one of them.

Sirius
06-09-2008, 13:13
But what really annoyed me the most was the total disinclination of many of the phorm posters to even participate anywhere else on the site despite the fact that there were many who had certain expertise that would HELP others on this site.

---------- Post added at 12:12 ---------- Previous post was at 12:09 ----------



I've got ALL of the pms I received...I'm going to make a scrapbook eventually of every abusive and every praiseworthy one of them.

:clap:

dilli-theclaw
06-09-2008, 13:14
Prasieworthy - I don't think I've had one of them!!!

Raistlin
06-09-2008, 13:17
Phorm was always going to produce emotive and contentious debate

That's the point though isn't it? There was no debate. Anybody'trying to 'debate' was attacked and villified.

forums live and die by how they handle difficult subject matter

Indeed they do, which is why this one has survived as long as it has. If we allowed the rest of the forum to become as hostile and biased as the Phorm thread was we would end up shutting down very quickly. Running a forum is about facilitating debate on all levels, on all subjects, and for all audiences - something which the Phorm thread could never deliver.

maybe the CF mods could have chose to do things alittle more popular like let people rant and if they go far ban them

Define 'too far'.....would your definition include abusive PMs and Reputation comments to anybody that dared criticise the APM or individuals within it? Would your definition include the posting of personal information? Would your definition include abusing the functionality of the forum (reporting posts without any need, abusing the PM and reputation system, ignoring Moderators requests, attacking the Team and the site on various other forums)?

We can't afford to be wooly in the way that we deal with these issues. We have Terms of Use that people sign up to when they join, and we moderate posts/threads in line with those.

We have no objections to people ranting, in fact some of the best debates on forums such as this are started by one person's rant.

As for banning people, believe it or not that's a last resort that we don't like to use. That's why infraction points are issued, and suspensions of varying lengths are used, if we were to ban everybody that went 'too far' (assuming that 'too far' means 'breaks the rules') then we wouldn't have many people here and the Phorm thread probably wouldn't have made it past the second week :D

I know what you mean though, and neither I nor anybody else has any interest in stifling sensible, informed, adult, debate. Unfortunately the Phorm thread was none of those things, largely because of a minority of the people posting in it.

It would make more sense to delete posts and suspend members rather than affecting everyone else who wants to continue the debate..I mean that's what we're all here for isn't it?

And that's exactly what we did. There comes a time though where you have to make a decision as to whether the good that is generated by having a thread like that open is sufficient to justify the negative will, bad behaviour, and administrative burden, in managing it.

Many people seem to have forgotten that CF isn't just about the Phorm thread. It existed because CF exists, not the other way around. The Team has a responsibility to all the Members and to the whole of CF.

---------- Post added at 12:17 ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 ----------

Prasieworthy - I don't think I've had one of them!!!

Well..... Some of them were quite :erm: colourful :D

dilli-theclaw
06-09-2008, 13:28
No no - I've had plenty of abuse type ones (which have made me want to leave CF all together) just not many nice ones :)

Sirius
06-09-2008, 13:41
No no - I've had plenty of abuse type ones (which have made me want to leave CF all together) just not many nice ones :)

I can honestly say i have NEVER sent anyone a nasty pm, My opinion is that if you have to resort to abusive pm's you have lost the argument and any credibility you may have had.

BTW dilli this was not aimed at you m8 :) Just used your post as a quote

xspeedyx
06-09-2008, 13:53
Too far would be breaking the rules but again I don't run the site or mod the site just looking at a overview, I suppose banning people right away would have been a good move so I would have done like a three strike ban but again I ain't a mod so I just wanted to give my views

Paul
06-09-2008, 14:07
The infraction system is more or less like a three strike system, each infraction gets you more points and a longer ban, get enough and you are gone for good. In most cases it would take four or five infractions rather than three. :)

Kymmy
06-09-2008, 14:14
I am genuinely confused to see a discussion like this still raging HERE after about three weeks which you seem to be keeping going all by yourselves. I've leave it there.

You would be right if a CF mod/admin opened this thread 3 weeks ago, instead yesterday it was a anti-phorm person who was allowed to say his piece...So if you are confused then ask the anti-phormers as to why they keep opening threads like this...

Hugh
06-09-2008, 14:15
You would be right if a CF mod/admin opened this thread, instead it was a pro-phorm person who was allowed to say his piece...So if you are confused then ask the pro-phormers as to why they keep opening threads like this...
Don't you mean a pro anti-Phorm person and pro anti-Phormers?:D

Sirius
06-09-2008, 14:17
You would be right if a CF mod/admin opened this thread 3 weeks ago, instead yesterday it was a pro-phorm person who was allowed to say his piece...So if you are confused then ask the pro-phormers as to why they keep opening threads like this...

See there you go again bringing facts into the debate :LOL:

Kymmy
06-09-2008, 14:52
Don't you mean a pro anti-Phorm person and pro anti-Phormers?:D

Sorry been staring at a server screen most of the night :( corrected

See there you go again bringing facts into the debate :LOL:

I never see them as facts, just mislaid truths ;)

Rchivist
07-09-2008, 17:37
...

Again trying to be objective, I've just had a look at cadire's 9 posts on the locked monster thread, and the quality and tone of his occasional posts is much more restrained, and less "ad hominem" than the reply he got above from you. I've edited it out because I'd rather not give it another airing. I think it is important to maintain high standards, especially in this recovery period.

zing_deleted
07-09-2008, 17:44
Recovery period? Laugh my ass off in your general direction

Rchivist
07-09-2008, 17:46
You would be right if a CF mod/admin opened this thread 3 weeks ago, instead yesterday it was a anti-phorm person who was allowed to say his piece...So if you are confused then ask the anti-phormers as to why they keep opening threads like this...

Thank you for that - you are right I hadn't noticed that the thread had only been going for a day or so. Mind you - I'm not keen on putting people in narrowly defined little pigeonholes like "anti-phormers" or "phorm-haters". I don't think it does much for the adult and informed quality of the debate. Can't they just be people, posting with views that we either agree with, or disagree with, or maybe sometimes a bit of both?

There may be good and bad posts, off topic posts, abusive posts, posts with ad hominem language, posts that are primarily attacking an individual, posts that contain strong arguments, posts that are childish, posts that read like someone throwing toys out of the pram - but isn't it best to judge the post rather than the person? At least that's how I read the forum guidelines, and I have been reading them (again) recently.

I have been able to see quite clearly over the last few weeks those who understand this, and those who don't. It's been very instructive. I can't comment on what may or may not happen in a PM - I've had some fairly rude ones myself but they are easily deleted.

---------- Post added at 16:46 ---------- Previous post was at 16:44 ----------

...

Thank you for your timely reply but if you don't mind I'll look away.

Paul
07-09-2008, 17:52
If this is going to turn into another them/us bitching thread then I will be closing it.

Chris
07-09-2008, 18:00
Oh, another one of the hat3rz. :zzz:

If you lot despise this place so much, why do so many of you keep coming over here and starting threads to bleat about how rubbish CF is for locking your pet topic?

Ah, hang on, could it be because you don't have anywhere to go grandstanding any more? Alex's blog is hardly alive with posters, is it. :rolleyes:

Do run along there's a good chap, we will cover Phorm in our own way and in our own time, not in yours. If some of you had borne that in mind from the start, the Phorm thread would probably still be open.

Again trying to be objective, I've just had a look at cadire's 9 posts on the locked monster thread, and the quality and tone of his occasional posts is much more restrained, and less "ad hominem" than the reply he got above from you. I've edited it out because I'd rather not give it another airing. I think it is important to maintain high standards, especially in this recovery period.

Then allow me to re-quote it for you. May I also quote this useful web page in your direction as well, because you've used the phrase ad hominem twice recently in such a way that causes me to doubt you understand what it actually means:

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

If you wouldn't mind, please show me, in my post above, where I have asserted that a truth claim made by Cadire is false by virtue of some perceived personal flaw of his.

While this member may, or may not, have made restrained posts in the past, what he said in starting this thread was anything but. Why start the thread in the first place?

Perhaps your opinion of him is now revised somewhat, seeing as you're no longer labouring under the misapprehension that this is a long-running thread started by the CF Team for the purposes of bitching about the Phorm thread? :dozey:

I'm well aware that I'm hardly the anti-Phorm Campaign's poster boy, especially over at Alex's fan club, but hey, guess what, I can live with that. As for you ... recovery period? If you were any further up yourself you'd be tickling your own ribcage. You certainly tickle mine.

Ignitionnet
07-09-2008, 18:17
Where did I put that popcorn?

Rchivist
07-09-2008, 18:30
I'm familiar with the meaning of "ad hominem" thanks,
criticizing or attacking the person who proposed the argument (personal attack) in an attempt to discredit the argument Wikipedia
but in the light of Paul M's post about "bitching" which I agree with and will respect, I don't think a more detailed reply from me would be helpful. As one of my posts has already gained me negative repping from David F (for "very arrogant tone") of the type which appears to be the sort that Rob M mentioned unfavourably above (http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34632956-post28.html), perhaps I should stop here - we seem to be headed downwards again. I've tried not to make personal remarks, or be rude to anyone, or call out formal bolded mod statements. Best wishes to all.

Paul
07-09-2008, 18:34
And that seems a good point to close it.