| Anti jab posts 21:59 - Jan 14 with 3028 views | Sirjohnalot |
Just deleted a ridiculous post about the vaccine causes mass deaths and being government control. We’ve warned about this before, anymore posts about the vaccine causing mass deaths and the poster will be banned.
If you care about the site you’ll not do it |  | | |  |
| Anti jab posts on 22:22 - Jan 14 with 2338 views | KeithHaynes |
Bans for any more for sure. |  |
| |
| Anti jab posts on 22:31 - Jan 14 with 2318 views | builthjack |
Crazies. |  |
| Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
|
| |
| Anti jab posts on 22:31 - Jan 14 with 2316 views | raynor94 |
Why hesitate, ban them immediately, they have had enough warnings |  |
| |
| Anti jab posts on 22:33 - Jan 14 with 2308 views | Sirjohnalot |
Giving the person the benefit of the doubt in case they’ve had one too many.
All
For debate, but not when it could cause harm to people and the site | | | |
| Anti jab posts on 22:34 - Jan 14 with 2305 views | Scotia |
I saw the post before it was, quite rightly, deleted.
Ridiculous post and this is the best move.
Careful this thread doesn't descend in to more anti vax guff though. |  | | |
| Anti jab posts on 22:36 - Jan 14 with 2300 views | Sirjohnalot |
If it does. They’ll be banned. | | | |
| Anti jab posts on 22:41 - Jan 14 with 2288 views | Brynmill_Jack |
| Anti jab posts on 22:36 - Jan 14 by Sirjohnalot |
If it does. They’ll be banned. |
No opinions welcome! |  |
| Each time I go to Bedd - au........................ |
| |
| Anti jab posts on 22:42 - Jan 14 with 2286 views | 1462jack |
| Anti jab posts on 22:36 - Jan 14 by Sirjohnalot |
If it does. They’ll be banned. |
You’re killing this place
Thanks [Post edited 14 Jan 2023 22:48]
|  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Anti jab posts on 22:50 - Jan 14 with 2259 views | Sirjohnalot |
| Anti jab posts on 22:41 - Jan 14 by Brynmill_Jack |
No opinions welcome! |
If you mean opinions that damage the site, the sponsors and the charity then you’re right, they’re not welcome. | | | |
| Anti jab posts on 22:53 - Jan 14 with 2251 views | Sirjohnalot |
Brynmill Jack and Jack 123 banned Ffs what’s wrong people ?
Post a link on a thread asking people to respect the site and not harm the charity so you post that link ?
This post has been edited by an administrator | | | |
| Anti jab posts on 23:17 - Jan 14 with 2172 views | Sirjohnalot |
| Anti jab posts on 22:42 - Jan 14 by 1462jack |
You’re killing this place
Thanks [Post edited 14 Jan 2023 22:48]
|
More than entitled to your opinion. No problem at all with anyone criticising me for anything I do as a mod. These types of posts harm the charity part of the site which is its purpose. Please explain how protecting the charity aspect is killing the site which was set up for the charity ? | | | |
| Anti jab posts on 09:14 - Jan 15 with 2041 views | onehunglow |
It’s not an isolated instance either.
This is beyond comprehension.
Well done John and Keith | |
| |
| Anti jab posts on 09:48 - Jan 15 with 2002 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Anti jab posts on 22:53 - Jan 14 by Sirjohnalot |
Brynmill Jack and Jack 123 banned Ffs what’s wrong people ?
Post a link on a thread asking people to respect the site and not harm the charity so you post that link ?
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Why are we naming them?
Nobody was allowed to mention the Builth or STID banning the other week, it was deleted in an instant.
It’s these double standards that people don’t like. |  |
| |
| Anti jab posts on 09:55 - Jan 15 with 1996 views | Sirjohnalot |
| Anti jab posts on 09:48 - Jan 15 by Dr_Parnassus |
Why are we naming them?
Nobody was allowed to mention the Builth or STID banning the other week, it was deleted in an instant.
It’s these double standards that people don’t like. |
I’ve had enough of begging people to comply.
I did not name the person that posted the link that led to this thread but when posters put an anti vax link on a thread asking people not to do it as it harms the site, I will do what is necessary.
By ‘people’ you mean you. | | | |
| Anti jab posts on 09:59 - Jan 15 with 1988 views | hobo |
Banning people doesn't make the problem go away you know. People are going to have to talk about the elephant in the room sooner or later |  | | |
| Anti jab posts on 10:04 - Jan 15 with 1977 views | onehunglow |
| Anti jab posts on 09:59 - Jan 15 by hobo |
Banning people doesn't make the problem go away you know. People are going to have to talk about the elephant in the room sooner or later |
Some impressionable people around
Reading the utterly dangerous anti vax narratives it’s incredible anyone could dispute jonalots action .
This is human forking life we re talking about here,a world hit by a pandemic that,when a vaccine was found, then didn’t want it as it killed itself . WTF is wrong with you .
I asked if these people would refuse a vaccine against TB in 50s south Wales
Not one reply .
Anti Vaxers themselves are killers | |
| |
| Anti jab posts on 10:05 - Jan 15 with 1969 views | Sirjohnalot |
| Anti jab posts on 09:59 - Jan 15 by hobo |
Banning people doesn't make the problem go away you know. People are going to have to talk about the elephant in the room sooner or later |
And they’re welcome too. If it wasn’t for the harm to site, it wouldn’t bother me at all. It’s a matter of decency and respect. Keith has asked people not to go down the anti vax route and my job is to protect the site and the charity.
There’s plenty of places to put their theories, but not on here as charities and sponsors do not want their names linked with conspiracy theories.
This post has been edited by an administrator | | | |
| Anti jab posts on 10:06 - Jan 15 with 1959 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Anti jab posts on 09:55 - Jan 15 by Sirjohnalot |
I’ve had enough of begging people to comply.
I did not name the person that posted the link that led to this thread but when posters put an anti vax link on a thread asking people not to do it as it harms the site, I will do what is necessary.
By ‘people’ you mean you. |
No, I mean people. Who do you think likes double standard then, other than those that benefit directly from such things?
Due to you deleting my post in response to someone asking who was banned, another responded more cryptically saying “I don’t know who was banned but I’m Swansea Til I Die…” and you deleted that too.
These are the double standards that need to be stamped out. Just like banning for 2 weeks for calling a moronic view moronic, then banning for a day for continued vile abuse.
You treat people differently based on your personal like and dislike for them. This has been put to you before and not just by me before you say that again, wrongly. [Post edited 15 Jan 2023 10:08]
| |
| |
| Anti jab posts on 10:09 - Jan 15 with 1949 views | mangohilljack |
Just a suggestion and I hope constructive feedback is welcome.
Banning long serving posters for having an alternative view can and will have a detrimental effect on the forum long term.
If you want to protect the forum and the charity then it's in the site's best interest to have as many posters on here as humanely possible.
Of course there has to be lines to be drawn and boundaries to be set.
Myself I've been moderating forums since the mid 90's and always found the deletion of offending posts and a 3 strikes and your out formula far more beneficial to the forum than an instant ban no questions asked.
censorship, cancel culture and the lack of constructive debate causes far more problems than the offending posts in the first place.
Anyway that's my twopenneth worth and before anyone tells me to go do one if I don't like how it's moderated ....it's only a suggestion. | | | |
| Anti jab posts on 10:12 - Jan 15 with 1935 views | Sirjohnalot |
| Anti jab posts on 10:06 - Jan 15 by Dr_Parnassus |
No, I mean people. Who do you think likes double standard then, other than those that benefit directly from such things?
Due to you deleting my post in response to someone asking who was banned, another responded more cryptically saying “I don’t know who was banned but I’m Swansea Til I Die…” and you deleted that too.
These are the double standards that need to be stamped out. Just like banning for 2 weeks for calling a moronic view moronic, then banning for a day for continued vile abuse.
You treat people differently based on your personal like and dislike for them. This has been put to you before and not just by me before you say that again, wrongly. [Post edited 15 Jan 2023 10:08]
|
That’s your opinion and you’re welcome to it. I’m not replying further. | | | |
| Anti jab posts on 10:15 - Jan 15 with 1924 views | onehunglow |
| Anti jab posts on 10:09 - Jan 15 by mangohilljack |
Just a suggestion and I hope constructive feedback is welcome.
Banning long serving posters for having an alternative view can and will have a detrimental effect on the forum long term.
If you want to protect the forum and the charity then it's in the site's best interest to have as many posters on here as humanely possible.
Of course there has to be lines to be drawn and boundaries to be set.
Myself I've been moderating forums since the mid 90's and always found the deletion of offending posts and a 3 strikes and your out formula far more beneficial to the forum than an instant ban no questions asked.
censorship, cancel culture and the lack of constructive debate causes far more problems than the offending posts in the first place.
Anyway that's my twopenneth worth and before anyone tells me to go do one if I don't like how it's moderated ....it's only a suggestion. |
With all due respect, people need vaccination to help them avoid potential killer diseases and virus .
It’s why children are innicukated against MMR ,Polio etc. it keeps them alive .
Smart arses urging others not to protect themselves should be seen as damnation . | |
| |
| Anti jab posts on 10:17 - Jan 15 with 1919 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Anti jab posts on 10:09 - Jan 15 by mangohilljack |
Just a suggestion and I hope constructive feedback is welcome.
Banning long serving posters for having an alternative view can and will have a detrimental effect on the forum long term.
If you want to protect the forum and the charity then it's in the site's best interest to have as many posters on here as humanely possible.
Of course there has to be lines to be drawn and boundaries to be set.
Myself I've been moderating forums since the mid 90's and always found the deletion of offending posts and a 3 strikes and your out formula far more beneficial to the forum than an instant ban no questions asked.
censorship, cancel culture and the lack of constructive debate causes far more problems than the offending posts in the first place.
Anyway that's my twopenneth worth and before anyone tells me to go do one if I don't like how it's moderated ....it's only a suggestion. |
It’s ridiculous, it really is.
“and a 3 strikes and your out formula.”
These things don’t work because those who acquire moderation powers often find it impossible remain impartial and treat usernames equally.
It leads to 3 strikes of minimal to no rule breaks for those they don’t like, where others who do ten times worse get away scott free.
There will never be respect for the rules when the rules are applied so selectively and conveniently. | |
| |
| Anti jab posts on 10:17 - Jan 15 with 1922 views | KeithHaynes |
| Anti jab posts on 10:09 - Jan 15 by mangohilljack |
Just a suggestion and I hope constructive feedback is welcome.
Banning long serving posters for having an alternative view can and will have a detrimental effect on the forum long term.
If you want to protect the forum and the charity then it's in the site's best interest to have as many posters on here as humanely possible.
Of course there has to be lines to be drawn and boundaries to be set.
Myself I've been moderating forums since the mid 90's and always found the deletion of offending posts and a 3 strikes and your out formula far more beneficial to the forum than an instant ban no questions asked.
censorship, cancel culture and the lack of constructive debate causes far more problems than the offending posts in the first place.
Anyway that's my twopenneth worth and before anyone tells me to go do one if I don't like how it's moderated ....it's only a suggestion. |
The forum contributes to around 7 % of the overall figures for this website, we could lose a hundred posters and little would be affected.
* It’s not the viewpoint it’s the way it is being put over by certain posters who continue to lack the skills to do so. This isn’t censorship and it’s been said so many times now it’s boring. If people cant debate and put forward their opinions without insults or bringing the forum in to disrepute then they will be stopped from posting.
The topic can be covid, biscuits or different coloured to nail polish, the subject is irrelevant ( to a point ) It’s the way it is managed by those posters who can’t control themselves and show respect for our persistent requests to interact like adults. | |
| |
| Anti jab posts on 10:17 - Jan 15 with 1922 views | Gwyn737 |
| Anti jab posts on 10:09 - Jan 15 by mangohilljack |
Just a suggestion and I hope constructive feedback is welcome.
Banning long serving posters for having an alternative view can and will have a detrimental effect on the forum long term.
If you want to protect the forum and the charity then it's in the site's best interest to have as many posters on here as humanely possible.
Of course there has to be lines to be drawn and boundaries to be set.
Myself I've been moderating forums since the mid 90's and always found the deletion of offending posts and a 3 strikes and your out formula far more beneficial to the forum than an instant ban no questions asked.
censorship, cancel culture and the lack of constructive debate causes far more problems than the offending posts in the first place.
Anyway that's my twopenneth worth and before anyone tells me to go do one if I don't like how it's moderated ....it's only a suggestion. |
Tbf the reasoning behind not wanting anti-vax posts has been highlighted again and again and again. And again.
If posters still can’t help themselves then it’s on them. | | | |
| Anti jab posts on 10:19 - Jan 15 with 1920 views | Sirjohnalot |
| Anti jab posts on 10:09 - Jan 15 by mangohilljack |
Just a suggestion and I hope constructive feedback is welcome.
Banning long serving posters for having an alternative view can and will have a detrimental effect on the forum long term.
If you want to protect the forum and the charity then it's in the site's best interest to have as many posters on here as humanely possible.
Of course there has to be lines to be drawn and boundaries to be set.
Myself I've been moderating forums since the mid 90's and always found the deletion of offending posts and a 3 strikes and your out formula far more beneficial to the forum than an instant ban no questions asked.
censorship, cancel culture and the lack of constructive debate causes far more problems than the offending posts in the first place.
Anyway that's my twopenneth worth and before anyone tells me to go do one if I don't like how it's moderated ....it's only a suggestion. |
Thank you for your feedback and I’m always more than happy to receive it good or bad. (Actually prefer critical feedback as it helps to improve as I have and will continue to make mistakes )
Here however I don’t think I have.
Someone posted a link to a discredited source. I deleted it and posted this thread, not naming the person but asking people not to post anti vax things and the reasons why. I also made it clear that if it happened again, they’d be banned.
Two posters, on the same thread, in answer posted links to more anti vax sites in response. It was late at night, I was about to fall asleep. Had I done, they would have remained up all night till I next logged on, which coops damage the site.
I was left with little choice.
I don’t want to ban anyone, I haven’t got time with work to go through posts, but sometimes, despite very clear warnings, people do it anyway.
Always happy to hear feedback and if you’ve any suggestions as to how better I could have handled it, please free feel to post here | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
