Advice please Adrian

[Frodo]

I had a post culled for the reason below. Is this correct by the rules of Bigfooty?

You were singling out a poster who can't respond as he is on a red card.

 

[Chief]

Well, if the mod thought your post unfair given the circumstances I'd accept their decision.

 

[Frodo]

Well, if the mod thought your post unfair given the circumstances I'd accept their decision.

With respect...you are backing the mods too far.

In buisiness you back your managers. This is different, you are giving carte blanche to unfairness IMHO.

 

[Chief]

*sigh*

You asked me if that was allowed under the rules. Without knowing ANY background I have said that if the mod thought that, given the circumstances, it was appropriate I would accept their decision.

It is ONE post from the way you tell it.

 

[bushie]

Tell the whole story frodo.

You posted a malicious crack aimed at creating a vendetta against a poster who humiliated you on the SRP board. A poster who, because he has a red card, has no right of reply or ability to defend himself.

Who is being unfair again???

You seem to have a chip on your shoulder over this.

I replied to your whinge on the cricket board, and my post was deleted as well. But do you hear me crying?? The mod was correct in deleting them.

Get over it. Stop plagiarising articles and learn to rebutt properly and you wont get humiliated again!!

 

[Fred]

The action taken was correct.

 

[Lach72]

The boot has spoken.

 

[Frodo]

I guess I've not had a definitive reply reply :-

I asked :-

I had a post culled for the reason below. Is this correct by the rules of Bigfooty?

You were singling out a poster who can't respond as he is on a red card.

I'd just like to know the answer. Because if true then to reply to a post by any red carded member 'must' be illegal as they can't respond.
Such a rule, if correct, should be fully implemented, not selectively, to be fair.

 

[Chief]

You want me to say "Yes everyone will be subject to this as a definite rule" or "no Frodo you were treated unfairly". Neither of those answers are applicable.

The definitive answer is:

If the mod thought, given the circumstances, your post unfair or not good for their board or the site as a whole they are within their rights to remove it.

 

[Fred]

I guess I've not had a definitive reply reply :-

I asked :-

I had a post culled for the reason below. Is this correct by the rules of Bigfooty?

You were singling out a poster who can't respond as he is on a red card.

I'd just like to know the answer. Because if true then to reply to a post by any red carded member 'must' be illegal as they can't respond.
Such a rule, if correct, should be fully implemented, not selectively, to be fair.

You weren't replying to a post by a red carded member. You made a post saying what you thought of a red carded member. Making uncomplimentary posts about other members has always been frowned upon.

 

[bunsen burner]

Tell the whole story frodo.

You posted a malicious crack aimed at creating a vendetta against a poster who humiliated you on the SRP board. A poster who, because he has a red card, has no right of reply or ability to defend himself.

Who is being unfair again???

You seem to have a chip on your shoulder over this.

I replied to your whinge on the cricket board, and my post was deleted as well. But do you hear me crying?? The mod was correct in deleting them.

Get over it. Stop plagiarising articles and learn to rebutt properly and you wont get humiliated again!!

Hilarious comments from someone who recently had a hissy fit and threatened physical violence.

 

[bushie]

Hilarious comments from someone who recently had a hissy fit and threatened physical violence.

Very true...Not one of my finest moments.

But the rest of my post is spot on!

 

[skipper kelly]

Frodo.

The administrators and moderators reserve the right to remove or alter your posts and threads at any time for any reason.

This is the only rule that you need to be aware of.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

You weren't replying to a post by a red carded member. You made a post saying what you thought of a red carded member. Making uncomplimentary posts about other members has always been frowned upon.

That's explains my actions in a nutshell. The post in question wasn't exactly helping the situation & so I deleted it & the response. It's amazing how many posters struggle to accept the umpire's position even if it is over a minor issue. Time to move on to more important matters...

 

[Asgardian]

To accept, or take exception, THAT is the question.

(my apologies Mr Shakespeare)

 

[Frodo]

Frodo.



This is the only rule that you need to be aware of.

Ah..carte blanche. Fair enough, but the reply was not that from the moderator.

It was..............


You were singling out a poster who can't respond as he is on a red card.

The answer I have had is 'sod the rules, whatever a mod does I'll back'

What I posted was a good thing for the board, and the site. That is the important aspect.

 

[Chief]

Frodo, grow up. You're making a fool of yourself over a single post. Save it for something more important eh?

 

[Frodo]

Frodo, grow up. You're making a fool of yourself over a single post. Save it for something more important eh?

Well that is abusive in itself!! Grow up, duhhhhh.

One single post may be worth a million others. I find this important because it means the rules are irrelevant. If taken to be the practice in common law it ends up like this.

Plaintiff: I appeal on grounds that the reason given by the policeman was contrary to the law.
Magistrate: I don't care, whatever the police says goes.

Now that is something that is not foolish, it is a clear case of importance which goes to the heart of 'the rules of Bigfooty'

 

[Chief]

The mod was right using any interpretation of the rules you care to give. You are wrong. Accept it.