What's a forum without people posting, some friendly banter and opposing views. By MAMs decision to remove the above posters we now have less views and these forums have lost their humour and rich content. I say bring back GF and DB immediately.

Please post your support if you agree?

Death threats Bullshare ?? that's a bit drastic !!!!

Exec.

I was aware moderators and interventions.

Agree with some of P 81 mainly;

So 'Yes', I would like to see Goldfinger back posting on here and given a Yellow Card instead of a complete ban.



The problem which MM may be wary of is when a poster is suggesting the "threat" of taking legal advice and the costs surrounding the unlikely possibility of "actions" or the
pain in the arse of preparing for such.

==-==-=-=

To me the skirmishes between DB4 and GF remind me of my kids (all girls) when they were about 4 - 7 complaining that when they were passing on the stairs from one floor to the the other that one blew on the other.

-=-=-=-=-

I think it would be possible for the participants to "grow" up, recognise that neither party is physically bruised or bleeding, and both parties have food to eat and not losing money.

Apologise to one another and MM and be reinstated on condition to try to stay out of other's hair, or otherwise be sent to their own rooms.

====-=-=-=

Both contributed to this thread and often "enlivened it".

=-=-=-=-=-=-=

(I wish I could get my hands on a moderator to help me deal with my wife. 8-))

Jimmy B , Tell me about it, but the police arrested the individual within 3 hours and was sectioned.


BB's are a weird world and some people take things far to seriously. It would be lovely if we could all get on in a civilised way.

Bullshare,

I was physically threatened by E-mails via MM.

I was a little bit fitter than I am now and thought at the time that the E-mailer may have been in for an interesting experience.

Fred: probably the same person we had the threats from. Sorry you had that experience , not good at all.

Bullshare.

Not your fault or responsibility.

It happens.

--=-=-=


When you view the amount of mud slinging on PM Questions, is it a wonder that "virtual" posters copy the behaviour viewed?

bloody labour rent-a-thug

Mike

I'm sorry but the mysterious 5 BB users, who may or may not post on the BB and, if they don't thus mysteriously skulk around in the background, isn't a healthy way to moderate, IMHO.

Let's assume they do post....

If so I would like to see a 'moderator identifier' attached to their username. That way, users can actually see an open and honest 'MoneyAM' association with that poster.

In other words, you 'know who you are talking to' and so would obviously be 'more careful about what you say'. And you know who to go to when and if the need arises because you can see who is around at the time.

Hey! This is YOUR BUSINESS and you don't need whippersnappers like me to tell you how to run it.

But when you (and the rest of us) lose the 'mostly' very valuable and somewhat prolific posting of a contributor like Goldfinger it is a sad event.

He produces 'page clicks' and 'others also do so' in response to joining in with the conversation. All of this amplifies up.

But again, it's a 'trade off'. If he brings money in but at the same time causes staff hassle then you have to evaluate the worth of him. Obviously, you've done this and come down on him towards the negative with a Red Card for him.

But it shouldn't have come to this!

My point is, because the moderation methodology of MoneyAM is so very bad, golfinger felt unsupported by it and went a bit ballistic. When the staff or the 5 BBers could have done something but chose not to, he then gave you all something far worse to have to deal with by way of both frustration and revenge.

In conclusion, IMHO, the moderation is not fit for purpose on here. It is far too lightweight.

But so is the imput for users from the MoneyAm side of things. Your punters are bored on here and you don't do too much about livening things up. I guess that's why they have bursts of entertaining themselves.

Apologies if I offend. I'm a blunt guy, now ex-Yorkshire, which might explain things, I guess. At times, I do tend to call a spade a shovel.

the implication yesterday was that the (very silly) spat between DB and GF and the "wrecking posts" occurred just over a single w/e ..... this was most certainly not the case, and if memory serves me aright, it carried on for a good week and more and maybe even several before anyone within the MAM management woke up and decided to act

I must say there are some proper hypocrites here , Excecline i should be careful what you write .

Execline

I don't agree , Mike & Ian have the right balance in moderating the board

golfinger felt unsupported He was unsupported because he was in the wrong.

it doesn't matter much whether GF or DB was in the wrong

other than should either or both have been given yellow or red cards, there is a valid debate as to whether Mike and his Merry Men were anything like as alert as they should have been in nipping this whole silly spat in the bud

i couldn't possibly comment!

We generally don't need moderators. We are responsible adults who know the difference between acceptable and unacceptable. So those people who lack the skills to self moderate don't belong on a public BB.
.........'gf lacked support from the MAM moderators'........good grief! He's kicked off more times than I can remember. Jeez what a load of rubbish, imo.

how pompous of you harry

What i won't miss is Goldfinger trashing his own thread [ the talk to yourself thread ] with his non stop polictical views and copy & paste from the loony left in between Fred's long winded'tripe and his large offensive polictial cartoons

What is the talk to yourself thread?

agree 100% Harry

cynic

it doesn't matter much whether GF or DB was in the wrong

Don't be silly, if it didn't matter we wouldn't have had this thread

skinny

NOWT

Self moderation! umumumh.


A bit hopeful when some enjoy being so beastly!

There are such things as pardons.

aldo .... you have cherry-picked and thus taken something completely out of context
i guess i could have started instead by saying that both DB and GF were in the wrong (which is true), and then continued as i did