45th President of the United States, Donald Trump (Vol. 12)

[bitchstewie]

Ben Lowden said:

rscott said:

Thanks Ben. Could you clarify whether they way Byker28i posts news articles is still acceptable though? It'll avoid any further confusion about Rule 16...

Copying and pasting copy from another site is in breach of rule 16 and is not acceptable, however I will ask our legal team if we're able to provide any more clarity on this rule. If anything changes, we'll update the rules of posting and alert forum users of the change.

Ben usually common sense wins the day until it doesn't which is why this is being discussed on the Trump thread because anyone attempting to do so in website feedback (presumably there for you to get feedback about the website?) saw their thread shutdown in about 10 minutes.

I'm sure people don't want to be perceived as being awkward but the example that leaps to mind is whether screengrabs of tweets are allowed for example? Or only links to the tweet?

Or if I link to an article on the BBC can I quote anything from the article or will I be banned for doing so at the whim of a moderator which is what appears to have happened to Byker?

If someone gives a quote to the BBC am I allowed to mention the quote? At what point is copyright going to be mentioned?

If people know the rules and if they're enforced evenly that's fair enough it's your forum and your rules but that doesn't seem to be what's happened here hence the uncertainty about what now is and isn't allowed.

[The Hypno-Toad]

Good to see that common sense has prevailed and I am sure Byker will be heartened by the amount of support he has within the PH Community.

[tangerine_sedge]

Great news to hear - waiting for the next "killer" post from Byker

[valiant]

Common sense prevails.

Might want to rewrite Rule 16 to make it clearer on what is and what isn’t acceptable.

[Countdown]

tangerine_sedge said:

Great news to hear - waiting for the next "killer" post from Byker

I can't wait either - I'm going to report him for breaking Rule 16

[jimmyjimjim]

silentbrown said:

HM-2 said:

eharding said:

HM-2 said:

A few pages ago someone posted a breakdown of what proportion of posts on this thread were from Byker. It wasn't particularly high, about 10% IIRC.

273 of 5476, so just under 5%. It was just over 5% before the weekend.

Even lower than I thought then. A thread which is composed of over 95% posts by other members is hardly a "soapbox".

I'd take that figure with a big pinch of salt. According to the thread stats his last post was on 22nd May...

IIRC, from looking into it many years ago, it's actually 273 posts in the last month, of 5484 comments in the thread for all time.

[fatbutt]

While I understand the point of the rule and its place in a forum like this, I still don't understand how one poster can do it one way for so long and never receive a warning. His style of posting has been consistent throughout and in the vast majority of instances he's supplied a summary and a link with almost no personal skew. Of course, he choses the links which is where the personal opinion applies however others can follow exactly the same route and post similar point with counter links. Or at least they could have done.

When scraps have broken out he's usually carried on regardless and posted something new, usefully directing everyone from some spat that has become tiresome.

Byker deserves a better explanation as to why now rather than a chapter and verse recitation of the rules. Lets hope he gets it.

[Tom Logan]

Countdown said:

I can't wait either - I'm going to report him for breaking Rule 16

I just tried to check the Rules of Posting but the page is blank, perhaps the rules are being amended.

Ben posted exactly the same on WF as he did on this thread re Byker's sin binning, I thought about reporting him for cross-posting.

[pincher]

To be honest, this feels like an enormous back-pedal from PH, reacting to the depth of feeling over this.

It’s telling that Ben is having to refer Rule 16 further up the food chain for clarification, as it’s clearly bobbins in it’s current form.

If you are going to enforce it as a rule as it stands, you’ll end up having to delete a good chunk of posts.

Whichever ‘person in authority’ put Byker in the sin-bin should have the cojones to come on here and detail the reasons why, given the thread has been running for years.

But they won’t, because they don’t have any.

Pretty shameful really.

[Centurion07]

pincher said:

To be honest, this feels like an enormous back-pedal from PH, reacting to the depth of feeling over this.

It’s telling that Ben is having to refer Rule 16 further up the food chain for clarification, as it’s clearly bobbins in it’s current form.

If you are going to enforce it as a rule as it stands, you’ll end up having to delete a good chunk of posts.

Whichever ‘person in authority’ put Byker in the sin-bin should have the cojones to come on here and detail the reasons why, given the thread has been running for years.

But they won’t, because they don’t have any.

Pretty shameful really.

Aside from Kinky and Big Al, I don't think I've ever seen another mod even admit to taking any action, much less *gasps* explain themselves...

[Slaav]

My 2p worth on the binning and reinstating of Byker:

A) Any ban hasn't been explained fully although Ben has tried and clarified a few things
B) It appears it was a 'sin binning' and we may have all over reacted.
C) Ben does appear to have raised his head above the parapet on this one and shouldn't be completely tarred and feathered as a result
D) Byker has been reinstated
E) Website Feedback was pretty heavily moderated over the weekend and seemed to shut down all 'discussion'?
F) I think the general sentiment has been picked up, noted, acted on and I am sure that Byker will be secretly quite chuffed that so many have come on here and defended him/argued his case.
G) I wouldn't be surprised if Byker got personal messages also in support
H) This episode alone MAY give rise to people looking elsewhere for 'chat', 'info' and fights

Thanks Ben for coming on and clarifying. I am personally happy to leave this here as I have previously made my feelings known.

Personally, I think we can probably leave this be but that is just my personal opinion obviously and everybody (least of all Byker,) may not agree.

Now - what's the Orange moron been up to today?

[eldar]

PRTVR said:

eldar said:

PRTVR said:

Maybe that's the point, instead of being a discussion it turned into a soapbox for Byker28i.

No one had to join, participate or view the thread, it was an individual choice. It is clear it was closed down by complainants afraid of what was being said and partial moderation.

If you don't like a thread don't watch or join, don't be like the kid that takes their ball home because they are losing.

I have never hit the report button in all the time I have been here, life is to short, I was just expressing an opinion on a possible reason for the ban.

I didn't mean you, personally, more the generic poster. No suggestion from me of any complaints from you.

[rscott]

Slaav said:

My 2p worth on the binning and reinstating of Byker:

A) Any ban hasn't been explained fully although Ben has tried and clarified a few things
B) It appears it was a 'sin binning' and we may have all over reacted.
C) Ben does appear to have raised his head above the parapet on this one and shouldn't be completely tarred and feathered as a result
D) Byker has been reinstated
E) Website Feedback was pretty heavily moderated over the weekend and seemed to shut down all 'discussion'?
F) I think the general sentiment has been picked up, noted, acted on and I am sure that Byker will be secretly quite chuffed that so many have come on here and defended him/argued his case.
G) I wouldn't be surprised if Byker got personal messages also in support
H) This episode alone MAY give rise to people looking elsewhere for 'chat', 'info' and fights

Thanks Ben for coming on and clarifying. I am personally happy to leave this here as I have previously made my feelings known.

Personally, I think we can probably leave this be but that is just my personal opinion obviously and everybody (least of all Byker,) may not agree.

Now - what's the Orange moron been up to today?

Pretty much agree with the above. Perhaps it was just a sin bin, but that doesn't seem to tally with what Byker has said elsewhere.

Hopefully PH will take a closer look at how the moderation process works so this sort of thing doesn't happen again.

[hersh]

+1

[Tom Logan]

rscott said:

Pretty much agree with the above. Perhaps it was just a sin bin, but that doesn't seem to tally with what Byker has said elsewhere.

Hopefully PH will take a closer look at how the moderation process works so this sort of thing doesn't happen again.

My view re the sin bin is that, due to the amount of flak aimed at the PTB by many posters on this thread and in WF that it was a case of backtracking to try to cool things down, particularly as the rule in question is a bit vague and that the banning was originally a kneejerk reaction, possibly by one of the third party mods to a complaint or complaints engineered by some of the more vociferous Trump supporters.

I have no evidence to support this theory of course, just my own guesswork.

[BadBull]

Some of the newer mods (hired from outside) don't understand this place.

Some of the older ones seem to be able to do as they please with no oversight.

Rotrex & Kinky were always decent on this thread though.

[Chimune]

Slaav said:

My 2p worth on the binning and reinstating of Byker:

A) Any ban hasn't been explained fully although Ben has tried and clarified a few things
B) It appears it was a 'sin binning' and we may have all over reacted.
C) Ben does appear to have raised his head above the parapet on this one and shouldn't be completely tarred and feathered as a result
D) Byker has been reinstated
E) Website Feedback was pretty heavily moderated over the weekend and seemed to shut down all 'discussion'?
F) I think the general sentiment has been picked up, noted, acted on and I am sure that Byker will be secretly quite chuffed that so many have come on here and defended him/argued his case.
G) I wouldn't be surprised if Byker got personal messages also in support
H) This episode alone MAY give rise to people looking elsewhere for 'chat', 'info' and fights

Thanks Ben for coming on and clarifying. I am personally happy to leave this here as I have previously made my feelings known.

Personally, I think we can probably leave this be but that is just my personal opinion obviously and everybody (least of all Byker,) may not agree.

Now - what's the Orange moron been up to today?

Agreed.
Oh and you missed..
I) rule 16 is vague to the point of being useless. Which has now been laid bare for all to see.

[eharding]

rscott said:

Pretty much agree with the above. Perhaps it was just a sin bin, but that doesn't seem to tally with what Byker has said elsewhere.

Hopefully PH will take a closer look at how the moderation process works so this sort of thing doesn't happen again.

Indeed - let's wait and see if this catharsis brings some changes.

Maybe somebody, somewhere is already spending less time policing News, Politics and Economics, and instead is focusing their talent on moderating the hotbed of posting rule violation and downright villainy that is Regional PHers : Channel Islands. Slightly disappointing to see that Isles of Scilly don't get a dedicated forum, as that might be an even better option.

[B'stard Child]

Al Gorithum said:

Personally I'm not invested enough to report anybody, and life's too short.

I hit the report button for posts on a regular basis - have you seen some of the spam posts for keto and christ knows what else on a regular basis

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=19...

Edited by B'stard Child on Monday 21st June 21:32

[Slaav]

Anyway folks....

forgive me for having multiple log ins but...........



I’m Byker

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2...