Club Championships 2022 Discussion and Match Reports

[blacksheep21]

Dec 2, 2022 23:14:06 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

Dec 2, 2022 15:34:32 GMT rollingstone said:

Pride and principles are qualities sorely lacking in society today.  Fair play to him for refusing to accept wholly unnecessary censorship

I’ve ran into this issue on here before myself and it can be very frustrating. The issue is 2 pronged- moderators do this in their spare time and thus are at the mercy complaints and can’t really invest much time in weighing up the merits of a conversation.

Posters too regularly use the ability to complain or cite something as offensive as a way of backing out of a conversation in which they have shown themselves to be wrong or an argument which they have started and cannot win.

I had the same issue recently whereby I pointed out the fact that a current Kerry player had stamped on another player in a club match.

It wasn’t a rumour, it wasn’t unsubstantiated as I provided evidence of where it could (and still can be seen) however the argument back first centred around why was I making this aware to others and then eventually the posts were taken down as someone complained about finding them offensive.

This really stuck a chord with me as the incident was clearly viewable for people so there was no rumour etc, and the complaint button was used as a way of suppressing factual information that people didn’t like to see being pointed out.

I didn’t go as far as vet but I genuinely wondered about where this forum was goin after that.

Where can it be seen?

[Mickmack]

Some people fly off the handle at other posters without reading closely what has been written.

That can be challenging at times but at the end of the day its a forum and no one dies.

[kerryexile]

I want to be very clear.

When some one puts up a report on a game I am not knocking their report. Actually the report by againstthegrain was excellent. And other comments give a picture of what happened. As a person who does not see a lot of club games I love these reports.

But when guidelines are given on how to structure a report it makes you wonder. What are they trying to replicate?

Its certainly not because of his views on Covid.

But some believe the latter are significant and should be held against him.

I don't.

[dano]

Veteran is , by far, the most eloquent and Hoolihanesque of the self appointed match reporters on this forum.I, for one, looked forward to his briliant match reports despite the fact that I may have already known the result. We have lost a valuable asset there. I think a compromise would be in order. Just my opinion.

[kerrybhoy06]

Dec 2, 2022 23:37:18 GMT blacksheep21 said:

Dec 2, 2022 23:14:06 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

I’ve ran into this issue on here before myself and it can be very frustrating. The issue is 2 pronged- moderators do this in their spare time and thus are at the mercy complaints and can’t really invest much time in weighing up the merits of a conversation.

Posters too regularly use the ability to complain or cite something as offensive as a way of backing out of a conversation in which they have shown themselves to be wrong or an argument which they have started and cannot win.

I had the same issue recently whereby I pointed out the fact that a current Kerry player had stamped on another player in a club match.

It wasn’t a rumour, it wasn’t unsubstantiated as I provided evidence of where it could (and still can be seen) however the argument back first centred around why was I making this aware to others and then eventually the posts were taken down as someone complained about finding them offensive.

This really stuck a chord with me as the incident was clearly viewable for people so there was no rumour etc, and the complaint button was used as a way of suppressing factual information that people didn’t like to see being pointed out.

I didn’t go as far as vet but I genuinely wondered about where this forum was goin after that.

Where can it be seen?

Clubber, match stream is still there

[blacksheep21]

Dec 3, 2022 6:22:51 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

Dec 2, 2022 23:37:18 GMT blacksheep21 said:

Where can it be seen?

Clubber, match stream is still there

I have to pay 10 euro though? If so, I can live without seeing it.

[kerrybhoy06]

Dec 3, 2022 10:09:41 GMT blacksheep21 said:

Dec 3, 2022 6:22:51 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

Clubber, match stream is still there

I have to pay 10 euro though? If so, I can live without seeing it.

That’s your personal preference, you don’t need to tell me about it!
It’s there to be seen so there was no disputing it’s accuracy

[blacksheep21]

Dec 3, 2022 10:57:27 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

Dec 3, 2022 10:09:41 GMT blacksheep21 said:

I have to pay 10 euro though? If so, I can live without seeing it.

That’s your personal preference, you don’t need to tell me about it!
It’s there to be seen so there was no disputing it’s accuracy

I guess I’ll never know!

[ciarraimick]

Dec 3, 2022 6:22:51 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

Dec 2, 2022 23:37:18 GMT blacksheep21 said:

Where can it be seen?

Clubber, match stream is still there

I did nt see the incident and I've no intention of paying a tenner to watch it but what I will say is the player you mentioned shocked me. Many view incidents differently depending on which team you support. If you are a Narries supporter maybe you think it was a terrible act but maybe others might think it's accidental. In 1996 I recall the infamous Martin Ó Connell Brian Dooher incident where Ó Connell was accused of stamping on Dooher head. O Connell to this day says it was accidental but it looked bad. Niall Morgan broke Paddy Andrews jaw but apologised after saying he never meant it. I believe him but many of my Dub friends don't. Yet when John Small broke McLaughlin jaw in a very similar incident the same people said it was an accident eventhough Small never commented. The player you mentioned is normally clean and I have heard anyone else claim he committed this bad act. Now if true its a horrible act and should be highlighted but as I've stated I can't comment myself on the alleged incident as I did nt see it.

[Moderator]

The account of a stamping incident was indeed posted. I didn't see the incident. Other posters said the ref consulted with umpires and no action was taken (rightly or wrongly).

That should have been the end of the matter.

But a certain poster kept bringing it up, over and over, to the point it became tedious.

Complaints were received and the posts removed...that's how this forum works.

[ciarraimick]

Dec 3, 2022 23:33:40 GMT Moderator said:

The account of a stamping incident was indeed posted. I didn't see the incident. Other posters said the ref consulted with umpires and no action was taken (rightly or wrongly).

That should have been the end of the matter.

But a certain poster kept bringing it up, over and over, to the point it became tedious.

Complaints were received and the posts removed...that's how this forum works.

Fair enough

[Annascaultilidie]

Nobody needs to be insulted with an explanation of the pros and cons of Veteran.

However the the scéal is the poster flounced over a totally innocuous deletion of a comment. I think I saw the comment. I didn't think it delete worthy at all. And it was deleted.

So bloody what.

Veteran chose to flounce on it. It is our loss I agree, but his choice to take that line. It's an internet forum to talk about football. It isn't High St.

[kerrybhoy06]

Dec 3, 2022 23:33:40 GMT Moderator said:

The account of a stamping incident was indeed posted. I didn't see the incident. Other posters said the ref consulted with umpires and no action was taken (rightly or wrongly).

That should have been the end of the matter.

But a certain poster kept bringing it up, over and over, to the point it became tedious.

Complaints were received and the posts removed...that's how this forum works.

But I can’t see how a complaint could be upheld over something that happened. That’s where it becomes censorship.

And it was brought up over and over- this all happened within 1 day and within the context of one conversation.

Just because someone complains about an incident doesnt mean that the post should be taken down, especially when it has happened and it’s odd that the posts were taken down when the moderator has said that they didn’t even see the incident.

There are lots of incidents that refs don’t see or deal with at the time- can they never be discussed?

[Moderator]

Posts get deleted after complaints. The bone of contention and/or the complainant need not be revealed.

[blacksheep21]

Dec 4, 2022 7:57:40 GMT Moderator said:

Posts get deleted after complaints. The bone of contention and/or the complainant need not be revealed.

Just to clarify, if anyone complains re a post does that post get deleted?

[Moderator]

blacksheep21...I direct you to the “Notice to all contributors” thread at the top of the General Board.

That should clear up most things.

But not every post gets deleted.

[kerrybhoy06]

Dec 4, 2022 7:57:40 GMT Moderator said:

Posts get deleted after complaints. The bone of contention and/or the complainant need not be revealed.

I do understand and agree that moderating is a good thing but as I said in a previous post- the complaint function is used as a crutch for people who either aren’t getting their way in a discussion or who want to shout down an incident that they are unhappy with.

Anyways I’m happy to leave it go from here and I am appreciative of the work that you guys do in running the forum- so thank you for giving us a place to discuss Kerry football.

[Control5]

Dec 4, 2022 9:43:25 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

Dec 4, 2022 7:57:40 GMT Moderator said:

Posts get deleted after complaints. The bone of contention and/or the complainant need not be revealed.

I do understand and agree that moderating is a good thing but as I said in a previous post- the complaint function is used as a crutch for people who either aren’t getting their way in a discussion or who want to shout down an incident that they are unhappy with.

Anyways I’m happy to leave it go from here and I am appreciative of the work that you guys do in running the forum- so thank you for giving us a place to discuss Kerry football.

I am a moderator here since 2008 and not once have i seen that happen.
That's 14 years.
It is an insult to other posters and it should be withdrawn. It is totally inaccurate and you have no basis for saying it.

Complaints are invariably received from posters who have nothing to do or involved in a particular discussion.

Lots of complaints over the years are not acted upon.

Moderator had confirmed that not all posts get deleted and you made your allegation after that. You are impugning the integrity of the Moderators.

Moderators do some posters a favour occasionally by deleting what has been said as it protects them from a possible day in court as some posts are slanderous. For example, would you be more circumspect about an alleged incident recently if you were writing a letter to The Kerryman and putting your name and address at the end of it. Using a username puts a greater onus on posters to be careful about what has been said. So i think you in particular have good reason to be grateful to moderators.


General comment
I welcome the news that the county board are going to engage a solicitor to police message boards. It will probably take the danger away of moderators being sued when someone is slandered. It is unclear.

I operate as Control 5. The other one is 'Moderator' who volunteered to do the job in December 2020 in the midst of the covid era. I was glad that happened as it wasnt easy then. 'Moderator' takes a far stricter line that me but there are no guidelines other than what is on the main page about 'keeping things fair and accurate etc. Referees differ in games as well as on message boards. Another person operates as Control 3 but is seldom on here.

I hope this helps clear up some of the issues and concerns.

[Control3]

Dec 4, 2022 11:12:41 GMT Control5 said:

Dec 4, 2022 9:43:25 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

I do understand and agree that moderating is a good thing but as I said in a previous post- the complaint function is used as a crutch for people who either aren’t getting their way in a discussion or who want to shout down an incident that they are unhappy with.

Anyways I’m happy to leave it go from here and I am appreciative of the work that you guys do in running the forum- so thank you for giving us a place to discuss Kerry football.

I am a moderator here since 2008 and not once have i seen that happen.
That's 14 years.
It is an insult to other posters and it should be withdrawn. It is totally inaccurate and you have no basis for saying it.

Complaints are invariably received from posters who have nothing to do or involved in a particular discussion.

Lots of complaints over the years are not acted upon.

Moderator had confirmed that not all posts get deleted and you made your allegation after that. You are impugning the integrity of the Moderators.

Moderators do some posters a favour occasionally by deleting what has been said as it protects them from a possible day in court as some posts are slanderous. For example, would you be more circumspect about an alleged incident recently if you were writing a letter to The Kerryman and putting your name and address at the end of it. Using a username puts a greater onus on posters to be careful about what has been said. So i think you in particular have good reason to be grateful to moderators.


General comment
I welcome the news that the county board are going to engage a solicitor to police message boards. It will probably take the danger away of moderators being sued when someone is slandered. It is unclear.

I operate as Control 5. The other one is 'Moderator' who volunteered to do the job in December 2020 in the midst of the covid era. I was glad that happened as it wasnt easy then. 'Moderator' takes a far stricter line that me but there are no guidelines other than what is on the main page about 'keeping things fair and accurate etc. Referees differ in games as well as on message boards. Another person operates as Control 3 but is seldom on here.

I hope this helps clear up some of the issues and concerns.

I agree with everything said by my colleagues in the moderation team. Having been a moderator on this forum since it was re-instated in 2007 I can categorically state posts aren't deleted purely based on requests or complaints made by other posters. If we operated a policy of removing posts each time we receive a request or complaint there would be little by way of content.

If Veteran has decided to take offence and leave the forum. That is his own prerogative. The moderators do no take members 'status' perceived or otherwise into account when deciding on issues around content.

As for me seldom being on here. I am always lurking in the background
Moderator and Control5 are really on the ball so my interventions aren't needed.

[Ballyfireside]

Vets reports were, well they bridged that gap if you didn't see the game.

The problem is that nobody ever disagreed with him and so while we have no benchmark, still I'd say he wasn't far off the mark, generally.

What used to annoy me was his often unnecessary use of unusual words and I'd doubt if I was in the minority here, so to get his point you had to use a dictionary and which interrupted the flow of thought, and that he was good was, well it was 'full on flow.'

And yip while he takes a view on things and like all auld lads while he's as stubborn as stubborn, I think his take was generally respected if not always agreed with.

Still out of respect and given that he was part and parcel of the forum, maybe moderators might reshow a bit of the evidence, but just for a few days and it again gets re-deleted regardless. Then we call all move on, the longer these things go on the less likely they are ever to be resolved and, ah sure he enjoys posting too, and he has served us well, even if he does keep reminding us of the superiority of his UCC education!

[kerrybhoy06]

Dec 4, 2022 11:12:41 GMT Control5 said:

Dec 4, 2022 9:43:25 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

I do understand and agree that moderating is a good thing but as I said in a previous post- the complaint function is used as a crutch for people who either aren’t getting their way in a discussion or who want to shout down an incident that they are unhappy with.

Anyways I’m happy to leave it go from here and I am appreciative of the work that you guys do in running the forum- so thank you for giving us a place to discuss Kerry football.

I am a moderator here since 2008 and not once have i seen that happen.
That's 14 years.
It is an insult to other posters and it should be withdrawn. It is totally inaccurate and you have no basis for saying it.

Complaints are invariably received from posters who have nothing to do or involved in a particular discussion.

Lots of complaints over the years are not acted upon.

Moderator had confirmed that not all posts get deleted and you made your allegation after that. You are impugning the integrity of the Moderators.

Moderators do some posters a favour occasionally by deleting what has been said as it protects them from a possible day in court as some posts are slanderous. For example, would you be more circumspect about an alleged incident recently if you were writing a letter to The Kerryman and putting your name and address at the end of it. Using a username puts a greater onus on posters to be careful about what has been said. So i think you in particular have good reason to be grateful to moderators.


General comment
I welcome the news that the county board are going to engage a solicitor to police message boards. It will probably take the danger away of moderators being sued when someone is slandered. It is unclear.

I operate as Control 5. The other one is 'Moderator' who volunteered to do the job in December 2020 in the midst of the covid era. I was glad that happened as it wasnt easy then. 'Moderator' takes a far stricter line that me but there are no guidelines other than what is on the main page about 'keeping things fair and accurate etc. Referees differ in games as well as on message boards. Another person operates as Control 3 but is seldom on here.

I hope this helps clear up some of the issues and concerns.

Discussion on an incident that occurred and can be clearly viewed by anyone who wants to view it- was taken down and posters were told not to discuss it again due to a complaint about it.

How could it be seen any other way? The fact that the incident happened is irrefutable if you watch the match.

It wasn’t a false allegation, it was 100% accurate to call it out yet a complaint ended up stifling and eventually killing the ability to discuss the incident.

I can’t see how the complaint and subsequent banning of discussion in the topic can be seen as anything other what I have outlined

[ciarraimick]

Dec 4, 2022 14:46:02 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

Dec 4, 2022 11:12:41 GMT Control5 said:

I am a moderator here since 2008 and not once have i seen that happen.
That's 14 years.
It is an insult to other posters and it should be withdrawn. It is totally inaccurate and you have no basis for saying it.

Complaints are invariably received from posters who have nothing to do or involved in a particular discussion.

Lots of complaints over the years are not acted upon.

Moderator had confirmed that not all posts get deleted and you made your allegation after that. You are impugning the integrity of the Moderators.

Moderators do some posters a favour occasionally by deleting what has been said as it protects them from a possible day in court as some posts are slanderous. For example, would you be more circumspect about an alleged incident recently if you were writing a letter to The Kerryman and putting your name and address at the end of it. Using a username puts a greater onus on posters to be careful about what has been said. So i think you in particular have good reason to be grateful to moderators.


General comment
I welcome the news that the county board are going to engage a solicitor to police message boards. It will probably take the danger away of moderators being sued when someone is slandered. It is unclear.

I operate as Control 5. The other one is 'Moderator' who volunteered to do the job in December 2020 in the midst of the covid era. I was glad that happened as it wasnt easy then. 'Moderator' takes a far stricter line that me but there are no guidelines other than what is on the main page about 'keeping things fair and accurate etc. Referees differ in games as well as on message boards. Another person operates as Control 3 but is seldom on here.

I hope this helps clear up some of the issues and concerns.

Discussion on an incident that occurred and can be clearly viewed by anyone who wants to view it- was taken down and posters were told not to discuss it again due to a complaint about it.

How could it be seen any other way? The fact that the incident happened is irrefutable if you watch the match.

It wasn’t a false allegation, it was 100% accurate to call it out yet a complaint ended up stifling and eventually killing the ability to discuss the incident.

I can’t see how the complaint and subsequent banning of discussion in the topic can be seen as anything other what I have outlined

Another poster said you have to pay 10e on clubber to see the alleged incident. I don't think many are going to pay that to see a few seconds incident so it cannot be clearly viewed by everyone. Also not one other poster collaborated your view. Now I'm not for one second doubting your statement but maybe your allegiance might have affected your judgement or else there is a silence because the player involved is a county player.

[mike70]

Dec 4, 2022 15:44:31 GMT ciarraimick said:

Dec 4, 2022 14:46:02 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

Discussion on an incident that occurred and can be clearly viewed by anyone who wants to view it- was taken down and posters were told not to discuss it again due to a complaint about it.

How could it be seen any other way? The fact that the incident happened is irrefutable if you watch the match.

It wasn’t a false allegation, it was 100% accurate to call it out yet a complaint ended up stifling and eventually killing the ability to discuss the incident.

I can’t see how the complaint and subsequent banning of discussion in the topic can be seen as anything other what I have outlined

Another poster said you have to pay 10e on clubber to see the alleged incident. I don't think many are going to pay that to see a few seconds incident so it cannot be clearly viewed by everyone. Also not one other poster collaborated your view. Now I'm not for one second doubting your statement but maybe your allegiance might have affected your judgement or else there is a silence because the player involved is a county player.

For what it’s worth, no need to doubt the man, it happened, I saw the clip, anyway time to move on, let’s park the acrimony, we are one kerry.

[Control5]

Dec 4, 2022 14:46:02 GMT kerrybhoy06 said:

Dec 4, 2022 11:12:41 GMT Control5 said:

I am a moderator here since 2008 and not once have i seen that happen.
That's 14 years.
It is an insult to other posters and it should be withdrawn. It is totally inaccurate and you have no basis for saying it.

Complaints are invariably received from posters who have nothing to do or involved in a particular discussion.

Lots of complaints over the years are not acted upon.

Moderator had confirmed that not all posts get deleted and you made your allegation after that. You are impugning the integrity of the Moderators.

Moderators do some posters a favour occasionally by deleting what has been said as it protects them from a possible day in court as some posts are slanderous. For example, would you be more circumspect about an alleged incident recently if you were writing a letter to The Kerryman and putting your name and address at the end of it. Using a username puts a greater onus on posters to be careful about what has been said. So i think you in particular have good reason to be grateful to moderators.


General comment
I welcome the news that the county board are going to engage a solicitor to police message boards. It will probably take the danger away of moderators being sued when someone is slandered. It is unclear.

I operate as Control 5. The other one is 'Moderator' who volunteered to do the job in December 2020 in the midst of the covid era. I was glad that happened as it wasnt easy then. 'Moderator' takes a far stricter line that me but there are no guidelines other than what is on the main page about 'keeping things fair and accurate etc. Referees differ in games as well as on message boards. Another person operates as Control 3 but is seldom on here.

I hope this helps clear up some of the issues and concerns.

Discussion on an incident that occurred and can be clearly viewed by anyone who wants to view it- was taken down and posters were told not to discuss it again due to a complaint about it.

How could it be seen any other way? The fact that the incident happened is irrefutable if you watch the match.

It wasn’t a false allegation, it was 100% accurate to call it out yet a complaint ended up stifling and eventually killing the ability to discuss the incident.

I can’t see how the complaint and subsequent banning of discussion in the topic can be seen as anything other what I have outlined

Moderators have minds of their own.

I do not need a complaint in order to act.

Do you still believe that posters complain to Moderators because they are losing an argument?

Or that Moderators would fall for that?

[Control5]

Dec 4, 2022 16:18:17 GMT kerryexile said:

If you look at the beneficiaries of these actions an unhealthy pattern emerges.

What exactly are you implying?

Who are the benefiaries?

And what are they benefitting from?

And what is the pattern?

[ciarraimick]

Dec 4, 2022 15:58:15 GMT mike70 said:

Dec 4, 2022 15:44:31 GMT ciarraimick said:

Another poster said you have to pay 10e on clubber to see the alleged incident. I don't think many are going to pay that to see a few seconds incident so it cannot be clearly viewed by everyone. Also not one other poster collaborated your view. Now I'm not for one second doubting your statement but maybe your allegiance might have affected your judgement or else there is a silence because the player involved is a county player.

For what it’s worth, no need to doubt the man, it happened, I saw the clip, anyway time to move on, let’s park the acrimony, we are one kerry.

I was nt doubting Kerrybhoy at all. I was simply implying that people see different things and no one collaborated what he saw. Now you did which makes it clearer.

[blacksheep21]

Dec 4, 2022 16:18:17 GMT kerryexile said:

I didn't see the deleted posts but can gather what they were about and roughly what was said.

kerrybhoy06 is correct. Moderator / Control3 / Control5 have a difficult job to do but what happened was not an opinion or hypothetical, it was on video, there for all to see. For that reason deleting it was erring on the wrong side of balanced management. And it is difficult to give them the benefit of the doubt as it is not the first time something like this happened. A whole thread disappeared a couple of years ago. If you look at the beneficiaries of these actions an unhealthy pattern emerges.

The readership of this forum extends away beyond Kerry supporters. A part of the appeal is the honest, robust discussion. Would it hold the numbers if the posts were from "yes men" and altar boys and the female equivalents? Maybe now that we have legal and social media professionals available more transparent guidelines could be published. If the specific reason why a complaint was upheld, was given, we could all learn from it.

You didn’t see the deleted posts so how can you criticise the moderators. I think I did read most of the comments - regardless of the right or wrongs of the incident which I did not see, I can see why a couple of them might have been deleted as they were quite strong. However it is a pity, that we cannot see the incident without paying 10 euro as it is a fair topic for debate and highlighting so I have sympathy with Kerrybhoy on this score.

[Control5]

Dec 4, 2022 16:47:32 GMT blacksheep21 said:

Dec 4, 2022 16:18:17 GMT kerryexile said:

I didn't see the deleted posts but can gather what they were about and roughly what was said.

kerrybhoy06 is correct. Moderator / Control3 / Control5 have a difficult job to do but what happened was not an opinion or hypothetical, it was on video, there for all to see. For that reason deleting it was erring on the wrong side of balanced management. And it is difficult to give them the benefit of the doubt as it is not the first time something like this happened. A whole thread disappeared a couple of years ago. If you look at the beneficiaries of these actions an unhealthy pattern emerges.

The readership of this forum extends away beyond Kerry supporters. A part of the appeal is the honest, robust discussion. Would it hold the numbers if the posts were from "yes men" and altar boys and the female equivalents? Maybe now that we have legal and social media professionals available more transparent guidelines could be published. If the specific reason why a complaint was upheld, was given, we could all learn from it.

I think I did read most of the comments - regardless of the right or wrongs of the incident which I did not see, I can see why a couple of them might have been deleted as they were quite strong.

Using words (while hiding behind a username) like scum and scummy is hardly on?

Moderators must protect themselves too from being complicit in slander.

[Ballyfireside]

From what I understand here, we all agree on the subject in broad terms, i.e. we all want the same thing, but we are falling down on the particular incident and which is why I suggested that a gist of the dispute is put up temporarily and so people can at least see what it is they are talking about, that is apart from a video clip of the incident.

I know Vet was being a bit ambitious but in fairness we should him a bit of slack, his heart is in the right place.

[Aodhan]

Dec 4, 2022 13:53:19 GMT Ballyfireside said:

Vets reports were, well they bridged that gap if you didn't see the game.

The problem is that nobody ever disagreed with him and so while we have no benchmark, still I'd say he wasn't far off the mark, generally.

What used to annoy me was his often unnecessary use of unusual words and I'd doubt if I was in the minority here, so to get his point you had to use a dictionary and which interrupted the flow of thought, and that he was good was, well it was 'full on flow.'

And yip while he takes a view on things and like all auld lads while he's as stubborn as stubborn, I think his take was generally respected if not always agreed with.

Still out of respect and given that he was part and parcel of the forum, maybe moderators might reshow a bit of the evidence, but just for a few days and it again gets re-deleted regardless. Then we call all move on, the longer these things go on the less likely they are ever to be resolved and, ah sure he enjoys posting too, and he has served us well, even if he does keep reminding us of the superiority of his UCC education!

Once in a while my world aligns with my good friend and part time nemesis, Ballyfireside. For the good of the Forum, the evidence as to why Veteran's posts were deleted needs to be made clear for all to see. Pointing us toward the rules of the forum is not the answer as the reasons cannot be found there.

This seems like a personal vendetta against Veteran unless proved otherwise. Personal opinions should never interfere with the rules and should not be swayed by the mob. Some members have since made a reference to Veteran's knowledgeable world views, even as much as calling them ludicrous, how that post still stands is baffling. Defamation written all over it. Unfortunately Alternate Reality rules the roost, not only on this forum but life in general.

No forum member has to my knowledge come out and said they agree with the deletions, as usual the complaining cowards are hiding again. We all need to learn from this and see evidence as to why the posts were deleted. Post the complaints with names redacted, surely there was more than one. Point out what rule or rules were broken. If Moderators are not comfortable with posting the evidence on an open forum, broadcast a PM.

All was great with the world again when Kerry lifted Sam, didn't last long, the bickering has started again.

It is possible that this post will also be up for deletion due in no small part to childlike complaints. Great as this forum is, it does at times lean toward Dorsey and Zuckerbergism.