Towcars re-Bye byel200 xc90

[Jimbob1]

Mr Moderator,

I am quite amazed at the way the conversation beetween two people has been allowed to go on so long on the Towcar section of this Forum one of being quite a contributor to this section surely if these people need to converse wouldn't it be better for them to converse by e-mail as the subject seems to taking up a fair amount of space, uninteresting at that.Please don't think I'm a miserable old F**T but some people do go on somewhat.Jim

 

[Parksy]

If two people want to converse about their towcars in the towcar section via the forum that's up to them. If you find their views uninteresting then don't read them!

I find the idea that any subject takes up 'space' ludicrous - This is a website.

 

[Dustydog]

Well said Parksy,

What has created many excellent friendships over the years is the "social intercourse" between members. If Jimbob had his way such friendships would never develop. A lot of us do meet up during the year enjoying our caravan hobby .

Jimbob,

A car is a very expensive purchase and I for one like to suck everyones brains just to confirm I am spending my hard earned cash wisely. That in my opinion is one of the excellent facets of a forum.

Cheers

Alan

 

[Gareth_374362591]

yeah well said parksy me and jo-anne have become buddies over the last few months and so have many others there is no point having a forum if you cant talk on it so thumbs up to you mate

well done

gareth

 

[Jo-AnneFairway5402010]

gareth and i have become mates over the last few months. alan and i and our partners have become friends and met up last year for a holiday. alan actually helped us buy the wyoming and we talk about 3-4 times a week.

keep up the forum chat

jo-anne

 

[Jimbob1]

Parksy(Moderator)

I must say I didn't mention any names in my thread but obviously I've tapped a few on raw nerves.Its amazing how some people jump.Jim

 

[Parksy]

Quite frankly Jimbob your original post has no point other than to attempt up stir up trouble on the forum.

Your second post reinforces my view that you are trying to wind people up.

 

[Jo-AnneFairway5402010]

here here parksy

 

[Guest]

One could take a jaundiced view and suggest he did achieve his objective, perhaps...

 

[Parksy]

Generally speaking I often wonder what those who critisise other forum members or submit posts which appear to aim to antagonise others hope to achieve on this forum. OK in this case a short term objective might be achieved but let's consider the bigger picture.

Returning to generalities about no one in particular -

What is their motivation? Is it because they are bored or they feel that the forum lacks excitement?

If that is truly the case then why don't they post on a livelier website such as Facebook or one of the forums which are associated with tabloid newspapers?

I'm not directing my comments specifically but I have to say that although a post designed to wind up others might create a minor ripple and some mild amusement on this forum the implications for those who submit what may be considered as 'flame' topics can be slightly more far reaching.

They are certainly assured of my undivided attention for a while and while this isn't in any respect a threat one of the routine tasks that a forum moderator performs is to scan all submitted posts in a sort of 'speed reading' fashion.

Guess which names are guaranteed immediately to draw the eye for closer scrutiny? ;0)

 

[Guest]

Looking at the time of your Post indicates it is near the 'witching hour' and possibly a time when philosophy can become assertive. I am usually in bed at that time, but do admit to having to get up far too many times for comfort.

However, I think you have answered many of your questions yourself. People, or humanity is one of the few species that takes pleasure from inflicting pain or death on others unfortunately. If not, we would be a much more peaceful species and certainly not Hellbent on destroying our own nests.

People criticise because they feel that some form of 'slight' has been presented against them. It, of course may not have been the original intention but as is usual a small bone of contention can easily become a torrent. Of course, on the other hand questioning a supposition is often the way to learning and improvement, so determining what is unwarranted criticism, and what is merely genuine enquiry, is often hard to distinguish. To be a Moderator requires the wisdom of Solomon, and even then somebody will not be happy.

The submission of Posts that supposedly cause 'antagonism' is another grey area. What some may feel is antagonistic, may to others, merely be a suitable point of discussion to ascertain various opinions. It is not expected that all will agree at the end of the day. Yes, we could all stick to factual questions on caravanning topics, but I suspect the interest of many would soon diminish, and do we really wish to become the caravan equivalent of 'anoraks at the end of station platforms with notebooks'?

It would be ideal if everything submitted was in 'good taste' but even here the definition is so foggy as to be unanswerable. For example some of the older generation feel that M...a is certainly not in good taste but others feel she is a superstar and flock to her Concerts. I personally feel the language of G R...ay, the chef, is not in good taste, but others disagree.

However, on a final point I would ask that if there is indeed a 'hit list' of recalcitrant Forum members, then those that are on that list should at least be given the courtesy of being made aware of it.

 

[Parksy]

Hi Scotch Lad

The reason that I added my 'philosophical' third post is because my initial reaction to Jimbob's questions that were addressed to moderators appears to be a bit harsh and dismissive.

This has also been pointed out to me by those who's opinions I respect and value so I attempted to explain matters from the moderators side of the fence in greater depth.

There aren't many moderators on this forum and much like anyone else I am subject to time pressure during the day. Hell hath no fury and all that ...........

On one hand the moderators try to keep the forum running by tidying up duplicate posts, forwarding email addresses and normal mundane activities of that nature.

On the other hand this forum is hosted by a major publishing company and it carries the name of the magazine which it represents. When posts containing real argument and ill feeling apear on the forum the moderators have to make a fairly rapid decision about what action to take if any. If we don't act fairly quickly things can quickly escalate so an instant snapshot or judgment call is needed.

Where in our opinion forum rules have been broken whether inadvertantly or not we have to act. Regardless of our personal opinion if we allow one through we have to allow them all through.

Your point about human nature is spot on, we all sometimes sit at the keyboard and feel slighted or angry and moderators are no different to anyone else on the forum. We do our best to remain objective but it can be difficult for anyone if they feel that they are under attack and the 'red mist' has to be controlled and pride swallowed sometimes.

I like the 'widom of Solomon' comment and in order to answer it please forgive me for paraphrasing a quote from 'The Life of Brian' -

'He's NOT Solomon, he's a Very Naughty Boy!!'

Let me put forum members minds at rest by the way and say that say that no, there is not a 'hit list' of recalcitrant forum members.

If I have occasion to delete or edit a post I save it in case of later dispute either between forum members, companies or forum admin (or any combination of the above.)

We are subject to scrutiny and dates, times and the names of those concerned in disputes can be important to the forum administrator.

It helps to create a clear overall picture for the administrator who represents Haymarket Publishing to decide what action to take if necessary.

I added the comment about which names I look at first in an admittedly clumsy attempt to end my previous post on a lighthearted note but my joke has backfired.

I can only define what constitutes 'antagonism' with the benefit of hindsight. If normal banter is exchanged it may at first glance appear to be antagonistic but the originator of the post may not have meant it to be taken that way. I try if I can to see how things develop but if one forum member appears to launch an attack on another forum member I'd begin to think that antagonism had occured. If this continued, more especially if I'd joined the thread and posted a bit of a warning then I'd have to decide what to do next. I'd say that the needle by this time would definitely be pointing toward the red 'antagonistic' zone on the moderator alert dial.

Going back to my point about the forum carrying the name of the magazine, there was a time when this forum resembled the Wild West and regular insults were exchanged between groups of long standing forum members on a regular basis. This was great fun for the participants in these exchanges and very entertaining at times for the rest of us. Oh how we laughed!

Not so funny for the reputation of the magazine though when those who were new to caravanning or others with questions or information would shy away from contributing to the forum and post on several other forums that Practical Caravan forum was unfriendly, clique ridden and unhelpful. I've seen these posts on other forums and couldn't deny that they had elements of truth, the perception of this forum was and still is in some cases very negative.

It's difficult to decide where suitable discussion and reasonable disagreement ends and ill feeling and insult begin.

You're right in saying that if the forum becomes too 'train spotter' then we will lose a valuable element of the forum but the bad old days of traveller rants, dogs'n'kids wind ups, political posts lifted from certain newspapers etc are gone for good.

If members of the forum really want to participate in debates about politics, race, immigration etc then they would do best to join one of the multitude of websites that host debates of that nature. They are better at hosting that sort of thing than us and have more and better recources to moderate such topics.

Again we can only rely on hindsight to decide if the 'line' has been crossed and I apologise to those who may feel that I've misjudged them or treated them badly.

Good taste is subjective as you point out and the final arbiter of good taste on this forum is the members themselves.

If there are howls of protest about offensive content in any given post then I would take it that the post had crossed the boundaries of what a significant number of forum members would be prepared to accept. On the other hand in the recent Jonathan Ross/ Russell Brand topic there were differing opinions aired on the forum without any major issues that would concern the forum moderators.

Moderators can only react as objectively as we can to posts after the event as we see them but there's no guarantee that we will be right.

Like cricket umpires, if we raise a bony finger and point toward the pavilion to give 'out ' we have spectators who will be watching and who then will decide if we were right but there will be a good proportion of the crowd who will be certain that we are not.

 

[Guest]

Thank you for your comprehensive response. I did not intend this to become a discussion, I only submitted my 'one liner' because it seemed to me that your 'put down' had actually caused the participants of the Post in question, to cease. Whether this was a result, or just coincidence, is not clear.

No, you do not have to justify your decisions as a Moderator, that is a 'perk' of the job, if that is the right word. Us mere members may grumble and complain but at the end of the day, as you mention also, it is 'off to the pavilion' time, or as the Yanks seem to call it nowadays, 'the sin bin'.

I think you are being a little unfair in stating that opinion of the Forum is negative from outside Parties. Yes, there was a time when a few members seemed to be hogging the limelight, and yes, there was a certain degree of humour attached. It was indeed a bit of fun, although like many TV Comedy Shows, forgot when to stop. However, there are always cliques developing in a ny group of people and other Forums are certainly no better. In addition, there will always be people sitting on the periphery, who are wanting to join, but are restricted by either shyness, or fear of being laughed at. One can only hope that if any are reading this and feel they are in that category, then please 'jump in'. Start with technical questions and advance to other more general topics. I actually feel that this Forum having the commercial PC Magazine behind it, is a better format as it is far more impartial, just as long as certain commercial boundaries are not crossed. This is probably very wise as I read that in the US a model is suing a website to get the identity of a contributor who made extremely disparaging comments about her. If she succeeds, Heaven help the contributor.

I don't totally agree with the removal of all Posts on non- caravanning matters. We all live in a volatile and complex world, and what happens around us concerns us all. For example, as a result of our so called 'credit crunch' I read that advance bookings are up 40% and that more and more people have decided that caravanning is to be their holiday of choice this year. That is fine from one standpoint, but can the system cope is another question. We will no doubt see the results throughout the year.

My final comment on the 'hit list' was tongue in cheek as I did recognise that your comment was not literal. However, just to be on the safe side, I thought I would ask.

 

[Parksy]

I'm glad of your contribution Scotch Lad because it's given me the opportunity to put a humble moderators point of view about the forum and to hopefully dispel a few myths.

I'm always happy to discuss with those affected the reasons behind any decision that I may make and I do this both on the forum and privately via email.

I know that at times my actions may seem arbitary and unjustified so although theres no compulsion to do so I'm happy to account for my actions.

The moderators are not the masters of this forum or it's members,we're the servants.

I look in to many caravan related forums on the internet just to try and keep abreast of happenings and to seek confirmation of rumours etc. The reputation of this forum has in the recent past suffered if some of the posts on other forums that I once read are to be believed.

I can only hope that as a forum we are now more friendly and helpful than was the general perception at times and we owe a lot to the members of this forum who despite the occasional spat regularly contribute posts containing debate, good humour and information.

Contrary to what may be the overall perception very few posts are actually removed from this forum.

The fact that the moderators are now identifiable and post under out own names (in common with other forums) can sometimes make this forum appear to be over moderated but not every post that we make is in connection with forum moderation.

A glance at the 'New Members' section of the forum will show a healthy influx of fellow caravanners wishing to take part in our forum and they are very welcome indeed.

It would count as a minor miracle if every forum member agreed with a moderators decisions and some issues are bound to be contentious but the forum continues to roll merrily along despite the technical limitations and quirkyness that it operates under and of course our members vote with their keyboards and mice in the end.

 

[Jimbob1]

I'm glad of your contribution Scotch Lad because it's given me the opportunity to put a humble moderators point of view about the forum and to hopefully dispel a few myths.

I'm always happy to discuss with those affected the reasons behind any decision that I may make and I do this both on the forum and privately via email.

I know that at times my actions may seem arbitary and unjustified so although theres no compulsion to do so I'm happy to account for my actions.

The moderators are not the masters of this forum or it's members,we're the servants.

I look in to many caravan related forums on the internet just to try and keep abreast of happenings and to seek confirmation of rumours etc. The reputation of this forum has in the recent past suffered if some of the posts on other forums that I once read are to be believed.

I can only hope that as a forum we are now more friendly and helpful than was the general perception at times and we owe a lot to the members of this forum who despite the occasional spat regularly contribute posts containing debate, good humour and information.

Contrary to what may be the overall perception very few posts are actually removed from this forum.

The fact that the moderators are now identifiable and post under out own names (in common with other forums) can sometimes make this forum appear to be over moderated but not every post that we make is in connection with forum moderation.

A glance at the 'New Members' section of the forum will show a healthy influx of fellow caravanners wishing to take part in our forum and they are very welcome indeed.

It would count as a minor miracle if every forum member agreed with a moderators decisions and some issues are bound to be contentious but the forum continues to roll merrily along despite the technical limitations and quirkyness that it operates under and of course our members vote with their keyboards and mice in the end.

Hi,

Just like to applaud the threads written up by Scotchlad and Parksy what you both have said makes one hell of lot of good sense.Thanks Parksy for clearing up the hit list business.Have a good day.Jimbob

 

[Parksy]

Hi,

Just like to applaud the threads written up by Scotchlad and Parksy what you both have said makes one hell of lot of good sense.Thanks Parksy for clearing up the hit list business.Have a good day.Jimbob

Many thanks Jimbob :0)