Gray1 Vendor Tag

[zupcon]

Well a whole weeks passed, and still no sign of the vendor tag being applied despite promises by the moderators

Perhaps the mods need to consult piggsy ?

you should hang your heads in shame, how can you even think about giving up your time free of charge to assist a site that happily allows "special members" (pigsy's mate) to shaft all and sundry

take a good hard look at the evidence, and do the right thing. Why is Grey1 a "special" case LOL. Absolutly pathetic.

 

[N Rothschild]

can someone fill me in i feel like im missing something!

 

[Lightning McQueen]

The latest buzz is that they are not going ahead with the venture, see this post. If this is true then that would change everything, there will be no reason to push for a vendor tag and admin would have been right to hold off from applying it hastily, the deadline only being three days late anyway.

Perhaps JayJay and/or grey1 would care to comment on this news?

 

[candles]

Grey's left the forum for good.

 

[Lightning McQueen]

He was online yesterday?

 

[vegas]

The latest buzz is that they are not going ahead with the venture, see this post. If this is true then that would change everything, there will be no reason to push for a vendor tag and admin would have been right to hold off from applying it hastily, the deadline only being three days late anyway.

Perhaps JayJay and/or grey1 would care to comment on this news?

Does'nt seem right that as the reason for 'this venture' been pulled was probably due in no small part to some TT members 'outing' these practices on both the TT board and the main board itself, in the first place, that those members concerned can just now resume back on 2tw as if nothing has ever happened, and importantly with no vendor tag, whereas the members who raised the issue in the first place, remained banned from the private forum.

Surely, this tastes a little odd. Does this mean that any vendor can get his or her tag removed just by 'another' member declaring that the vendor is no longer active.
Hmmmmmmmm

 

[belflan]

The latest buzz is that they are not going ahead with the venture,?

hi LMc,

I'm not sure if jj is going ahead with the venture (or in what form). all i said\meant was he will not be charging for grey's services (as in the past, for years and years, grey is helping other traders for freee)

belflan

 

[Lightning McQueen]

Does'nt seem right that as the reason for 'this venture' been pulled was probably due in no small part to some TT members 'outing' these practices on both the TT board and the main board itself, in the first place, that those members concerned can just now resume back on 2tw as if nothing has ever happened, and importantly with no vendor tag, whereas the members who raised the issue in the first place, remained banned from the private forum.

Surely, this tastes a little odd. Does this mean that any vendor can get his or her tag removed just by 'another' member declaring that the vendor is no longer active.
Hmmmmmmmm

I agree it is all rather complicated but if grey1 is genuinely not selling of any of his work through JayJay's web site and their paltalk rooms are seperate entities, and he has distanced himself from any commercial activity, then surely he doesn't need a tag, sure the evidence is there of the intention to go commercial, I don't know how far off the ground it got, if at all. anyway that's all my personal view btw.

Also, as you say there is the problem of banned tt members and the future for the tt forum, I can only suggest that bridges are for building.

hi LMc,

I'm not sure if jj is going ahead with the venture (or in what form). all i said\meant was he will not be charging for grey's services (as in the past, for years and years, grey is helping other traders for freee)

belflan

Hi mate
JayJay can obviously do as he wishes, he is no longer a member of this site and apologies if I have misunderstood or misrepresented your post that I linked, but I just got a feeling from it that if grey was not on board then maybe jj may have misgivings of starting it up, perhaps the whole idea may not have been as well received as he first thought, just a hunch all imo of course.

 

[zupcon]

The latest buzz is that they are not going ahead with the venture, see this post. If this is true then that would change everything, there will be no reason to push for a vendor tag and admin would have been right to hold off from applying it hastily, the deadline only being three days late anyway.

Perhaps JayJay and/or grey1 would care to comment on this news?

so that makes everything alright then ?

why did admin "hold off" in this particular case ?, is it perhaps its because "some members are more equal than others" ? what makes these particular members "more equal"

The website's still there, IPR is still being offered for sale (and in the unlikely event anyone would purchase, Grey1 recieving his "royalty payments")

Whats the score here, is it a commercial transaction, personal friendship, inept moderation. What is it exactly that allows 2 members to blatently violate terms and conditions, where others would be prevented from doing so. Why exactly cant the moderators be honest about this particular situation, what exactly are you trying to hide ?

 

[Lightning McQueen]

so that makes everything alright then ?

why did admin "hold off" in this particular case ?, is it perhaps its because "some members are more equal than others" ? what makes these particular members "more equal"

The website's still there, IPR is still being offered for sale (and in the unlikely event anyone would purchase, Grey1 recieving his "royalty payments")

Whats the score here, is it a commercial transaction, personal friendship, inept moderation. What is it exactly that allows 2 members to blatently violate terms and conditions, where others would be prevented from doing so. Why exactly cant the moderators be honest about this particular situation, what exactly are you trying to hide ?

You had better ask admin, I have posted as much as I know, unless grey1 posts to the contrary that he is connected to jj's venture then he is still up for a tag, the mods have asked for it, I have already explained we cannot give them, admin have to do it, please ask admin why he hasn't got it yet, maybe they are in discussions with him, I don't know.

I don't believe you are helping things at all, if there was a glimmer of hope that something could be salvaged from this mess, surely you should be more helpful rather than trying to post rubbish of cover ups and collusion, unbelievable.

 

[zupcon]

You had better ask admin, I have posted as much as I know, unless grey1 posts to the contrary that he is connected to jj's venture then he is still up for a tag, the mods have asked for it, I have already explained we cannot give them, admin have to do it, please ask admin why he hasn't got it yet, maybe they are in discussions with him, I don't know.

I don't believe you are helping things at all, if there was a glimmer of hope that something could be salvaged from this mess, surely you should be more helpful rather than trying to post rubbish of cover ups and collusion, unbelievable.

I'm not trying to "help things", I'm just pointing out blatent hypocrisy when I see it.

Just how do you even begin to moderate a site under these circumstances ?, vendor A comes along spamming his signals service, and the mods are on them like a ton of bricks, and a tags applied. Vendor B comes along and a blind eye's turned. How do moderators know which vendors are "more equal than others"

Perhaps "Admin" would be kind enough to adress these issue's in public ? what is there to hide ? Why is B "more equal" than A, is it random chance ?, financial inducement ?, personal friendship ?

As for "up for a vendor tag", that's been ongoing for a while, presumably in the hope all of this unpleasantness will die down and be forgotten. The evidence is there for all to see I'm afraid, absolutely NO action taken. I'm curious as to why

 

[barjon]

hi zup,

I don't think there's any conspriracy going on. jayjay resigned as a member so there was no point in banning him - but I see he somehow managed to re-appear as a guest (don't ask me how that's possible!!) so I've banned him anyway.

So far as grey is concerned I guess admin have just plain not got round to it, or it's at the bottom of their in-trays. Grey has stated in his Technical Trader forum that he has decided to leave and not post anymore - in which case whether he is badged as a vendor or not is pretty incidental. Should he re-appear we will have to clarify his position.

From a personal point of view, it's a real shame all this has blown up. A lot of people learned a lot (for free) from grey and are grateful to him. There's no changing that whatever badge he happens to have attached to his name.

good trading

jon