moderator initiated post deletion and stealth editing

[nine]

Magic Man is Mathemagician ... MP6140 you've said it all repeatedly and although I disagree with you I'm not going to restart it. You might consider that if he's a normal human being what you've said is pretty unpleasant - but lets leave it here and in this thread.

 

[nine]

MP.

You have moved from slandering Mathemagician to slandering Paul and the site as well.

Do you wish to take that all back of would you like to be permanently banned.

In fact, with that move I am going back to remove most of your posts on the subject so there is no need to take it back. MP6140, stay off this subject from this point or I will ban you, even at the risk that Sharky will have my job.

This is the second lot of bs anti-vendor stuff I've seen this morning. The last guy is gone for faking a second identity to attack a vendor. He is permanently banned.

The hurtful and slanderous behaviour you have displayed is unacceptable to me and beyond the site guidelines. Cease or go. I am banning you for 1 day to think about it.

 

[FXSCALPER2]

MP.

You have moved from slandering Mathemagician to slandering Paul and the site as well.

Do you wish to take that all back of would you like to be permanently banned.

In fact, with that move I am going back to remove most of your posts on the subject so there is no need to take it back. MP6140, stay off this subject from this point or I will ban you, even at the risk that Sharky will have my job.

This is the second lot of bs anti-vendor stuff I've seen this morning. The last guy is gone for faking a second identity to attack a vendor. He is permanently banned.

The hurtful and slanderous behaviour you have displayed is unacceptable to me and beyond the site guidelines. Cease or go. I am banning you for 1 day to think about it.

I just cannot believe you nine. You banned him because you are not happy with him? Since when are your sensibilities the issue here? Oh dear.

 

[nine]

Jumping to incorrect conclusions fxscalper.

My sensibilities are just fine and I am quite happy with Mike. "Oh dear" seems a little effete for you though. Perhaps you are not well?

Unfortunately for Mike though, insulting, being rude to, and maligning other members of the community is against our guidelines and, thus, unacceptable.

 

[TheBramble]

Far as I remember, originally when taking on the role, it was to advise Sharky and the team on the best way to steer the site and help discuss and dissect ideas and to ensure its path at the latest upgrade. We have also been continuing this, constantly exchanging ideas and updating as time goes by.

So you’re saying Sharky is quite happy it would seem to have a couple of bods quite new to the site and therefore unlikely even with their best intents, to be as aware as others of the issues and needs of the site and its membership, having a potentially controlling interest in how the site is developed?

 

[TheBramble]

Far as I remember, originally when taking on the role, it was to advise Sharky and the team on the best way to steer the site and help discuss and dissect ideas and to ensure its path at the latest upgrade. We have also been continuing this, constantly exchanging ideas and updating as time goes by.

This isn’t anything to do with the thread, but as that’s done with anyway now and this has become a general feedback sort of thing…

I’m really not trying to be difficult. I remember the Advisor thing being suggested and I may have been around when it all came about, but I spent some time away from the boards and don’t recall it coming into reality. If the role of the Advisor is as you say, why do the general membership need to know who they are? For what purpose?

I just want to know what the protocols are. I don’t want to inadvertently offend anyone. When I bump into an Advisor on a thread should I curtsy, bow, immediately defer to their opinion or simply bend over (just kidding…).

If Sharky hired an extremely expensive consultant to help him out with some specific element or aspect of the business or the site, and that person wanted access to the site (understandably) you wouldn’t necessarily have “extremely expensive consultant” badge for him/her. Or if Sharky had a commercial partner buy into the site, they wouldn’t necessarily have a “commercial partner” badge, would they?

So that’s really my genuine question – why do we need to know who the Advisors are? What do we do with them? What does anybody in the general membership do with them?

Never was part of the title in order to be extra helpful to newbies, that's just something I expected long term, experienced members did anyhow. What with this being a community board and all that.

Absolutely. And something I have discussed with Sharky. I may be getting over-sensitive in my twilight years, but a few of the bods who used to dispense pearls of wisdom and were all-round good guys, became Advisors and now display a growing and worrying (to me anyway) sense of self-importance. As is well known in HR circles, it’s much cheaper to give someone a title than a raise, and their ego will appreciate it much more. It’s a shame.

 

[trendie]

.....
I just want to know what the protocols are. I don’t want to inadvertently offend anyone. When I bump into an Advisor on a thread should I curtsy, bow, immediately defer to their opinion or simply bend over (just kidding…).
......
So that’s really my genuine question – why do we need to know who the Advisors are? What do we do with them? What does anybody in the general membership do with them?

Absolutely. And something I have discussed with Sharky. I may be getting over-sensitive in my twilight years, but a few of the bods who used to dispense pearls of wisdom and were all-round good guys, became Advisors and now display a growing and worrying (to me anyway) sense of self-importance. As is well known in HR circles, it’s much cheaper to give someone a title than a raise, and their ego will appreciate it much more. It’s a shame.

It really is just a sort of point of contact for newbies, Bramble.
I suppose a sort of "prefect".

I have had a small number of newbies PM me asking for advice. If I can't answer them directly, my longevity at T2W means I can at least point thme in the right direction, and best threads to read up on.
I avoid giving specific trading advice, or point them to someone I feel is better experienced.
Most of my time, as I think I have already said, is to report spam.
And, of course, generally being a good egg.

Nothing sinister, no real power, and you don't have to curtsy or bow.
Although a deferential tugging of forelock wouldn't go amiss.

(only posting so early in the day, as I AGAIN got spiked by GBPUSD, and am out until the US open)

 

[FXSCALPER2]

Jumping to incorrect conclusions fxscalper.

My sensibilities are just fine and I am quite happy with Mike. "Oh dear" seems a little effete for you though. Perhaps you are not well?

Unfortunately for Mike though, insulting, being rude to, and maligning other members of the community is against our guidelines and, thus, unacceptable.

I really think you need to back off and let people post. You are allowing your personal taste to determine what is acceptable and what isn't. In my opinion, you are too much of a busy body, with all due respect of course.

 

[nine]

Fortunately, as well as being wrong, your opinion is as important to me as mine is to you.
With all due respect; of course.

 

[TheBramble]

It really is just a sort of point of contact for newbies, Bramble.
I suppose a sort of "prefect".

But this is at odds with WASP's interpretation of the role - and you're both Advisors. Doesn’t sound like the remit is too clear.

I have had a small number of newbies PM me asking for advice. If I can't answer them directly, my longevity at T2W means I can at least point thme in the right direction, and best threads to read up on.
I avoid giving specific trading advice, or point them to someone I feel is better experienced.
And, of course, generally being a good egg.

Quite so and as it has always been. (You weren't one of the bods I was thinking of btw.).

I think that's the problem I have. What we had before the advent of Advisors worked well. Old hands helping the newbies. There is potential for diluting that bond between old and new hands by the introduction of any specific role for that purpose. I feel this is a case of attempting to fix something that wasn't broken and damaging it in the process.

More of a concern is the disconnect that appears to exist even among the ranks of Advisors as to what their specific role is. The more layers of Bureaucracy you introduce into Any organisation the more administration (time, cost, energy) it needs and the more discussion will inevitably take place. All, of course, to the detriment of the core business goals. Which is why it’s better to keep things simple and especially if it works.

If the role is as WASP suggests, then my earlier posts encapsulate the concerns and questions I have in that area.

 

[FXSCALPER2]

Fortunately, as well as being wrong, your opinion is as important to me as mine is to you.
With all due respect; of course.

:cheesy:How about banning me, nine? lol.

I am just playing witcha. Be good.

 

[zupcon]

Fortunately, as well as being wrong, your opinion is as important to me as mine is to you.
With all due respect; of course.

Only a passing thought but perhaps you should take some of your own medicine, a self imposed ban for a day to take time out and think things through.

Your behaviour is actually the problem, its not the solution.

Ban me if you must, no skin of my nose mate.

 

[Splitlink]

Only a passing thought but perhaps you should take some of your own medicine, a self imposed ban for a day to take time out and think things through.

Your behaviour is actually the problem, its not the solution.

Ban me if you must, no skin of my nose mate.

mp has made some good contributions to this site. I have had some friendly differences of opinion with him and he does not seem to mind. I've never been insulted by him.
I've no idea what happened here to get him banned for 24 hours but I will say that I could see where the thread was going, several days ago, and decided to leave you all to it.

I've come back because I must say that this kind of debate, if you can call it that, does no good at all to the site. It inspires a heated exchange which, if not controlled, becomes insulting, as each poster feels that he must have the last word.

This happened with Socrates and some others, of which I was one.. It's just not worth the trouble.

Split

 

[nine]

Zupcon,

Insulting me once is not enough. You are are unlikely to get banned unless you once again start to torment other community members; it was your behaviour that was the problem last time.



Split,

Yes, you are correct. I should have stopped it earlier when the insults first started. We won't let it go that far in future.

 

[FXSCALPER2]

Only a passing thought but perhaps you should take some of your own medicine, a self imposed ban for a day to take time out and think things through.

Your behaviour is actually the problem, its not the solution.

Ban me if you must, no skin of my nose mate.

Agreed. He sort of gets into things and makes a problem out of them when there is really no problem. Too funny actually.

 

[zupcon]

Zupcon,
You appear to be talking without knowing about what you talk. But that is fine.

Quite possibly so, it certainly wouldnt be the first time

Thankfully for the T2W management its not a prerequisite for anyone contributing to know what they're talking about !

Even so it still does'nt alter the fact that a mod once again decides to airbrush away history, or throw his weight about issuing bans having had his buttons pushed. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of the situation.

Still the reasons cited for MPs ban look positively legitimate next to those cited in the case of newtrader, banned for being "generally unhelpful" so progress of sorts possibly

regards
zu

 

[zupcon]

Zupcon,
Insulting me once is not enough. You are are unlikely to get banned unless you once again start to torment other community members; it was your behaviour that was the problem last time.
QUOTE]

Nine

Im certainly not looking for an argument, at least not today but this particular post is a good albeit minor example of some of the problems people are complaining about.

Initially, you chose to respond to my earlier post with a comment that I didnt know what I was talking about, then 10 minutes after posting, you used your magic air brush to re write history.

When I edit a post (as I often do), everyone is aware of this, the post is amended with details of the date and time at which the edit took place. When a moderator edits a post, there is absolutely no indication that changes have been made.

Hopefully you can see how this could be open to abuse.

regards
zu

 

[nine]

Zupcon,

You are less aware than you think.

If you amend your post reasonably quickly without adding an editing comment you will find that there is no "edited" notice. That's what I did, feeling that I was being unnecessarily personal. You might learn the same skill at some point.

Good luck to you and fxscalper on that.

 

[zupcon]

Zupcon,

You are less aware than you think.

If you amend your post reasonably quickly without adding an editing comment you will find that there is no "edited" notice. That's what I did, feeling that I was being unnecessarily personal. You might learn the same skill at some point.

Good luck to you and fxscalper on that.

Fair enough, I'll take your word on that. For the record, I didnt think you where being personal at all. Clearly there are many hidden adgenda's at play, and I would you have a far clearer view of the big picture in your role as moderator than I as an interested observer.

all the best
zu

 

[arabianights]

zupcon you have to do it without a reason for it to not show.