It's actually surprisingly clear http://www.singletrackworld.com/forums/forum-rules/
It actually isn't - does the Picolax thread does not conceivably fall foul of any of those rules?
Chat Forum
[closed]
WTF ??
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
Would you use the same language with your mates in a pub as you would with a child? It has been stated that this forum is for family intent which would suggest children as well as adults.
Pretty much, yes I think I would, but I suspect that you are pre-supposing a number of things there. Do I write the same way as I speak? Nope.
I still don't see too many 6 year olds, let alone a 2 year old as per your original post and my reply to it willingly coming on here on their own. To say the forum is overwhelmed with that sort of user is, I think stretching imgagination somewhat.
Regardless, I'm neither disagreeing with the rules, or the ruling. What I do disagree with is the sanctimonious who will happily moan about the likes of Rude Boy, but conveniently overlook their own behaviour.
Its a bit like your post regarding your two year old, which was self evidently inappropriate to what was being said as I pointed out to you. I note the attempts to up the age to make more impact, but the original post is exactly the fatuous sort of thing I am talking about.
Posted 2 years ago # -
It actually isn't - does the Picolax thread does not conceivably fall foul of any of those rules?
The Picolax thread had the advantage of being funny. Most of Rudeboy's posts were not funny and presumably took up far too much moderator time when the mods could have been doing other stuff - like researching, writing and photographing articles for the magazine. Yes, that thing that pays their wages...
Posted 2 years ago # -
I'm not going to carry on arguing with you. You are missing point for arguments sake and becoming the things you are arguing about.
I have better things to do.
Bye bye.Posted 2 years ago # -
@crazy-legs: completely agree with everything you wrote. My point is just that the "rules" do not provide a perfect framework for the forum. And nor do they need to, IMHO. They provide a set of ideas that the mods can adapt to local conditions, getting rid of porn, and bores like RB while keeping funny but vulgar stuff like Picolax.
Posted 2 years ago # -
CFH - I object strongly to the objectification of scantily clad females - this is my right. This sort of practice is strongly linked to sexual violence from the attitudes it engenders. Whilst it may be that you can avoid this "won't someone think of the children" In the past I have simply ignored the threads but in this new STW era of complaining to the Mods about stuff that you think is inappropriate I shall be reporting it.
If you want a forum of scantily clad young women there are I believe many places on the net to meet your needs.
I find the slavering perving over these pics unacceptable on a family orientated forum
Posted 2 years ago # -
TJ, are you that much of a prig in real life as well?
Sexual violence, eh? Of course. So, by enjoying the banter and humour of the day, we're all secretly harbouring nefarious desires like that are we? Well thank you, Mr Freud, now how about you disappear up your own backside as a parting shot?
family orientated forum
Really? Is it? How many users here are under 16, even, let alone "children"?
Posted 2 years ago # -
why would under 18's look at this forum? it's full of very uncool daily mail readers who ride marins and go to bed after watching news at 10.
Posted 2 years ago # -
CFH - prig - lovely word.
Of course not - but the excuse for banning rudeboy is his avoidance of the swear filter as his posts might be seen by kids and according to many including the Mods this is a family orientated forum.
I just want the mods and others to see the hypocrisy. Bowdlerised swearing is unacceptable as children might see it but people perving over scantily clad young women is acceptable despite the FACT that this distorts relationships?
However the pervy threads do really annoy me - in the same way as page 3 of the sun does.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I object strongly to the objectification of scantily clad females - this is my right. This sort of practice is strongly linked to sexual violence from the attitudes it engenders.
Ah, so if you go to somewhere such as Saudi, you'd expect to find little or no sexual violence then?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrgggggghhhhhhh.....GROW UP!
Posted 2 years ago # -
TJ, lest you forget there are many men featured in the A&A as well......Balance, you see.
I went to a lovely cafe to buy some lunch just now. There was a copy of the Sun on the table next to a family. Did that lead to sexual violence? I rather doubt it.
The A&A was never intended as perving, nor do I believe that it is such. Many of them have led to very interesting discussions on people, on sports, on photos and all manner of other stuff. And, here's the killer blow, it's fun. You remember fun, don't you? Go on, stop being a prig* and have some!
*It is indeed a fine word, and greatly underused!
Posted 2 years ago # -
people perving over scantily clad young women
The only person I see perving over the images is me. If you and your kids can see the rest of the viewers, chapeau to your internet savvy.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Can I just say one word? Just one word without fear of Fred/Rude Boy?!
CHAV!
Snigger!!!!!!!!
Posted 2 years ago # -
You are missing point for arguments sake and becoming the things you are arguing about.
Nope I'm definately not a two year old, nor am I whining about my child prodigy surfing to STW, only to be perverted for life due to some every day ribaldry that has been swear filtered, which clearly said child will work out, from the combination of */£$%& that has replaced it.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I find the slavering perving over these pics unacceptable on a family orientated forum
Much as I find your drivelings about helmet usage are, but I'm not so small minded as to keep reporting you.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I find the slavering perving over these pics unacceptable on a family orientated forum
Much as I find your drivelings about helmet usage are, but I'm not so small minded as to keep reporting you.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I just see the Friday pervy threads as totally inappropriate on here. I feel very strongly about this.
But not quite strongly enough to have done something about it? Someone else did, mods agreed, end of subject.
Posted 2 years ago # -
So how about we live and let live, abide by the rules, (obviously whilst pushing the boundaries just to make sure they are where they are supposed to be obviously), and get on with stuff, remembering that we're mostly grown ups and are here to have a laugh, or pick up some info or to pontificate, but definately not to deliberately offend.
Personally I'm going to raise a glass to Rude boy tonight, but I've not yet decided whether its as a toast or to ensure sufficent load to be able to pi$$ on his grave.
Over and out
Posted 2 years ago # -
"Sexual Violence"
Is that what you call having a "Tommy Tank" TJ ?
Posted 2 years ago # -
"Sexual Violence"
Is that also what you call having a "Tommy Tank" TJ ?
Whatever floats your boat....
Posted 2 years ago # -
Can we have one discussion re:conduct on STW without TJ swerving us back to his holier than thou views on Friday A+A? Please? We heard you first second and third time mate, get over it and yourself.
Best thing about this forum is the grown up (not Adult) banter and long may it continue. Loads of funny writing on here, mostly written by grown-ups.
Rudeboy I dont like but shouldnt be banned for life.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I knew, just knew that this would be a RudeBoy thread. Hadn't even realised he been banned...
Posted 2 years ago # -
Threads like this always make me feel that this forum is on the verge of imploding in on itself, sucking the luckless souls who happen to be viewing at the time into a unidimensional purgatory of apple white boxes and animated flash adverts.
Posted 2 years ago # -
a unidimensional purgatory of apple white boxes and animated flash adverts.
segue to Mac vs PC chapter 937
Posted 2 years ago # -
After reading all the further nonsense, I have elevated my "couldn't give a" status, from monkey's, to Rats Arse. Dont make me take it higher people.
Posted 2 years ago # -
dont worry folks he does care deeply dont be fooled....we had a wake last night for RB and Loweys eulogy was more moving than Candle in the wind at Diana’s funeral
Posted 2 years ago # -
"Sexual Violence"
Is that also what you call having a "Tommy Tank" TJ ?
Whatever floats your boat....
maybe he tore his frenulum from over enthusiasm?
Posted 2 years ago # -
nah. I think that was this chap...
http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/profile/snappedbanjostringPosted 2 years ago # -
johnners - Member
Why not take your own advice, if this is all so unimportant, why does it matter who's banned or not from participating? It does appear that this all matters to you more than you profess.
Obviously you don't read many of my posts johnners - I don't have any problem with that of course. But I would suggest that before you come to any definitive conclusions, you actually read what I have been posting.
Again and again and again, I have said that Mark/the mods are of course perfectly entitled to do what they want and ban who they want, without even giving a good reason. If anyone has a problem with that, then I would remind them that they are under no obligation to use this forum. If I post on here, it is only for two reasons. Firstly because I choose to, and secondly because I haven't been blocked.
Here is just one example of me making the point :
ernie_lynch - Member
Now of course there isn't any reason at all why this forum should be an exercise in 'justice and democracy'. And if Mark wants to ban someone for no reason other than because he is in a bad mood after tripping over the cat and spilling his coffee, he is of course perfectly entitled to do so.
If anyone doesn't like the decisions and how they are come to on here, then they are under no obligation to post on this forum. I can't see any problem with that.
Posted 1 day ago #
That doesn't mean however, that Mark/the mods control the way I think and what I say - they can only silence me. If they choose to tell me that the world is in fact not round, but indeed flat, I might feel it necessary to reject their suggestion - I do my own thinking.
Likewise, if am told that RudeBoy was banned because of an unacceptable post in which he avoided the swear filter, and yet that post has still not been removed or moderated, allowing 14 year olds the world over to read it and learn new words, then I will draw my own conclusions.
The offending post/thread is still here [Please do not click if you are under 18 years old]
Furthermore johnners, I am perfectly entitled to the opinion that those who incessantly whinged about RB to the mods, are pathetic and weak individuals who should in the words of Junkyard, "MTFU"
btw, I often spend time in my life doing things simply because they amuse me, despite the fact that they may be rather frivolous and unimportant. Don't you johnners ?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Yes. Yes I do.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Excellent johnners !
Let's all be 'frivolous and unimportant' then
Posted 2 years ago # -
That doesn't mean however, that Mark/the mods control the way I think and what I say - they can only silence me.
"I am not a number! I am a free man!"
Ernie, earlier...
Posted 2 years ago # -
He is not the messiah.. he's a very naughty boy.
I seem to remember the Roman's didn't quite get him last time either, challenged norms of behaviour etc.
Ah well! Guess we'll just have to wait for the next 'incarnation'
But in the mean time..........
Posted 2 years ago # -
Jesus saves
and Budda scores on the rebound
Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
