blonde poker forum

I tapped this out last night, only to find the thread locked grrrrrr!!!!! It appears to have been locked for good, so I'll start a new thread ;-)

Well a couple of weeks is certainly a long time in poker!  I have now read 50 odd pages of this; it has confirmed alot of the initial thoughts I had when I returned to the forum a couple of months ago.  That is that namely Blonde Poker as a business, forum and a community has lost its way somewhat.

As Claypole stated previously, there is now a hazy line between a business (with few revenue streams) and a forum. This does not help as the directors/executives are expected to make shrewd business decisions – whilst at the same time explaining their actions to a community (many of whom have no investment in ‘the business’!) It also does not help that, far from being a virtual community, Tighty/Tikay/Flushy can fully expect to run into members at a casino near you!

On first inspection Tikays post can appear to be calculating – however I firmly believe we have a man trying to protect the business whilst also trying to appease forum members.  Are we shareholders? No – so do we REALLY deserve an explanation?

Something clearly needs to be done though, as it appears this situation is getting out of hand and it can only be damaging for the company and forum – and god forbid any dissent spread to the card rooms!  My take on things follows...

Board members of bigger, brasher companies commit far more severe crimes/mistakes than those of Kev.  The result?   Summary dealing in person and the ‘offer’ of a resignation.  The individual is punished but leaves with his dignity intact.  At the same time the company avoids airing its dirty laundry in public; its reputation and brand suffer less/no damage.  If brought to book at a later date, they can more easily justify their actions to shareholders.  Naturally any party wronged, receives compensation or (more suitably in this case) a letter of apology.

In my (limited) opinion the Original Post was a poor idea.  I’m sure Tikay/Tighty/Flushy have their own thoughts on this and know how they would deal with similar situations in future.

But what of the other matters that have sprung to light? To recap:
-   The money.
-   The alleged snooping.
-   The video incident.
-   The use of Bain as a messenger.
-   Bains post (that has outraged a few, but I have not seen).

THE MONEY
Ideally this should have been dealt with in a face to face manner. Ascertain the facts and take into account circumstances the individual was under at the time and now. How damaging was this to company image? How best can we limit the damage? Why did Kev spend the money? He wasn’t paid by Blonde poker – so has our negligence caused or contributed to this? What position does Kev find himself in now? Should we call the police? What do we gain by calling the police?

Personally I believe Kev should have been reprimanded and ‘asked’ to resign as a mod, with an agreement between the parties that this not be mentioned again.  If any posts were to appear or be insinuated, then they should be deleted to protect the company i.e. the company’s interests ahead of cheap forum tittle tattle.

THE ALLEGED SNOOPING
A couple of definitions:
Moderator – (a) an arbitrator. (b) a person who monitors the conversations in an online chat room for bad language/inappropriate content.
Arbitrator – someone chosen to judge or decide a chosen issue.
Snooping – a person who pries in the business of others.
Integrity – the adherence to moral principals/honesty.

Now what is interesting is that it can appear that one who moderates is very similar to one who snoops! Surely one who snoops would be ideal for a moderator? No! This is because a moderator is chosen to judge/decide on issues. Everybody knows that this is their job and is comfortable with that fact.  A snooper looks into the business of others without them knowing.  If she looks into Kevs business, what could she be doing with mine? Who is it being leaked to? By prying Ginger is breaking the moral principle of an individual’s right to privacy. As others have stated, she may even be breaking the law. Her integrity is instantly called into question; if this is the case, how can she be expected to adequately judge on the disputes/contents of other individuals posts? Naturally this damages forum member’s confidence in the company/forum. Something must be done!

In my opinion, Gingers integrity is called into question here.  I will go into the video incident later, but if she was acting as a whistleblower then perhaps it would be best to await the outcome of any police investigation OR, rather than jump the gun, suspend her MOD rights pending said investigation.

THE VIDEO INCIDENT
I won’t linger on this for too long. Not because I am devaluing the severity of its nature – but because it is a criminal matter under investigation.  Quite simply if a crime has been committed, then you do not want the perpetrators associated with your brand. Therefore, again, pending the results of a police investigation suspend all those allegedly involved – and any forum posts on the subject removed.  The forum should not be put in a situation where it can be seen to influence the outcome of proceedings – whether that is by false reporting, rumour mongering or intimidation.

BAIN THE MESSENGER
I am really not too well versed on this, but it appears to me very simply as a poor judgement call in appointing him as a messenger representing the website/company.  Why have somebody that is not on the payroll represent your company? Whoever made the decision to appoint him has had a failing in judgement.  If it was Gingers call, then clearly this is further evidence to view her as a potential liability and backs the argument for a suspension.

BAINS MESSAGE
I’ve not seen it, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it was offensive! This is coming from a man who at some point has been chosen to represent the website. If his remarks are really that bad (compare an contrast to previously banned posters), then do you really want him representing your website – or do you want remarks attributed to somebody seen as a ‘Face’ of the company at some point? If not, quite simple, BAN.

Just a few thoughts, but a general rule to live by when deciding this (and future disputes/issues) could be:
‘Did the actions of the individual effect the operational effectiveness, public image or profits of the company?’
If on weighing up the probabilities it is 51% more - then impose a sanction!

Clearly if Blonde is to run as a business, things need to be looked at and frameworks put in place for dealing with future problems. If it is all too much hassle to run it like that then, is it all worth it?

All I will say, is that it’s such a shame. Blonde used to be a really fun place to post and read many varied views without too much worry for being flamed (or if you did get flamed there was usually a tongue planted firmly in cheek). Something clearly needs to be done to uphold, clean up the forums identity – another Blonde Bash perhaps ;-)

Maybe I’m naive, feel free to slate me :-D

its the internet bro.

comprehensive thought!

mostly valid except i dont think Bainn was ever chosen as a messenger by "blonde"

good work

tb;dr

Did you leave your computer at her house and did she ever have access to it ? Do tell how she would get your info ??

Sandy

FYP

I haven't read so far that any "snooping" took place online.

Sandy

Integrity – the adherence to moral principals/honesty.


Sometimes you may need to be in someway dishonest in order to adhere to their moral principles no?

Nobody seems to mind in Kevs alleged case.

There are huge double standards appearing.

I do wonder why people keep this kind of stuff (chat logs, pms etc).

If a partner finds something in the house that tells them their partner is cheating then who is the biggest scumbag ? The cheat or the person who finds out by looking at something they shouldn't ?

Judging by the standards being applied here you'd think only 1/2% people have ever read a partner/family members diary,texts, emails etc. I happen to think that's unrealistic even though there may actually be an even higher percentage who think it's wrong.

Sandy

After reading the OP, I have recommended you to be promoted to Lance-Corporal.

Personally, I if I sent an email/text/PM to someone with a partner or husband/wife I would expect it to be read by both.

Jane said Kev routinely read her PM's and emails.

Right or wrong, it's what couples do.

Very much This

Who died and put you in charge?

Love you breaking it all down, categorising it all while throwing disclaimers all over the place that you "don't know much about this" or "haven't seen this".

I can't respect this as a post - all it is a rehash of points you liked from other people's posts. The thread was locked, all you've done is restarted it, with no new info.

Can't see the point myself, unless you were just so annoyed your 3 hour typing marathon was in vain once you realised the thread was locked.

Read faster - type faster.

Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

New thread! Lets go go go!

Correction for your post, Ginger decided she had the right to involve Bainn, before she told the heads of Blonde. Doubt they will be happy to confirm this but it was getting outed on the last thread and is probs why it was locked.

Maybe I got the entire tone of your post wrong, in which case i will apologise in advance.


Now I'm going out for a bit to enjoy my life in the real world and not worry about whether an ex-girlfriend looked at an ex-boyfriends computer and how it effects her whole moral compass and social decency to such an extent that she can't be trusted to know the difference between flaming and banter or heaven forebid have to be able to distinguish spam from regular posts. I just hope I can stop all these dreadful thoughts from racing around in my head whilst i am trying to enjoy myself.

 ;applause;

POTY

+1

Maybe if the mods leave one of these Kev-gate threads unlocked for a change this subject might get a chance to die a natural death too.

Bedtime.....good night all  ;D

Can someone enighten me as to why this person isn't banned?

As far as i know he hasn't bumped any threads yet.

+1

Ridic poster

I would like to apologise to Lee for the hostility i showed towards him in my post, we have exchanged PM's since and he is clearly not malicious etc it was a bad judgement call on my part.

There are other people who i could have directed it at though and not felt the need to even consider apologising to. All my points are valid even if harsh towards Lee.

i never knew you and Kev were so close....nice one