Link Censorship

[madasahatstand]

there are no arguments here. its just a friendly debate:)

[TightEnd]

It's not always the truth that matters but people's perceptions. If someone thinks that there is "one rule for one and one for another" then surely this reflects badly on blonde?

i agree with you Bongo, and I work hard to try to battle that perception

I also believe, personal view, that moderation is USUALLY best done behind the scenes, unnoticed so it doesn't interfere with the public forums.

As we have seen recently this isn't always possible but all anyone needs to do if they perceive someone is treated favourably compared to another is PM us or ask us and we'll be straight down the line with our response

[Bongo]

Would that not be easier for you if there were some guidelines in place so people knew what they could and could not do? 

[Rod Paradise]

In response to the original post, there's a world of difference between a site we all know, www. vcpoker.com, getting a bit of publicity for sponsoring a charity poker comp, a link to get an affiliate link some hits,  & a link to www. disgustingstories.com.

We make judgement calls and they're not too difficult to make or understand with a bit of thought.


In response to the clique insinuations etc, get real. One of the most recent to get a suspension, Scottish Dave is very popular with the mods/admin, most of whom enjoyed his company at BB1 & BB2. Big contrast is his mates (me included) accepted it and to his credit so did he.

[TightEnd]

Would that not be easier for you if there were some guidelines in place so people knew what they could and could not do? 

there are.

they aren't however public, its our job to use them and interpret them to help ensure this is the sort of forum we all enjoy

[Bongo]

Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear - I meant public guidelines to acceptable behaviour of members.

I'm not saying it should be a huge tome of rules - it could just be a written summary of the blonde ethos and a list of things that may not be obviously covered by that.

Thinking back to the new member who posted a link to a poker related webcomic that he enjoyed. The link was removed due to the advertising banner on the site, all fair enough so fair - but how was the newbie meant to know what he was doing was against the rules?

[TightEnd]

Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear - I meant public guidelines to acceptable behaviour of members.

I'm not saying it should be a huge tome of rules - it could just be a written summary of the blonde ethos and a list of things that may not be obviously covered by that.

Thinking back to the new member who posted a link to a poker related webcomic that he enjoyed. The link was removed due to the advertising banner on the site, all fair enough so fair - but how was the newbie meant to know what he was doing was against the rules?

yes point taken

[ifm]

The position on awarding suspensions/bans is quite simple

After any problems, the people involved are sent PM's and warnings are issued... and the individuals are reminded of the way blonde works.

any further trouble is met with a final warning, explaining that the next step is a suspension of their account.

Either this is untrue or you have changed policy in the last couple of hours,

[fergus8]

this sites is like euro 2008, mods in full riot police gear, rest of us are english hooligans, and theres plastic garden chairs being flung about and a few arrests. larve it.