Surely, Foxy hasn't been banned. Really ...?

I always considered Foxy a 'peace-maker' ... and always gentle in her responses.

Did I miss something?

I read the rules Jinny, they are a short list without good definitions.

And anyway a community evolves over time some very specific rules understood within the community but maybe not immediately to new people or those who have missed part of the evolution process aka me and you. Which why I wanted the rules explained within OLO by OLO peeps.

Yep I know, I should have been banned as well and avoided it somehow. Not a moderation decision you’d catch me questioning.

You got called evil? See that’s a funny one again about abuse being in the eye of the beholder, wouldn’t bother me at all. Which probably means I wouldn’t hesitate to call some else evil without knowing it would keep them up nights.

Which is all the evidence you need for the need of forum moderation.

But there is a common theme emerging of people wanting to know why something happened.

Didn’t there used to be General, News and Current Affairs sections then a technical one and another one?

I think Foxy got banned or left of her own accord Danielle. Still not clear on that one.

DB, I thought perhaps you could teach me some. :)

Jinny,

You might recall that during one highly emotional post you delivered a mini tirade to Graham and questioned his moderating decision.
If any of us more experienced on this forum had done that, we would have expected instant suspension at the very least.
But you're still here with us and the whole thing will eventually blow over...so, on to the next subject.

BLUE: i respect ur wishes before on not getting refereed to. I believe i have a right to state that you were wrong in you judgement, like a lot of them. too bad, so sad. dont like it, go form ur own website. The stuff u said eventually is BS, brain washed. cannot accept how it is, why it is. IMHO

Poirot: easy for you to say. my brain does not function da same way yours does. Everyone is different.

Maybe it is because I always like to challenge rules. it just bothers me, thats all. I would just like to know, after I got banned and my link removed, why i was allowed back. Is that too much to ask? Why who a stranger give you all these rules and not practise it themselves. Id I am banned, i should remain banned(don't you think?)

After all, i was the one who broke the rules.

Why am i still here? Explain? Anyone here? Since GY prefers not to.
For those of you who don't need to sleep.. come one.. i need explanation here? most of you are highly intelligent.. waiting..

Jinny,

It seems to me that Graham owned responsibility for allowing your personal thread to go ahead, although he regretted that decision later...also you are new to OLO and it seems you were given a bit of latitude - which seems reasonable under the circumstances.

TPP has a few unanswered questions.



"Didn’t there used to be General, News
and Current Affairs sections then a
technical one and another one?"

There are presently four categories in which topics in the General Discussion area of the Forum may appear. They are 'News and Current Affairs', 'General Discussion', 'Elections', and 'Technical Support'. Only two of the categories presently show on the default display: this is because it is over one month since any topic has been submitted and approved in either the 'Elections' or 'Technical Support' categories.

Post a topic and get it approved in the 'Elections' category without there being a real electoral event and Belly and I will kill you. Slowly and painfully. Many others will look on approvingly while we do it.

'Technical Support' is for anything to do with how the OLO site actually works. It is a good place to submit topics of a general nature as to Forum features or to seek other users' input as to how they see the site operating in the computer users experience sense, rather than with respect to Forum rules or policy as we are doing here.



"Who is MTR?"

Houellebecq has already answered that after a fashion in saying "MTR is a strange woman who posts sometimes about men being gratified. It really annoys her when men are gratified without permission". Initially I thought him to be wrong, thinking it to be the acronym for 'Mechanical Target Range', but then I remembered Melinda Tankard Reist. Melinda is a fairly regular article contributor to OLO. From what I hear around the traps she has copped a fair amount of ad fem flak from some OLO users over time. 'Mechanical Target Range' may have been right.

Hers may be a specific case of the sort of abuse that particularly concerns GrahamY, being abuse directed at an OLO article contributor.



"Can personal agendas be of interest to everyone
and worth discussing even after being labeled as one?"

Speaking purely for myself, I would have to say I don't know, but I will try to find out.