Guest spin cycle Posted March 29, 2009 Report Posted March 29, 2009 give us Barabbas, no sorry Chris,@ duncan 8) free the inflicted ;D lets start with just chris....it's 'easter'...not 'christmas' (evil) . seriously....come on admin. ' FREE THE MAIDMENT'... pleeeeeeeease
Guest Posted March 29, 2009 Report Posted March 29, 2009 i think your wrong albear,as they couldent convert a old fox like yourself, albear your to smart for that Sorry don't genuinly understand this?
Guest bigda Posted March 29, 2009 Report Posted March 29, 2009 Sorry don't genuinly understand this? albear you will not be fooled, ::)youll keep us all right
Guest Posted March 29, 2009 Report Posted March 29, 2009 Dave, is that true? I have no axe to grind but when you set up a site .net in direct opposition of the same name ,to what looks like to me to damage this site, I don't think so. But if my conception of this is wrong please tell me Alan, i've known Duncan for quite some time, and in my opinion, he's a straight and honest bloke. I wouldn't say it if i didn't honestly believe it. The website you reference is not his, as far as i'm aware, never was his, and for what its worth, he is no longer a member on there. I would like to see him back in the fold, just my opinion. Dave
Guest Posted March 29, 2009 Report Posted March 29, 2009 Alan, i've known Duncan for quite some time, and in my opinion, he's a straight and honest bloke. I wouldn't say it if i didn't honestly believe it. The website you reference is not his, as far as i'm aware, never was his, and for what its worth, he is no longer a member on there. I would like to see him back in the fold, just my opinion. Dave Dave I would NEVER question your honesty. But I thought he had left and set up the .net equivalent?? Am I wrong?
Guest spin cycle Posted March 29, 2009 Report Posted March 29, 2009 i would like to see dovey back to ( i don't know him personally ). trouble is he seemed to have a 'problem' with 'moderation'...his extreme love of free speech, whilst admirable, seeming to be a problem....JMO i hasten to add. like CHRISS i don't know why they were banned....but in the absence of information and , in light of, recent events i can't see why 'maidment' can't come back now and hopefully 'dovey' in the future....allways considering they want to of course
Guest Posted March 29, 2009 Report Posted March 29, 2009 There is no doubt that Dovey provided great 'writing' on the site and the site is worse for not having his abilities. I know in the past I have spoken to him in confidencs for advice and appreciated him keeping that confidence. In terms of him coming back that is for the webmaster but what I would say is that I felt he had become very 'negative' toward the site he wanted it to be more democratic... and it is not a public site it has a private owner. I'm sure Dovey will read all this and I write it like Dave honestly and without any prejudice (I hope!)
Guest Vic Posted March 29, 2009 Report Posted March 29, 2009 Dave, is that true? I have no axe to grind but when you set up a site .net in direct opposition of the same name ,to what looks like to me to damage this site, I don't think so. But if my conception of this is wrong please tell me Yes Albear! I had the same impression. I too, enjoyed Doveys contributions. If it was not Dovey, who created the "anti- basics" site, He surely was in, with the perpetrator, which will all come out in the washing at the end of the day.
Guest spin cycle Posted March 29, 2009 Report Posted March 29, 2009 i must admit ,initially, i regarded it as an 'anti-basics' site. perhaps it is/was....perhaps though it was a 'refuge' for banned members. but its 10 weeks since the 'statement' so maybe,to save more grief/ lawyers...they could be 'offered'...'re-integration' . i hasten to add that this is up to richard & co and i'm not going to get upset if they say 'no way' as it is their call. also the members concerned may not want to comeback ....but i'm hoping
Guest bigda Posted March 29, 2009 Report Posted March 29, 2009 free them, from there bondage, they must repent though ;D
Webmaster Posted March 29, 2009 Report Posted March 29, 2009 It is not right or fair to discuss banned members as they have no control or means to reply to posts. The banning of any member is between the administrator(s) and that member, it is neither helpful or needed for any other member to pass public comment or opinion. If there are any queries about this or any other matter they should be addressed to an administrator via PM or email and not posted to the public forum in any circumstance.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now