Locked

[jimcee]

Well Well Well.
I had thought of doing a piece for the Riddoch thread, but found it locked because a couple of contributors supported some of my previous contributions.
On top of this there was rather an ambiguous message from one, Herby Dice, whom I had always considered to be the alter ego of NickB.
The same Herby appeared to be dis-associating himself from remarks made by his other self.
Unless of course, the Administrator and Moderator are not the same person, or if they are, that they have a Jekyll and Hyde disposition. Someone, somewhere has the answer to this conundrum.
It will be interesting to see whether this post appears on the website.

[NickB]

Well Well Well.
I had thought of doing a piece for the Riddoch thread, but found it locked because a couple of contributors supported some of my previous contributions.
On top of this there was rather an ambiguous message from one, Herby Dice, whom I had always considered to be the alter ego of NickB.
The same Herby appeared to be dis-associating himself from remarks made by his other self.
Unless of course, the Administrator and Moderator are not the same person, or if they are, that they have a Jekyll and Hyde disposition. Someone, somewhere has the answer to this conundrum.
It will be interesting to see whether this post appears on the website.

Jim,

You have been told repeatedly that Herby and I are two different people.

I take it from this post that you are choosing to call me - and Herby - liars in public.

I will give you a couple of hours to make a public apology before I ban you for 30 days.

Your choice.

[Herby Dice]

Not sure that a ban is appropriate here. Jimcee was not the one responsible for the outrageous slur of suggesting I was you in the past, and it is possible he did not read that thread. I would give him the benefit of the doubt this time, but let me reiterate for all posters:
Nick and I are two very different people. His views are his own, mine are mine. My purpose here, at Nick's request, is to moderate - to ensure that the rules of the forum are followed. nothing more, nothing less.

[jimcee]

Thank goodness the cavalry have ridden to the rescue.
The thought that I might have been banned for 30
days (a fate worse than death), had me coming out in goosepimples.
So if I might be allowed to reply to the points raised in response to my posting -
I have never been aware that Herby/Nick are actually two entirely different people, each with their own individualllistic view on things - past utterances have suggested an affinity between the two.
I would never dream of saying to anyone (in public, or otherwise) that they were liars - I might have suggested in the past that I doubted the veracity of a statement made by another person, but to call them a liar is something which is foreign to my nature.
Perhaps it might not be a bad thing for this administrator/moderator relationship to be made clear somewhere on the rules or wherever.
So I unreservedly apologise for thinking that Herby Dice and Nick B actually share the same body, but this was done through ignorance and not malice ( I hope that my not guilty plea has been registered within the timescale m-lud).
As a final thought (or two) - what is the significance and status of a LOCKED thread? who applies it? and who are the 30 odd people who have been following the course of these deliberations? (so far).

[NickB]

Not sure that a ban is appropriate here.

I'll defer to your judgement then.

However, Jim, let me reiterate a point that people seem to be slow to take on board. The purpose of this forum is not to criticise me or the way the forum is run, and things generally run a lot smoother if people make at least a small attempt to stay on topic.

Moderators
The point of having a moderator (some busier forums have several moderators) is to avoid it becoming a 'dictatorship' by the administrator and also to allow the admin to take his eye off the ball from time to time. Herby and I regularly correspond on forum matters, and while we do not always see eye to eye we have not fallen out over a decision either of us has taken so far.

Locked Threads
You ask about locked threads. The purpose of locking a thread is to make sure no-one can make any more posts on that thread. This is usually done when the moderator or admin feels that there is no purpose in allowing any more posts on the topic as it has either become personal, gone too far off topic or has been hijacked by a troll. (See the forum rules for a definition). A locked thread slowly and inevitably sinks to the bottom of the pile as no more people can post on it. It is considered a less drastic action than simply removing posts or a whole thread, which is another weapon mods and admins have in their armoury.

One last point for anyone who has read this far and still has the will to live:

I have deleted a post by 'Maggie', which is one of Longshanks' alter egos. I did warn him very specifically about this in the last post in the locked thread, but he chose to ignore it. And let's be clear, this is not a guess, I do have proof not only that he is Maggie but that he set up the account with the specific intention of winding me up. I do not intend to share that proof, so don't bother asking. I am minded to delete the Maggie account permanently as there is really no need for anyone to have two personae on here, but for now have applied a 30 day ban to that account as well.

I am now (ironically) going to lock this thread as I can see no purpose in discussing these issues further. Any new threads that are started with the specific purpose of winding me up or complaining about the way the forum is run will be summarily deleted and no explanation given or discussion entered into. Persistent offenders will be banned.

Now, can we get back to what this is meant to be , a place to discuss local issues in an amicable manner?