What's happened to some of our more illustrious posters?

[ByronBlack]

I do agree Byron. Ultimately I am so grateful to the members of this forum who's help, information and patience over the years has encouraged me to do many WW related things. I still find this an inspirational place and spend far too much time here (even atm when i'm supposed to be painting ).

However, even after Charley's explanation, I still find Jacob's ban harsh. I'm not putting Jacob on any pedestal, I just think it could have been dealt with in a much more grown up way.

Did Jacob set up that Yahoo group? If he did i'm sure he isn't planning some sort of WW forum domination. Looks like he's just using it as a place to chat to his sympathisers.

Tom - I'm not saying his trying to takeover UKW - that simply won't happen, but i'm sure charley and the mods thought about their decision before making it, I see no problem with him using it as a way to chat with his sympathisers, but for some members to start abusing certain mods in this way is out of order in my opinion. End of the day this is Charley's site, and I respect whatever way he wants to run it, no one said this was a democracy.

 

[Sawdust]

I do agree Byron. Ultimately I am so grateful to the members of this forum who's help, information and patience over the years has encouraged me to do many WW related things. I still find this an inspirational place and spend far too much time here (even atm when i'm supposed to be painting ).

However, even after Charley's explanation, I still find Jacob's ban harsh. I'm not putting Jacob on any pedestal, I just think it could have been dealt with in a much more grown up way.

Did Jacob set up that Yahoo group? If he did i'm sure he isn't planning some sort of WW forum domination. Looks like he's just using it as a place to chat to his sympathisers.

Tom - I'm not saying his trying to takeover UKW - that simply won't happen, but i'm sure charley and the mods thought about their decision before making it, I see no problem with him using it as a way to chat with his sympathisers, but for some members to start abusing certain mods in this way is out of order in my opinion. End of the day this is Charley's site, and I respect whatever way he wants to run it, no one said this was a democracy.

Byron, did you used to take apples for your teachers :wink:

 

[ByronBlack]

I do agree Byron. Ultimately I am so grateful to the members of this forum who's help, information and patience over the years has encouraged me to do many WW related things. I still find this an inspirational place and spend far too much time here (even atm when i'm supposed to be painting ).

However, even after Charley's explanation, I still find Jacob's ban harsh. I'm not putting Jacob on any pedestal, I just think it could have been dealt with in a much more grown up way.

Did Jacob set up that Yahoo group? If he did i'm sure he isn't planning some sort of WW forum domination. Looks like he's just using it as a place to chat to his sympathisers.

Tom - I'm not saying his trying to takeover UKW - that simply won't happen, but i'm sure charley and the mods thought about their decision before making it, I see no problem with him using it as a way to chat with his sympathisers, but for some members to start abusing certain mods in this way is out of order in my opinion. End of the day this is Charley's site, and I respect whatever way he wants to run it, no one said this was a democracy.

Byron, did you used to take apples for your teachers :wink:

:sign3:

 

[llangatwgnedd]

Hope the manacles are taken off the Grim.

I do enjoy his knowledgeable postings.

But history tells me and a few others on here, that forming a splinter forum does not work.

 

[Jake]

I recieved Jacob's PM and from it gather that he only sent it because he'd been threatened with being banned for some other infringement. Could we know what that other infringement was supposed to be, please? And the moderator involved?

Alf

Tony and Jacob got into a spat, views will no doubt vary, but you can see most of it in the thread - apart from Tony's last post in the exchange which was unnecessarily aggressive and personal (in my view). I then posted saying that Tony should just accept that he had one view, and Grim had another, and asking for another moderator to step in. Shortly after, Tony deleted his post and mine, saying via PM that he had "reacted" to "provocation" but accepting (I think) that his response had been inappropriate.

I don't know what was happening at the same time between Grim and Tony via PMs, if anything was. What would have been clear to Jacob, just from the thread, was that Tony was getting pretty heated and personal. And I suspect they have history, not just as poster to poster, but as poster to mod. I am really not surprised at all that Grim reached the conclusion that he would shortly be banned again for no reason, and that's just from the way Tony was acting in that thread - it is a shame that Grim then gave someone a justification to do that by acting on that expectation the way he did.

It isn't the first time I've seen that same or similar dynamics in action, ending up with Grim on a ban, and the real antagonists congratulating themselves on expelling what they see as the thorn in their side.

 

[motownmartin]

Rhubarb, Rhubarb, Rhubarb, give it a rest, who gives a horses hoof.

 

[Jake]

Yeah, I'm alright Jack too.

 

[motownmartin]

Yeah, I'm alright Jack too.

I see that you don't give a fig about Tony, just an observation, I just can't see why people get so upset, after all it's not the end of Mr Grimsdale.

 

[RogerS]

Rhubarb, Rhubarb, Rhubarb, give it a rest, who gives a horses hoof.

Even if you don't 'give a horses hoof', then why read the thread and why respond to Jake's well-reasoned post in such an emotive way? I don't see that it adds any value to the thread.

I agree with much of what Jake has said but then

......, and the real antagonists congratulating themselves on expelling what they see as the thorn in their side.

which kind of brings us all back to emotion again.

Trying to keep my emotions firmly bottled, re-reading the thread I see three separate issues.

1) The question of 'overdoing' the moderation of the forum. Charlie's explained that the mods have recognised this and are taking steps to remedy the situation. It's up to us...the rest of the forum..to show that this lighter hand will work.

2) Personal antagonism between two members spilling over (possibly from PMs but who can say and it is pointless speculating) into the more open forum arena. The perception among some forum members is that this became clouded by (1) above. Jake has put forward one explanation. In hindsight I can see that this explanation makes sense.

The downside is that a lot of teddies seem to have been thrown out of the pram with at least one other splinter group being started. I can understand the emotions. I have been guilty of similar emotional responses in the past.

3) Lastly Mr G's ban. Ultimately, it's Charlies' ultimate decision as it's his forum. Or is it? I would argue that the success or otherwise of a forum is the sum of its constituent parts. That includes the mods, all of us and Charlie. Re-reading the threads there are many members (and I put myself in that category) who value the input of the likes of Mr G, Senior, Scrit, JFC and many others (some of whom have not posted in a long time because of (1) above).

In an ideal world Mr G and Senior and others would return.

But in the meantime, hasn't everything been said? In spades? Maybe we should lock the thread now and move on?

 

[motownmartin]

Rhubarb, Rhubarb, Rhubarb, give it a rest, who gives a horses hoof.

Even if you don't 'give a horses hoof', then why read the thread and why respond to Jake's well-reasoned post in such an emotive way? I don't see that it adds any value to the thread.

?

I read most threads and I am entitled to an opinion.

My first message was not a response to Jakes post, I did not quote anybody, my second message was a response to Jakes sarcastic reply suggesting that I am selfish, I am far from selfish and would help anybody that wants my help.

The trouble with threads like these is that not many of the people that comment have never met the people they comment about, they are just remarking on something without the full facts.

Lets talk about woodwork or in this section other topics, lets not talk about other people, it's not nice, if I have a problem with someone I would prefer to sort it one to one.

If anyone does have a problem with what I said feel free to PM me.

 

[RogerS]

Fair point, Martin..it just goes to show how posts can get misconstrued and I'm guilty as charged Sorry.

Totally agree with you.. let's talk woodwork.

 

[motownmartin]

Roger, you didn't have to apollogise but thanks for doing so

 

[Alf]

I apologise for prolonging this - I was waiting to give a full 24hrs in which to receive some kind of reply to my questions - I don't intend to go any further with the matter after this. Feel free to go elsewhere and ignore it.

Personally I give a "horse's hoof" (is this a euphemism for something else? New to me) as I have quite a lot invested in this forum and don't much want to see what I'm seeing. It would have been polite to have a response from at least one moderator to my queries, even if it was only to say "we're not talking about it". Unfortunately I am going to talk about it.

Jake, your summing up is what I understood to be the case as well. It's quite likely Jacob would have got himself banned for something at some stage anyway, and the current actions on breakaway groups has pretty much killed any chance of a reconciliation and fresh slate that I'd hoped to encourage, but if we're going to play by the rules then the moderators should do so to. It's only fair. As early as Tuesday I had an unsolicited PM from Tony that strongly suggested to me he was predisposed to find fault with Jacob. Personality clashes are a fact of life; steppng well away from that clash and letting another mod act if necessary should be a fact of moderating. I'm not convinced Tony is entirely to blame for the fact that he didn't step away. However, I believe at the very least Tony should apologise for an error in judgement.

What worries me most is the Amazing Invisible Moderators. Yes, guys, you may well be talking it through and this and that on your private board but really you need to be seen to be backing up your moderating fellow in public. All we've heard from is Gill, who herself says she's not really the fully-fledged thing, and Adam who says he's resigning. Frankly, at the moment it looks like you're hanging Tony out to dry as much as anyone, just as happened to Neil six weeks ago. There simply should not be, or appear to be, one, single, solitary active moderator feeling that they're having to step in all the time and left hanging out to be the target - most of you will remember how I know that.

Do I enjoy spouting all this off in public? No. But you can only repeat yourself so many times in private.

Cheers, Alf

 

[Paul Chapman]

Well said, Alf.

Cheers :wink:

Paul (another one who gives a "horse's hoof" and is feeling very unhappy about all this stuff)

 

[Jake]

Yeah, I'm alright Jack too.

I see that you don't give a fig about Tony, just an observation,

I have nothing against Tony, just that I didn't think that thread was his finest moment. He's an adult, and I'm sure he knows that himself. Otherwise, well, he's still here, still moderating, etc, so I don't see the need to stand up for him - what's he lost out of this apart from a bit of debate about the rights and wrongs, which is hardly going to hurt him?

I just can't see why people get so upset, after all it's not the end of Mr Grimsdale.

Yes it is fortunate that mod/admin powers stop short of capital punishment.

 

[ByronBlack]

Just a small point which I think is in danger of being missed; Tony did not ban Jacob, depsite their spat, that was not the result of the ban as far as I can tell from Charley's response, so I think it's a little unfair for the direction of the thread to head that way.

I'm sure it's not too late for all parties to work it out, they just need to work out their differences or come to an understanding.

 

[Philly]

Al
Difficult to give simple black and white answers here. A lot of folks seem to have their own reasons for acting the way they do - not all of it obvious to the fair reader.
I have invested far too many hours in this forum and made far too many friends here to just walk away. We have an anti-social element who have infiltrated the forum and use every opportunity to raise bad feeling.
I, for one, cannot understand why you would spend a fair amount of your time purposely winding people up here. Seriously, how sad have you got to be? We have had members with multiple accounts, posting replies to their own threads under different names to purposely "get things going". WHY??
The whole spirit of UK Workshop is of sharing - openly, honestly and with no "keeping tabs". I know that a large amount of members have received and given advice, materials, tools and more freely to other members with no need for recompense. The spirit of generosity. And the forum is also open to all types of people - "professionals, hobbiests, DIY'ers, beginners, experts and industry icons" There is no "my opinion is more valid because I am a (enter label here)", it is a free and open exchange of info and experiences.
All this you know - you are a valued and loved member of this community. And I know you are (and have in the past) been frustrated by the way aspects of the forum are managed. This you need to discuss with the owner, Charley. I won't comment on the situation with Jacob here, but would add that the Mods who freely give their time to make this forum a positive place to be have no hidden agenda - only a passion to maintain the healthy atmosphere we have enjoyed over the years.

As an aside, if there are members who would be interested in giving of their spare time to moderate this forum please PM me or Charley to discuss this.

Phil

 

[Adam]

Just a small point which I think is in danger of being missed; Tony did not ban Jacob, depsite their spat, that was not the result of the ban as far as I can tell from Charley's response,

Correct.

I, for one, cannot understand why you would spend a fair amount of your time purposely winding people up here. Seriously, how sad have you got to be? We have had members with multiple accounts, posting replies to their own threads under different names to purposely "get things going". WHY??

Perhaps this gives people a sense of what has been going on behind the scenes. Its been troll city in here with people using multiple accounts to create havoc in threads.

Adam

 

[Scrit]

I started this thread because I was concerned about losing one of our more colourful, and despite snide comments by some, one of our more experienced and knowledgeable members. I think I can safely say that I and a number of other professional woodworkers on UKWS have become somewhat disenchanted by some of the happenings over recent months. Comments by some individuals seem to exhibit an attitude that it is OK to have us pros to answer questions but that otherwise we should keep our opinions to ourselves - especially if we dare to contradict what is being put out by those seeking to use the forum to further their sales pitch or where someone is obviously (at least to me) peddling methods of work which are downright dangerous and irresponsible (hence my Grade A silly person comments from time to time). To my mind there has been rather a lot of this of late.

The big problem with the Internet is that "all comments are of similar worth", allegedly, and it can be extremely frustrating to give advice based on sound theory and practical experience only to see someone else steam in full of hot air and fury to denigrate one's expertise - the same expertise, very often, which one calls on to earn a living. In fact at times some of the comments directed at me and my fellow tradesmen are downright insulting (if only of my trade rather than of me personally) and not something that people in the so-called professionals would tolerate. This doesn't mean that the tradesmen amongst us won't stop posting, but at times it does cause me at least to be less than keen to participate.

Just like Jacob, I too can be a garrilous individual. This come in part from being in the trades where a much more robust sense of humour is required; work on a building site or a shop fit for a week or two and you'll soon get the drift. This sometimes translates into my scribblings and can make my approach to others seem a bit brusque. I don't feel that Jacob is any different and whilst I may not have agreed with him at times, I nonetheless respected his opinions and found his points of view entertaining, informative and often educational - surely part of the raison d'etre of this forum. I will for one miss his valuable input here.

I understand that the Mods sometimes walk a very difficult path and that it can be difficult to do the 'job' in a way which seems even handed. Let's also not forget that the Mods are giving their time and efforts gratis, which I have no doubt can make theirs seem a thankless task at times. I do, though, feel that some of the moderation has been a bit heavy handed at times and I look forward to seeing what Charley has in store for us.

A forum is the sum of all its' members (and moderators) input and I feel that UKWS is indisputably one of the best woodworking forums anywhere. Like Alf, I think I can fairly say that I also have a fair bit invested in this forum and I look forward to it's continuation long into the future. I just hope that the disputes we have seen in recent times abate.

Scrit

 

[Mike.C]

Well said Philly.

I agree with Philly, and I have said it time and time again that the generosity of members on this forum is unbelievable, and I hope he does not mind me saying it but Philly is one of these members. He like many others give their time freely to help both on and off the forum

Do not let the trouble makers spoil this great forum.

Cheers

Mike