fdegrove is leaving or kicked out???

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
PedroPO

PedroPO

Member
Joined 2002
#1
I really don't understand this.

I was snooping around sin bin and I found that Planet 10 banned fdegrove(?) in 3/dec/2002.

I don't really know why and I don't want to find out, cause I don't agree with this cop attitude, but well that your forum not mine, I'm just here for the amps.

What amazes me is that the poor bastard said goodbye a few days before.

Is this really necessary?

I allways thougth that this kind of attitudes are the beginning of the end of a beautifull friendship that existed before the Hill Street Blues.

And for the porn thing, you get it when you buy a newspaper, late nigth movies, advertising, everywere. Should we ban them all?

we shouldnt be moralists, we should be making audio.

If some one gets off with his porn advertising, please ignore him and let him enjoy while he can.
 
#2
Pedro,

Frank announced he was leaving due to personal reasons (business) and a couple of days later was banned for a really, really, incredibly stupid reason.

Eric (mr feedback) summed up my views on the subject quite clearly here
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8271&perpage=15&pagenumber=2

and I stated it myself in another thread
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8279&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

<b>Frank's banning is a disgrace and I am totally disgusted.</b>
 
#4
Re: "Frank's banning is a disgrace ....."

mrfeedback said:
All in agreement say aye.

Eric.
Click to expand...
A Disgrace... I don’t know. Reactionary, yes, Stupid, yes, Arrogant, yes, Uncalled For, yes, One-Upsmenship, yes, Instigated, yes, a Travesty, yes, but a disgrace… well alright, aye.

Rodd Yamashita
 
#6
Aye 😡
This quarrel seems more a personal thing between a moderator and Frank. In this case the moderator edited his own words afterwards. Something that IMO is worse than what Frank did.
( BTW what did he really do wrong ?)
Personally I think that the other moderators should interfere in this matter and give Frank the credits he deserves.

Credibility of this site is in question gentlemen moderators...
 
#12
"Personally I think that the other moderators should interfere in this matter and give Frank the credits he deserves."

The decision to ban user fdegrove was a joint decision, which was independantly reviewed by each moderator. The action was put to a vote, and majority ruled on this action. Moderator Dice45, by himself, would not have made this permanent ban action without majority support from the moderator team. THIS WAS A TEAM DECISION.

For your reference, when the message is posted by a moderator and noted "the moderator team has decided " and/or "on behalf of the diyAudio moderator team" or similar, this should be taken literally. The message stating user fdegrove's banning plainly stated this.

The repeated threats made by user fdegrove were unacceptable, as decided by the diyaudio.com moderator team. By threatening diyaudio, user fdegrove demonstrated severe disprespect by attempting to intimidate diyaudio.

-CHRIS8
 
#15
CHRIS8 said:
The repeated threats made by user fdegrove were unacceptable, as decided by the diyaudio.com moderator team. By threatening diyaudio, user fdegrove demonstrated severe disprespect by attempting to intimidate diyaudio.

-CHRIS8
Click to expand...
<b><i>Repeated threats?</i></b> I saw the one that was made in the Fertin thread, which was meant as a back-off and warning to a moderator who had clearly abused his privileges and stepped over the mark, on more than one occaision.
Please enlighten us with thread references to these "other" threats. I do not beleive they exist.

On the contrary, there is clear reference in a number of thread that a moderator here on more than one occaision tried to intimidate a member of good standing and who made many, many valuable contributions to this forum, giving far more to it than he took.

I find your comment to not match up to the evidence I've seen on the forum, and so far find it to be no more than disingenuous hypocrisy.
 
#16
CHRIS8 said:
The decision to ban user fdegrove was a joint decision, which was independantly reviewed by each moderator. The action was put to a vote, and majority ruled on this action. Moderator Dice45, by himself, would not have made this permanent ban action without majority support from the moderator team. THIS WAS A TEAM DECISION
Click to expand...
Did Bernhard vote in this? If so his vote should not count as clearly there was a personal emotional involvement in the issue, and therefore a blatant conflict of interest (between personal and moderation issues). Also, who instigated the vote? Again if it was Bernhard then it should not have taken place at all for the reason I just stated.

What does a majority decision mean? What were the numbers?

If the moderation team ever wish to have any credibility after this fiasco, or the recent comments by another moderator that posts are not deleted, when I have seen it done, Frank should have his membership reinstated immediately.
 
#18
C'mon dig out the info yourself

Brett said:
I find your comment to not match up to the evidence I've seen on the forum, and so far find it to be no more than disingenuous hypocrisy.
Click to expand...


Brett,

The "threats" CHRIS8 is talking about were emails that frank seems to have sent. KenL confirmed in this thread , that frank threatened the moderator team in this mail with legal action.

The legal part of this may bear more weight than you think. I received an E-mail from Frank where he copied what he had sent the site. It was clear that he was threatening legal action and not humourous.
Click to expand...

In the SinBin, planet10 confirms this, but read it yourself.........

IMHO you people should first go and read through the SinBin entry and the related threads before posting obsolete opinions/info. :xeye:
 
#19
Bob,

My opinions are not obsolete at all. I have had many, many emails with Frank over recent weeks, including a number on this exact subject over the last few days, and I <b>know</b> that his intentions were simply to get the offending party to back off.

With all due respect to Ken, I feel he has misinterpreted what was said (I have the email too), and subsequent emails have clarified this point.

I stand by my claim that the moderation actions in this case constitute disingenuous hypocrisy.
 
#20
Brett said:
Bob,

My opinions are not obsolete at all.
Click to expand...

Brett,

sorry for that. 🙁 but I must add that it wasn't aimed at you in particular:
you people
Click to expand...

Brett said:

I have had many, many emails with Frank over recent weeks, including a number on this exact subject over the last few days, and I <b>know</b> that his intentions were simply to get the offending party to back off.

With all due respect to Ken, I feel he has misinterpreted what was said (I have the email too), and subsequent emails have clarified this point.
Click to expand...

Ok, I didn't know you have insight in it.

Brett said:


I stand by my claim that the moderation actions in this case constitute disingenuous hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm, this doesn't make things any better, as Ken backs the moderators, and you claim that Frank is right.

Methinks that mail should be put somewhere so everybody can read it!

As rwagter said, we should perhaps forget this mess, as it just gets worse. I'm not as disappointed about these recent troubles as I am about the incapability of the involved parties to solve it.
I would like to know what happened and contribute to collective reflection on this issue, but it seems like I have to acccept that there is some friction between certain members, that can't be stopped by any rational efforts.

And after all, it's none of my business..............
🙄
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom