Dr Good Vibe Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 I for one as well as many others by the look of it would like to know thank you Mark. I enjoyed his posts and images as many did please explain. Is anyone else wondering?
Aslan Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 I think Marc has made his position clear in another thread Doc. The view is that Jack was using his thread to promote the fact that he has a new showroom and new products on offer, hence it was removed. Likewise, I have been banned from listing any of my run out stock, plant equipment, etc as I am no longer a sponsor. Vince has been called to account in his Aussie Turntable thread. No one is being singled out for special treatment, rather the existing rules are being rigidly enforced.
New Sensations Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 The view is that Jack was using his thread to promote the fact that he has a new showroom and new products on offer, hence it was removed. I sincerely hope Keith didn't leave because of this. I'll miss his Lord Vader avatar and presence.
Super Mustud Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 I think Marc has made his position clear in another thread Doc.The view is that Jack was using his thread to promote the fact that he has a new showroom and new products on offer, hence it was removed. Likewise, I have been banned from listing any of my run out stock, plant equipment, etc as I am no longer a sponsor. Vince has been called to account in his Aussie Turntable thread. No one is being singled out for special treatment, rather the existing rules are being rigidly enforced. That seems reasonable. Perhaps the only other question is whether there was some behind the scenes notification to the naughty people to make it clear that patience was exhausted/ Having said that, its Marc's forum and he who puts up the dosh makes the rules. I am a little pissed off with the traders who bent the rules, as there is info on those threads that is interesting. If this info becomes unavailable because of the advertising content then the rule benders are really shooting themselves in the foot, as they lose ALL coverage, not just the naughty bits. Perhaps I am making this comment from a position of overwhelming ignorance.
Super Mustud Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 I sincerely hope Keith didn't leave because of this. I'll miss his Lord Vader avatar and presence. On the other hand we might have the Keith who existed before the Lord Vader incarnation back with us. The original Keith injected a lot of pithy comments into SNA that have been sadly missed due to other commitments. Where are you, Keithy?
Aslan Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 Referring to the second part of your first sentence Mustud............................that's the underlying problem in all of this................it was the sponsors who were putting up most of the dosh! Hence my view that the membership should fund the forum in the future.
Aslan Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 On the other hand we might have the Keith who existed before the Lord Vader incarnation back with us. The original Keith injected a lot of pithy comments into SNA that have been sadly missed due to other commitments.Where are you, Keithy? Hopefully he is having a break and will return with a renewed sense of humour, in the knowledge that the bull**** that goes on is someone else's problem.
Once was an audiophile Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 (edited) I sincerely hope Keith didn't leave because of this. I'll miss his Lord Vader avatar and presence. The force is strong JD i can feel the presence of keith lord vader Edited July 8, 2011 by kajak12
Dr Good Vibe Posted July 8, 2011 Author Posted July 8, 2011 Referring to the second part of your first sentence Mustud............................that's the underlying problem in all of this................it was the sponsors who were putting up most of the dosh!Hence my view that the membership should fund the forum in the future. Interesting Andrew, so sponsors were putting a large part of the funding does that mean they also have input to the rules.
Keith_W Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 Where are you, Keithy? Sorry Alex, it is no longer my role to explain difficult moderator decisions to members. Furthermore, it is not my style to be publicly indiscreet and make life hard for my friends back in the team. I am sure one of them will be along shortly.
Super Mustud Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 Sorry Alex, it is no longer my role to explain difficult moderator decisions to members. Furthermore, it is not my style to be publicly indiscreet and make life hard for my friends back in the team. I am sure one of them will be along shortly. No, no, it is not Lord Vader we seek. It is jolly Keith. Remember, the one on that motor bike?
Keith_W Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 **** you, Alex Don't forget that without me on the mod team, you can no longer change your name back to Mustud52. Jokes on you!
Sir Rab of Everest Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 I am a little pissed off with the traders who bent the rules, as there is info on those threads that is interesting. Yes, there was a lot of interesting stuff on a number of threads that probably fell into this category. I just hope that those folks come to the party and pay sponsorship!
Guest Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 The motor bike was one of the funnier moments on sna keith:love
Aslan Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 (edited) Interesting Andrew, so sponsors were putting a large part of the funding does that mean they also have input to the rules. No Dr, I was simply inferring that if someone is paying a hefty slice of the upkeep they will naturally expect to be given a fair go and that the rules will not discriminate against them. The sponsors have bailed in numbers because its friggin expensive and the vast majority of the membership couldn't give a rats **** and not only didn't support them but actually undermined them in some ways. I've personally poured over $8,000 into SNA over a six year period......................about friggin time the "whinging bastards", "dont buy it, you can build it better and cheaper" brigade, the "buy it from Hong Kong its cheaper" brigade, et al; footed the bill for running SNA I reckon. But you know what............they're the ****heads who wont spend a cent to save this place. It'll be a hundred or so genuine nice guys who do and the ****nuckles still will be here. I make no apology if I've offended anyone. Tough ****! Edited July 8, 2011 by Aslan
Grumpy Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 Good onya Andrew, Seems to be a place where we can finally have an opinion without being bullied from doing so, like it use to be.
Telecine Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 **** you, Alex Don't forget that without me on the mod team, you can no longer change your name back to Mustud52. Jokes on you! Good one Keith. Pity you didn't change it to I_Love_Webber on your way out. It could have a been a good note to end on.
ENIGMA Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 The sponsors have bailed in numbers because its friggin expensive That's not the only reason. I feel some of the genuine ones didn't get the appreciation they deserved, some sucked as much blood out of it they could then left and some made a rod for their own backs and left leaving a sour taste.
Aslan Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 (edited) That's not the only reason.I feel some of the genuine ones didn't get the appreciation they deserved, some sucked as much blood out of it they could then left and some made a rod for their own backs and left leaving a sour taste. No argument from me on that score Del. Edited July 8, 2011 by Aslan
Guest Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 No Dr, I was simply inferring that if someone is paying a hefty slice of the upkeep they will naturally expect to be given a fair go and that the rules will not discriminate against them. The sponsors have bailed in numbers because its friggin expensive and the vast majority of the membership couldn't give a rats **** and not only didn't support them but actually undermined them in some ways.I've personally poured over $8,000 into SNA over a six year period......................about friggin time the "whinging bastards", "dont buy it, you can build it better and cheaper" brigade, the "buy it from Hong Kong its cheaper" brigade, et al; footed the bill for running SNA I reckon. But you know what............they're the ****heads who wont spend a cent to save this place. It'll be a hundred or so genuine nice guys who do and the ****nuckles still will be here. I make no apology if I've offended anyone. Tough ****! rat Rrse DIK heads FCUK nuckles tough CHIT
JA Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 (edited) Hello Guys, The closure of the showcase thread was raised in a previous thread and that thread was closed pending the outcome of certain discussions. See: http://www.stereo.net.au/forums/showthread.php/36937-Jcr33?p=548958#post548958 It is also appropriate that this thread be closed so as not to prejudice such discussion and create any further potential angst. My Inbox is only empty enough for a few complaints. Best JA Edited July 8, 2011 by JA
Guest Posted July 9, 2011 Posted July 9, 2011 I will add to this (Thanks JA for handling it). It is difficult to have a public discussion about this, so we cannot - it singles too many people out which is unfair. I will be happy to explain and discuss directly with any member directly involved in the thread in question, or any that feel this affected them directly. The thread in question was the subject of multiple complaints (from both members and sponsors), and after turning a blind eye (because I felt it added value to the StereoNET content) for quite some time, that could not continue given the thread had significant commercial value to the OP, and the OP made the sole decision to discontinue advertising officially on StereoNET some time ago. For the record, I attempted direct communication with the OP regarding the thread which to date has gone unanswered. Unfortunately, I did not consult with the other Administrator on my actions regarding this thread at the time (which I had not deleted, but merely "hidden" pending discussion with the OP), and as a result Keith stood down from any further responsibilities within StereoNET. That is the short and long version of the issue. Again, if anyone wants to discuss this further, then please contact me. There is no need for any further public discussion threads to be started relating to this.
Recommended Posts