Were you mis-sold a moderation policy?

How many urc regulars (with an interest in cycling) are there, who
went over to urcm, but lost all faith in the moderation process and
returned here?
Any number?

On 13/12/2012 22:30, Squashme wrote:
How many urc regulars (with an interest in cycling) are there, who
went over to urcm, but lost all faith in the moderation process and
returned here?
Any number?


I was initially very interested in the moderated group but lost faith in
the moderation team.

If the moderation processed changed I might use the moderated group. I
do post to ulm occasionally.

On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 22:30:21 -0000, Squashme wrote:

How many urc regulars (with an interest in cycling) are there, who
went over to urcm, but lost all faith in the moderation process and
returned here?
Any number?

I did, and still do, as this group doesn't get seem to do much more than
provide a boxing ring for the pro- and anti- cycling brigades.


--
[dash dash space newline 4line sig]

Money/Life question

"Luke Moore" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Dec 2012 09:58:17 -0000, "Stanley Daniel de Liver"
wrote:

On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 22:30:21 -0000, Squashme wrote:

How many urc regulars (with an interest in cycling) are there, who
went over to urcm, but lost all faith in the moderation process and
returned here?
Any number?

I did, and still do, as this group doesn't get seem to do much more than
provide a boxing ring for the pro- and anti- cycling brigades.

I see this place as more of a playground than a boxing ring, while the
other place is being moderated in power-crazed fashion. Both are still
of value but limited in their different ways.

By definition, if you censor every "inflammatory" post or poster, then
you're only allowing opinions shared by the majority, it's no longer a
"discussion" group but a propaganda exercise.

Maybe we should start a moderated anti-cyclist group, and "moderate" every
post from a cyclist.

Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

Maybe we should start a moderated anti-cyclist group,

On you go then.

Does this mean you will stop posting to URC? Tell you what, I will
promise here and now not to sully your new anti-cycling group, but you
must promise not to post to URC.

On Dec 14, 3:00*pm, soup wrote:
* *Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

Maybe we should start a moderated anti-cyclist group,

On you go then.

Does this mean you will stop posting to URC? *Tell you what, I will
promise here and now not to sully your new anti-cycling group, but you
must promise not to post to URC.

Yes, they have no real reason to be here now. Remember what Cheerless
wrote in September:-

"Many people (myself included) only came to this group because of
Doug's
ravings"

No Doug, no Cheerless.

--------------------------------
'Now watch,' said the Zebra and the Giraffe. 'This is the way it's
done. One--two--three! And where's your breakfast?'

Squashme wrote:
On Dec 14, 3:00 pm, soup wrote:
Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

Maybe we should start a moderated anti-cyclist group,

On you go then.

Does this mean you will stop posting to URC? Tell you what, I will
promise here and now not to sully your new anti-cycling group, but
you must promise not to post to URC.

Yes, they have no real reason to be here now. Remember what Cheerless
wrote in September:-

"Many people (myself included) only came to this group because of
Doug's
ravings"

No Doug, no Cheerless.

--------------------------------
'Now watch,' said the Zebra and the Giraffe. 'This is the way it's
done. One--two--three! And where's your breakfast?'

but I have stayed because of the rest of you.

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
news
Squashme wrote:
On Dec 14, 3:00 pm, soup wrote:
Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

Maybe we should start a moderated anti-cyclist group,

On you go then.

Does this mean you will stop posting to URC? Tell you what, I will
promise here and now not to sully your new anti-cycling group, but
you must promise not to post to URC.

Yes, they have no real reason to be here now. Remember what Cheerless
wrote in September:-

"Many people (myself included) only came to this group because of
Doug's
ravings"

No Doug, no Cheerless.

--------------------------------
'Now watch,' said the Zebra and the Giraffe. 'This is the way it's
done. One--two--three! And where's your breakfast?'

but I have stayed because of the rest of you.

Same here. I thought Doug was the stand-out loon, I didn't realise he was
the tip of the iceberg.

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
news
Squashme wrote:
On Dec 14, 3:00 pm, soup wrote:
Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

Maybe we should start a moderated anti-cyclist group,

On you go then.

Does this mean you will stop posting to URC? Tell you what, I will
promise here and now not to sully your new anti-cycling group, but
you must promise not to post to URC.

Yes, they have no real reason to be here now. Remember what Cheerless
wrote in September:-

"Many people (myself included) only came to this group because of
Doug's
ravings"

No Doug, no Cheerless.

--------------------------------
'Now watch,' said the Zebra and the Giraffe. 'This is the way it's
done. One--two--three! And where's your breakfast?'

but I have stayed because of the rest of you.

Same here. I thought Doug was the stand-out loon, I didn't realise he was
the tip of the iceberg.

"soup" wrote in message
...
Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

Maybe we should start a moderated anti-cyclist group,

On you go then.

Does this mean you will stop posting to URC?

Why on earth would it?

Tell you what, I will
promise here and now not to sully your new anti-cycling group, but you
must promise not to post to URC.

I suspect your posts would be rejected for being "inflammatory" anyway.