|
|
Post by Joe K on Jul 17, 2012 20:28:45 GMT
Apparently, my 'Account has been Disabled'. I can't think what I did specifically to earn this, besides the obvious crime of re-registering after it was made clear I wasn't welcome. I suppose I won't know why the next time either. It seems kind of pointless when other reader/commenters behave so much worse than me, or Kay, or others who seem to incur TiG's displeasure... Anyway, here's the comment I was going to make on the 'Parish 3D'article... It's an interesting suggestion, but I would guess that Sharpness Docks was never on the cards because Stroud Council would not permit it. Housing scheme next to a busy motorway, or housing scheme next to a canal, which seems more lucrative? Now, an 'industrial dockyard', that is a place that could use an energy from waste plant. I wonder if this was discussed at the meeting, which must be coming to a noisy end now? |
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Jul 19, 2012 7:41:43 GMT
I emailed Matt Holmes - and Claire Shanahan, who is in charge of moderation for Northcliffe Media - to explain why my account was disabled while Chris Roberts continues to post as BB_Wolf?
And to post abusively, too. It took me a while to realise, because some of the things BB said seemed to make sense initially, but then bad taste cracks like the one about the town of Sofia in the population increase article started appearing, and I figured it out.
I can't be sure, but I wonder if it wasn't the library decision article that nudged him into reporting me. There was a lot of messing around with the ratings on that story. not by me, but 'BB' would be marked down, then after I posted again, his last comment would be marked up to '0' again, while mine would be marked down. It just goes to show what a pointless, in fact negative feature the rating system is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Jul 19, 2012 22:38:30 GMT
Actually, I think I see what I did, now. In short, annoyed a Dhanda. The comment below has been removed from the Is 'outsider' right for the top police job article (although my correction for the missing 'on' is still there, right after where my post should have been): 'Two thumbs, way, way up for the first candidate to allow 'all and sundry' (hey, I'm part of the 'all and sundry', and I didn't ask her to talk about the Tory short-list...) to share their views the candidates' blogs... 'But I read that blog, and more than anything else, what strikes me is that PD's wfe is being groomed for a constituency seat somewhere, and that this campaign is just an opportunity to cut her teeth on electioneering strategy. What with Labour having no chance of winning and all.' My first ban by TiG was for mentioning that Labour, along with all the other parties, could be economical with the truth during election campaigns, and they seem just as keen as ever to silence people who don't say what they want to hear... |
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Jul 21, 2012 22:31:35 GMT
It's crazy, what is being deleted on TiG. Really, do these comments appear especially offensive? 'You're being as naive as Chris, BB. If it's left to volunteers, the 'limited service' will have a very short shelf-life, and then the building will be sold off. The 'Big Community' is a stunt.' and 'BB_Wolf, have you ever tried not being rude to people? Whether you're actually naive, or in fact being very cynical, it's reasonable to make such an observation. Your jibes are not. Do [you] have much, or any, personal experience of volunteering?' Volunteers get power to take over running library(and I'm not leaving gaps, it's just a weird proboard thing... which may only be visible on my computer, and/or on AOL, so I probably shouldn't have mentioned it) |
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Jul 22, 2012 19:32:55 GMT
Bizarrely, even pointing out that TiG have mistakenly posted a picture meant for one article with another article, and including a link to the correct article, is some kind of violation. From my experiences with TiG's moderating procedure, I have to assume that someone reported this, because TiG rarely take action otherwise. But did they really say, 'yup, that's a violation', when they are happy to let Jpatstarsmead, for example, get away with calling Tory councillors liars despite a complaint? And yes, if someone blatantly accused Labour councillors of lying, without proof, I'd report that too. Pensioners might have to foot bill for church |
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Jul 26, 2012 10:12:20 GMT
A few days ago, I started getting the message that my account had to be validated (after posting over a half dozen comments). My requests for new validation emails only resulted in my being sent my email address and password, until just now it occurred to me to check my spam folder. There were the new validation emails.
So I used one, wrote a comment and...
Sorry… Your Account has been Disabled
|
|
