Forum Feedback (Please thank this post so we know you have seen it)

GreeBo

Domo1982 wrote: »

For sure but that's not the point I'm making Dr Rieux. Is there not a responsibility on the 2 persona's not to encroach on each other?

Take the Distance Membership thread as an example a few months back. Greebo's behaviour(as a regular poster) on that thread was deserving of censure in my opinion but no action was taken. I'm sure that's not the only example of this.

There is no such rule of responsibility other than to mod the forum. You can assume that we are 3 robots who always back each other up and you would be wrong, we frequently disagree on things, both publicaly and privately.

Did you report the posts you had a problem with? If not then frankly you have no business complaining.

SnowDrifts wrote: »

So can you confirm how many reports were received about your post Greebo? Can you also confirm what other mods were consulted before you ignorantly decided to dismiss the reports?

Let me guess..... it was just you Greebo wasn't it? And as I said before.... it's your way or no way.

I dont consult other mods about an action I have taken, thats for the poster in question to raise via DRP if they so wish. Thats the process on boards.
Why do you think I ignorantly decided to dismiss anything?
In actuality I started a discussion about the post in question on the mods forum. It wasnt dismissed and there was certainly no ignorance involved, at least on my part. I decided that there was no action required, as I and we often do on reported posts.
Again there are 3 other mods, CMods and Admins on here, do you seriously think I have the whole place in my pocket some how?

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

GreeBo.

We are not here for your selectively chosen multi quote game.

We are here to see can you change again.

You did it before.

What actually motivates you.

Me and you are polar opposites. In every way. Except handicap maybe.

But I would never ignore anyone. This should be about being exposed to opposing views and
Experiences.

I know you don't take on board what others think or do. But if you (plural) are ever going to improve in life, golf - you have to be Open to views and change.

I think you are cracking contributor. But too closed to say maybe or good idea or ill try that.


Anyway keep it up. I respect your views.

If you are not here to read my posts then feel free not to reply to them.
I replied to everyone who made a point that I had something to comment on.
I certainly am unlikely to take on board any point made in the manner you and several others may be trying to make.
You accuse me of being closed to others views, unwilling to change and ignorant, take a look at the stuff I get directed personally towards me here and tell me who is acting incorrectly?

bustercherry

GreeBo wrote: »

How about I respect the vast, VAST majority of posters who didnt have a problem with it, or ALL of the mods, CMODS and Admins who didnt do anything about it?
How about you realise its not all about you?

This whole thing could have been avoided if you followed the rules of the forum, if you treated others the way you DEMAND to be treated and if you didnt throw your toys out of the pram everytime you get pulled up on something that you were doing wrong.


Sorry whats not ok? That I reply in exactly the same way as gorfield has accused me of? Am I suddenly not entitled to a point of view, not entitled to defend myself?


Why should the post be removed?
Explain whats defamatory of offensive about it, tell me what it insinuates or how it insinuates anything?
It clearly and factually states that gorfield is acting in a manner that he himself had a problem with other posters doing in the past, on more than one occasion. There is no slight of character, no hint at any wrong doing, merely that gorfield took issue with the reactions of some people to something he did. Why are you assuming its something negative? I didnt mention of frame anything in such a way. The only reason its now assumed to be negative is due to the reaction of posters like you and gorfield himself.

I was talking about the post I reported. You know thd one where you were taking the piss out of the woman who had a Stoke after getting hit in the head with s golf ball.

Keano

You broke the rule of attack the post and not the poster.

I don't agree with the original post nor the moderators reaction to it. The post should have been removed and the poster given a warning via PM. It was handled terribly IMO.

SnowDrifts

There's no point quoting gorefield Greebo - as you can see he has closed his account.

Would he have closed his account had you posted a fair warning without making things personal - probably not.

Would he have closed his account had you taken on board the complaints you received and altered your warning to something more appropriate - probably not.

Kudos. Another poster gone. You will never change. And you can come back as much as you want with your routine retorts, I won't be listening.

GreeBo

Keano A Legend wrote: »

You broke the rule of attack the post and not the poster.

I don't agree with the original post nor the moderators reaction to it. The post should have been removed and the poster given a warning via PM. It was handled terribly IMO.

Im sorry but there was no such attack, please point it out?
I merely explained to the poster why it was inappropriate with an example they would understand.

If I had deleted the post and handled it via PM then posters like SnowDrifts would be on here complaining that Mods were deleting posts behind the scenes.

Snowdrifts wrote:

Then to add insult to the poster

Which is it you actually want, behind the scenes or in public, because you cant have both.

Keano

You dragged up old stuff that most posters probably didn't know about. You made it personal, yes or no?

GreeBo

Keano A Legend wrote: »

You dragged up old stuff that most posters probably didn't know about. You made it personal, yes or no?

I gave an explanation that I felt Gorfield would understand, since its something that he has experienced on more than one occasion.
It was a personal warning as it was directed purely at one poster, rather than the forum, it was however posted in public so all would be aware of what is not tolerated.

It was "dragged up" by his follow up posts and this feedback thread.

Keano

Don't disagree with that but a simple we are not going there and you know why one liner would have done. Not the spiel you felt it had to give. It got personal and their is history.

Rikand

GreeBo wrote: »

How about I respect the vast, VAST majority of posters who didnt have a problem with it,

Just because the whole forum didnt report it, doesnt mean people didn't have a problem with it

GreeBo wrote: »

Why should the post be removed?
.

Because 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Maybe gorfield was wrong to go about things the way he did a couple of years ago, it doesnt make it right for you to go and ram it back in his face.

kyleman

Rikand wrote: »

A lot of people in this thread need a nice tall glass of grow the **** up

Maybe so but saying the vast number on here have no problems with the Moderator just because they do not report it is rubbish!!

Rikand

kyleman wrote: »

Maybe so but saying the vast number on here have no problems with the Moderator just because they do not report it is rubbish!!

I deleted that post because part of being a grown up is not letting myself get riled up by childish behaviour

FixdePitchmark

kyleman wrote: »

Maybe so but saying the vast number on here have no problems with the Moderator just because they do not report it is rubbish!!

I've never reported a post in my life.

Can we not just deal with it man to man

If a forum is working well, it needs no moderation - it is self moderating. There was a period there when there was hardly a card for 6 months.

What typically happens is someone will mention one of the billion sub rules of rules - this then turns into the direction of the thread and it is tit for tat till a card is given out.

I wonder are there way more cards here than most other fora ? (over the years).

The gambling thing and Rory's nationality for example are a joke - these typically end up with over aggressive moderation - absolute ridiculous rules both of them - that is almost at ceausescu level. Was funny at one stage where every media outlet in the country was talking about Rory and we couldn't

I genuinely feel the moderation is the source of much of the problems here. People are just not use to such harsh control on them. It is just not natural in the modern world and internet.

There are genuine head bangers that need to be controlled (me for one) - but some of the soundest contributors are just risen into a situation where " they are given enough rope to hang themselves".

Anyway - it is not really that important - it is meant to be a bit of a laugh too - But I understand some people don't want this to be a "playground".

For all the bitching - we will forget all this and carry on.

Fair play GreeBo - you always have a good reply.

Benny Cake

If I'm ever up in front of court I'm bringing greebo.. He'd convince you black was white.

Felexicon

GreeBo wrote: »

it was directed purely at one poster

That's the issue people seem to have with it. If I direct something at a poster I'm open to infraction.

Think this is one to take on the chin, put your hand up and say fair point lads I was posting with my heart there and went over the line.

Saying that, I think it's a bit childish to go closing your account because someone on the internet doesn't like you.

GreeBo

Keano A Legend wrote: »

Don't disagree with that but a simple we are not going there and you know why one liner would have done. Not the spiel you felt it had to give. It got personal and their is history.

Are you seriously telling me that you wouldn't have this exact same reaction wondering what I was implying?

There was no spiel, I said dont go there for the same reason you didnt want people to go there. Nothing else, I didnt imply anything other than the fact that gorfield had an issue with people talking about him on here. I didnt say why they were or if they were wrong or right or if what they were talking about was good or bad. I didnt imply anything about it at all in fact, just that there was a previous situation where gorfield didnt like being spoken about.

There was nothing personal about it in the slightest, I dont know anything about him or have had any interaction other than the times he has PM'd me to complain.

Rikand wrote: »

Just because the whole forum didnt report it, doesnt mean people didn't have a problem with it

Well thats how the forum runs, people report things they have a problem with.
It not being reporting means nothing definitive either way, the small number of reports also, in the scheme of things means little.

Rikand wrote: »

Because 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Maybe gorfield was wrong to go about things the way he did a couple of years ago, it doesnt make it right for you to go and ram it back in his face.

Again you are missing the point, Im not making any comment on what he did or didnt do, Im purely speaking about the fact that he complained that people were talking about him. Nothing more. If you choose to read into what you think he did then thats your issue.

Felexicon wrote: »

That's the issue people seem to have with it. If I direct something at a poster I'm open to infraction.

Think this is one to take on the chin, put your hand up and say fair point lads I was posting with my heart there and went over the line.

moderators direct warnings at posters all the time, thats how it works.
I didnt attack the poster, thats what you get infracted for.
There was no heart involved, none.

Felexicon wrote: »

Saying that, I think it's a bit childish to go closing your account because someone on the internet doesn't like you.

I dont disagree, other than the fact that it has nothing to do with like or dislike either way from my side.

Felexicon

GreeBo wrote: »

moderators direct warnings at posters all the time, thats how it works.
I didnt attack the poster, thats what you get infracted for.
There was no heart involved, none.

I dont disagree, other than the fact that it has nothing to do with like or dislike either way from my side.

You did make it personal against the poster by bringing up his previous actions which was nothing to do with the post you were warning/infracting him for. I think this was unnecessary and a bit out of order.

In life I often go by the philosophy that if I have to continually explain my actions I'm more than likely in the wrong.
If you read back over this thread, you're doing a lot of explaining.

GreeBo

Felexicon wrote: »

You did make it personal against the poster by bringing up his previous actions which was nothing to do with the post you were warning/infracting him for. I think this was unnecessary and a bit out of order.

It was exactly to do with the post in question, it was a specific example to the specific poster as to why what they were doing was in appropriate.

Felexicon wrote: »

In life I often go by the philosophy that if I have to continually explain my actions I'm more than likely in the wrong.
If you read back over this thread, you're doing a lot of explaining.

Im doing a lot of explaining because a lot of people are doing a lot of misunderstanding, especially about things that they dont have the full picture on.

Keano

Roughly there are 5 or 6 who think you were wrong. You'll never change, nor ever admit you were wrong about anything. You'd make some politican. No point carrying on the discussion...

GreeBo

Keano A Legend wrote: »

Roughly there are 5 or 6 who think you were wrong. You'll never change, nor ever admit you were wrong about anything. You'd make some politican. No point carrying on the discussion...

And at least 4 or 5 who dont, agreed there is no point continuing.

You think that because you had a problem with it and reported it that it immediately means something will happen, thats not reality, reported posts are reviewed and actioned if deemed necessary.

Equally some of you will never change, you think every warning and infraction is a personal attack by me and that you are totally innocent of any wrong doing.

alxmorgan

GreeBo wrote: »

And at least 4 or 5 who dont, agreed there is no point continuing.

You think that because you had a problem with it and reported it that it immediately means something will happen, thats not reality, reported posts are reviewed and actioned if deemed necessary.

Equally some of you will never change, you think every warning and infraction is a personal attack by me and that you are totally innocent of any wrong doing.

How did mentioning the posters history help though ? It only confused the issue. That info could surely have been better addressed to the specific poster in PM ?

Keano

Hold up.

Firstly, I didn't report it. Why? Because I thought it'd be taken down immediately as it was a knee jerk post. Secondly, I think most of your moderation is actually ok and have no problem with it. This situation was just handled badly.

/out

Felexicon

GreeBo wrote: »

It was exactly to do with the post in question, it was a specific example to the specific poster as to why what they were doing was in appropriate.


Im doing a lot of explaining because a lot of people are doing a lot of misunderstanding, especially about things that they dont have the full picture on.

So the majority of posters in this thread are wrong and you're spending a full day trying to show them the error of their ways?

Take this discussion off the internet and imagine it in a pub or better yet out on the course. What do you think peoples reaction to you would be. Are any of them saying "You know what,I thought you were wrong the first 40 times you said that, but now I see where you're coming from"

GreeBo

alxmorgan wrote: »

How did mentioning the posters history help though ? It only confused the issue. That info could surely have been better addressed to the specific poster in PM ?

I addressed that earlier, I get accused of doing things behind closed doors if we handle things in the background.
There was nothing in my post that implied the gorfield had done anything other than take issue with people talking about him in the past.

Thats an historical fact.

If anything I'd be more likely to now think he thinks it was something bad, based on his toys out of the pram reaction.

This is a grown up real world place where people are not going to be treated like prima donna children.
Moderators are not going to take action on thread and via PM to ensure that no one can take any possible umbrage with the wording of a warning.

Eoinyh

I think your a terrible mod, an you have made the issue with gor personal, you can come back with all the counter arguments you want (which you always do) it should of been private,there is no common sense to your moderation, tell us who's decision was it about the mcilroy post been restricted, nonsense,if you are criticised by a poster as a poster it looks very much like you use your mod powers for some pay back, some things just need to go under the radar, don't worry your not the first bad mod an won't be the last to ruin a good forum.

Miley Byrne

GreeBo wrote: »

Equally some of you will never change, you think every warning and infraction is a personal attack by me and that you are totally innocent of any wrong doing.

And with that I am out too. What you posted above sums up the problem posters have with your modding/posting style

Later

GreeBo

Felexicon wrote: »

So the majority of posters in this thread are wrong and you're spending a full day trying to show them the error of their ways?

Take this discussion off the internet and imagine it in a pub or better yet out on the course. What do you think peoples reaction to you would be. Are any of them saying "You know what,I thought you were wrong the first 40 times you said that, but now I see where you're coming from"

The few posters on here have convinced themselves that I made an attack on gorfield.
Go read my warning again.
It clearly and solely reminded him that he didn't like people talking about him. That's it.
It didn't mention what or why people were talking about him.
It didn't pass any judgement about him
It didn't imply that he did wrong
It didn't imply that he did anything other than complain about people talking about him.

You are taking issue with my post based on your feelings on what gorfield did in the past and somehow imagining that I'm bringing that up.
I'm not, not in any way.

Seriously, go read the post again and by all means point out to me where I implied he had done anything wrong.

If anyone does I'll resign immediately as golf mod.

FixdePitchmark

GreeBo wrote: »

I addressed that earlier, I get accused of doing things behind closed doors if we handle things in the background.
There was nothing in my post that implied the gorfield had done anything other than take issue with people talking about him in the past.

Thats an historical fact.

If anything I'd be more likely to now think he thinks it was something bad, based on his toys out of the pram reaction.

This is a grown up real world place where people are not going to be treated like prima donna children.
Moderators are not going to take action on thread and via PM to ensure that no one can take any possible umbrage with the wording of a warning.

But GreeBo - some of the problem here, is the way you talk about other posters. Look at the words above

Toys out of pram
Grown up Real World
Prima Donna children

There are people here from all walks of life - all levels of responsibility and achievement. Some - very high levels of achievement.

Don't be judging people on their on-line persona.

You are just an unelected moderator on a golf forum. A bloody good one - but.

You are not above anybody and this is not The Real World. This is a world where a pseudonyms provides an ability to speak openly.

This is such a great opportunity - (as you do yourself) , to talk about all the ills of the game - absolute gold stuff has been revealed about Cups and Shields, dodgy handicaps etc. It isn't the real world - we should cherish the risk and freedom that provides. Yes - it means we are very frequently on the edge - so moderating is very very difficult.

At the end of the day another top contributor is gone - and you know what, what he has done in the game should have a bit of pull in a golf forum. (IMO) - same with SEVE3Iron - and I'm sure others could name a few.

I think the most positive stuff I read on this forum - was when we all got together collectively to support him out west - it was a real example of the best thing about here - a genuine sense of good will towards another poster, another golfer - and behind all the bull**** here , that is the most positive thing. If you, or any regular - posted - I had my best round last week , we would all be genuinely happy for him - well most would

I think people who are successful at golf / real life - are not going to be talked down to - that is part of why we lose the best people here - they don't take cards lightly - yes they are wrong, it is a personality flaw , but it is a reality of the dynamics of these types of personalities. Also the language is very condescending.

You'll have to be honest here GreeBo - if you got a card you would fight it to the death , you are the same as these lads. Most of us are a bit like that.

Yes, you can't have one rule for one and another for another - but Jesus - give a bit of respect to regular contributors who basically make the place.
Maybe a pm to them first.

You do a great job moderating - but people who read the forum want the best contributors on it.

I accept that does not give them carte blanch.

But if we are losing the best lads here - there is something wrong.

Again - a game of golf would sort all this - trust me.

Anyway - enough said - best of luck all.

dennyire

Wow. greebo...offering to resign? You gave me a stupid month ban last year for asking could I stream a golf event (and obviously implied legally)....guess its all catching up with you now...love watching this forum...don't contribute much but enjoy...have to agree with majority...you are over the top

Felexicon

GreeBo wrote: »

It clearly and solely reminded him that he didn't like people talking about him.

And this is the issue. You felt he breached or was close to breaching the charter but rather than just give him a warning/infraction you made a comment (while carrying out moderator duties) that was a personal dig at him. It makes no difference if he has or hasn't complained about something in the past and by you including that in your warning it comes across to a number of regular posters that you are using the opportunity to get back at him for a previous issue which is not a good way to moderate.

GreeBo

30 posts in 12 months is not a regular contributor, less if you include the posts that are not about himself.

Being a good golfer gives you exactly zero extra rights on here,full stop.

Causing mods extra work because you change your mind and want your old posts deleted doors not make you a good contributer.


What people are our have achieved in the real world is irrelevant on here, that will never change, and that's a good thing.

We are not going to avoid cards because people don't like being told they are wrong, that's an impressive way to run a free forum.

Re read some of the posts directed at me on this and other threads and then come back to me and talk about language.

The three bolded phrases are perfectly apt, gorfield took his ball abd went home, like he had threatened before, simply because he didn't get his way. That is a child's reaction. It's the equivalent of a temper tantrum and just as effective.
I don't believe for one minute that we have lost someone who makes this forum any way better, certainly not more than any other poster.
Someone like parlance or keano contributes far more than gorfield ever could.
You yourself contribute at least half of the volume of text on the forum., despite the underground forces trying to remove you of course

GreeBo

Felexicon wrote: »

And this is the issue. You felt he breached or was close to breaching the charter but rather than just give him a warning/infraction you made a comment (while carrying out moderator duties) that was a personal dig at him. It makes no difference if he has or hasn't complained about something in the past and by you including that in your warning it comes across to a number of regular posters that you are using the opportunity to get back at him for a previous issue which is not a good way to moderate.

What personal dig?
The thing he complained about is exactly what he was doing, I pointed that out to revolution the reason for the warning.

I don't have a previous issue with him, I have next to no interaction with him in over a year.

FixdePitchmark

GreeBo wrote: »

30 posts in 12 months is not a regular contributor, less if you include the posts that are not about himself.

Being a good golfer gives you exactly zero extra rights on here,full stop.

Causing mods extra work because you change your mind and want your old posts deleted doors not make you a good contributer.


What people are our have achieved in the real world is irrelevant on here, that will never change, and that's a good thing.

We are not going to avoid cards because people don't like being told they are wrong, that's an impressive way to run a free forum.

Re read some of the posts directed at me on this and other threads and then come back to me and talk about language.

The three bolded phrases are perfectly apt, gorfield took his ball abd went home, like he had threatened before, simply because he didn't get his way. That is a child's reaction. It's the equivalent of a temper tantrum and just as effective.
I don't believe for one minute that we have lost someone who makes this forum any way better, certainly not more than any other poster.
Someone like parlance or keano contributes far more than gorfield ever could.
You yourself contribute at least half of the volume of text on the forum., despite the underground forces trying to remove you of course

:D:D

Your ****ing class Greeb.

dennyire

beginning to wonder.. Greebo up so late and Ryder jug in morning....hope its not a tactical thing ..lose sleep? My bad x and goodnight

Felexicon

GreeBo wrote: »

What personal dig?
The thing he complained about is exactly what he was doing, I pointed that out to revolution the reason for the warning.

I don't have a previous issue with him, I have next to no interaction with him in over a year.

So you have no previous issue but you brought up a previous issue when giving the warning.

GreeBo

dennyire wrote: »

Wow. greebo...offering to resign? You gave me a stupid month ban last year for asking could I stream a golf event (and obviously implied legally)....guess its all catching up with you now...love watching this forum...don't contribute much but enjoy...have to agree with majority...you are over the top

Since you bring it up.
You asked for a stream, no mention of legal
We had several pm conversations where I explained the rules and you accepted them " fair enough" were your words.
You admitted that you hadn't read the charter in ages and had thought it was still ok to ask for streams.
I explained to you how you could still follow the posts as a guest.
I then removed your ban months earlier than it excited so you could partake in the next event thread.

Thanks for repaying my efforts by being so open and honest about what happened in your post.

FixdePitchmark

GreeBo - sorry my parting glass.

Do you actually have a child ?

I'm guessing you don't - I think you are in for a rude awaking when you do.

A harsh - black and white always right - simply will not work with them. That is how the "Real World Is".

Best of luck lad - I'll be out of your hair soon enough.

Your a legend man.

GreeBo

Felexicon wrote: »

So you have no previous issue but you brought up a previous issue when giving the warning.

Gorfield had the previous issue, back when he threatened legal action against boards.ie because of what someone else quoted in a post from gorfields Twitter account.

Felexicon

GreeBo wrote: »

Gorfield had the previous issue, back when he threatened legal action against boards.ie because of what someone else quoted in a post from gorfields Twitter account.

Why bring that back up though when it had little if anything to do with you?
Are you white knighting for boards.ie?

bustercherry

I've only caught up to where Greebo's quitting. Has he followed through yet?

GreeBo

Felexicon wrote: »

Why bring that back up though when it had little if anything to do with you?
Are you white knighting for boards.ie?

I brought it back up to explain to the poster why what they were doing was wrong.

No I'm the dark night, not what you want but what you need.

GreeBo

bustercherry wrote: »

I've only caught up to where Greebo's quitting. Has he followed through yet?

Yep, just as soon as someone presents a shred of evidence for what I'm being accused of.

Btw this is the feedback thread, not the daily mail.

Rikand

GreeBo wrote: »

Again you are missing the point, Im not making any comment on what he did or didnt do, Im purely speaking about the fact that he complained that people were talking about him. Nothing more. If you choose to read into what you think he did then thats your issue.

GreeBo wrote: »

Please don't imply things about players or clubs, if you have something to state then state it, otherwise don't.
You got very upset in the past when people mentioned your name on here in connection with things you had done, afford others the same rights you demanded.

Im not making any comment on what he did or didnt do,

in connection with things you had done,

/thread

bustercherry

Is that game set and match? I wanna get back to the daily mail.

Felexicon

GreeBo wrote: »

I brought it back up to explain to the poster why what they were doing was wrong.

No I'm the dark night, not what you want but what you need.

So the only reason what he was doing was wrong was because he gave out about the same actions previously?

FixdePitchmark

[IMG][/img]


Joke man

Felexicon

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

[IMG][/img]


Joke man

Didn't realise Fern Britton was married to GreeBo

FixdePitchmark

For **** sake - at this stage you just got to laugh.

Goodnight - game of golf to win in am.

Love you all. ALL

GreeBo

Rikand wrote: »

/thread

So what comment did I make about what he had done?

GreeBo

Felexicon wrote: »

So the only reason what he was doing was wrong was because he gave out about the same actions previously?

No, he was implying things about the club and the golfer, this hads all been covered pages ago btw.

Post #440

Rikand

GreeBo wrote: »

The few posters on here have convinced themselves that I made an attack on gorfield.
Go read my warning again.
It clearly and solely reminded him that he didn't like people talking about him. That's it.
It didn't mention what or why people were talking about him.
It didn't pass any judgement about him
It didn't imply that he did wrong
It didn't imply that he did anything other than complain about people talking about him.

You are taking issue with my post based on your feelings on what gorfield did in the past and somehow imagining that I'm bringing that up.
I'm not, not in any way.

Seriously, go read the post again and by all means point out to me where I implied he had done anything wrong.

If anyone does I'll resign immediately as golf mod.

Gorfield made an implication about the player and the club
So you made an implication about his past posting.

Just like Gorfields post where he didn't go into specifics, neither did you. Therefore, it was an implication of wrong doing

Please don't imply things about players or clubs, if you have something to state then state it, otherwise don't.
You got very upset in the past when people mentioned your name on here in connection with things you had done, afford others the same rights you demanded.

btw, don't resign on my account.

Gorfield has resigned, so I think that pretty much settles it

It clearly and solely reminded him that he didn't like people talking about him. That's it.

This is the one thing that really irks me about this whole situation. Everytime there's an infraction or some bone of contention, it's a "take it to PM's kind of a situation". Why couldnt you have just contact Gorfield by PM and said :: " Hey, you've done this thing before. Cut it out ta feck....." or " remember what happened last time you said something controversial and you got us to delete stuff..... " something like that.

Nope, instead you publicly imply his past discretions in the thread.

And you can say that you didn't actually say them all you want. You implied there was something more sinister at hand, whether you want to admit it or not. To me, It was implied!

It was through this implication that i was able to find out what had happened before. Whereas before your post, I would have been none the wiser