Jump to content

Sorry!

This site is in read-only mode right now. You can browse all our old topics (and there's a lot of them) but you won't be able to add to them.

Who wants Tom back?

southernsamurai

By southernsamurai
in General chitchat

 Share

Recommended Posts

southernsamurai Member

southernsamurai

Posted
Posted

INB4 tonguer

INB4 asslicker etc etc

ANYWAY.. this idea stemmed from Justhell's post and input from other members regarding Tom's knowledge and actual good advice/contribution he has to offer when he's not busy winding up IDW or calling out people to strong man comps lolololol..

Surely mods could make a re-consideration and unban his account on the agreement that he contributes positively?

Whose in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FellowshipOfTheRon Veteran member

FellowshipOfTheRon

Posted
Posted

in their moral decisions the mods weren't wrong in banning him but i agree that it may well be worth changing that from say a permanent ban to a 1 or 2 month one instead.. he brings a lot to the plate including good knowledge in all areas here and some good humour. even our govt doesn't indefinitely banish people (for worse crimes at that)

worst case scenario have him restart his modem/router so he gets a new ip, refresh browser cookies and make a new account here... we all start calling him with a hip new name like tamsom or something

Link to comment
Share on other sites
justhell Senior member

justhell

Posted
Posted

Im in favour to bring back Tom,he has alot of knowlage on bodybuilding,

to be honest this place is or can be a little boring without him here,come on pseudo,give the guy a chance,it really would benefit nzbb to have him here.(if he wants to come back).

:nod:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nate225 Veteran member

nate225

Posted
Posted

Oh a community lobby group....how cute :grin: :pfft:

Maybe as your next crusade you could help the Paeroa boy get reinstated at his school..... http://www.nzherald.co.nz/education/new ... d=10888763

In Tom's case is the NZBB forum the "best chance he has for gaining the stability he needs'' :pfft: :grin:

On a serious note, as much as I like Tom, for his knowledge and his wit, he was banned for a specific reason. That doesn't change.

If you really miss him that much pick up the phone or go and see him, he's not overly hard to get hold of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Riccardo Senior member

Riccardo

Posted
Posted

Bring him back, I think its a bit funny that he's been singled out allegedly offering to help out a newbie when I have been hit up by multiple members who are still on here offering to supply gear and have blatantly done so using NZBB for years. When you set a particular precedent for tolerance of such activity from the beginning then all of a sudden start enforcing rules to the letter without prior warning that you are going to start doing so, I think it's a bit unfair.

Set up the sting, name and shame those who get caught if you really want to and hand out a hefty suspension. But when other people flout the rules in a much more obvious manner, yet don't get caught because the fake account happened to be one of the few that they didn't PM that day, I think it's not right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nate225 Veteran member

nate225

Posted
Posted
Naters gonna hate ...... :pfft:

LOLz :pfft:

I get on with Tom well, he's a right royal pain in the ass to manage as a moderator but he knows more than most here (which in some cases isn't saying a lot unfortunately!) about training, diet, gear, and irl is a good guy.

Supposed to be training with him at some point, I'll give him a hug from all his online nuthuggers.... :pfft: :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Daz69 Senior member

Daz69

Posted
Posted
Bring him back, I think its a bit funny that he's been singled out allegedly offering to help out a newbie when I have been hit up by multiple members who are still on here offering to supply gear and have blatantly done so using NZBB for years. When you set a particular precedent for tolerance of such activity from the beginning then all of a sudden start enforcing rules to the letter without prior warning that you are going to start doing so, I think it's a bit unfair.

Set up the sting, name and shame those who get caught if you really want to and hand out a hefty suspension. But when other people flout the rules in a much more obvious manner, yet don't get caught because the fake account happened to be one of the few that they didn't PM that day, I think it's not right.

Well said as usual Riccardo...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nate225 Veteran member

nate225

Posted
Posted
Bring him back, I think its a bit funny that he's been singled out allegedly offering to help out a newbie when I have been hit up by multiple members who are still on here offering to supply gear and have blatantly done so using NZBB for years. When you set a particular precedent for tolerance of such activity from the beginning then all of a sudden start enforcing rules to the letter without prior warning that you are going to start doing so, I think it's a bit unfair.

Set up the sting, name and shame those who get caught if you really want to and hand out a hefty suspension. But when other people flout the rules in a much more obvious manner, yet don't get caught because the fake account happened to be one of the few that they didn't PM that day, I think it's not right.

Well said as usual Riccardo...

It seems ok to blame Tom for alleged supply through PM, but what are the forum rules on a Moderator MP'ing me to supply him with a stack containing a methamphetamine precursor..??

Is that OK..?

Oh I love the dramatics by calling ECA a more provocative name such as "stack containing a methamphetamine precursor"... :pfft: :grin:

At the end of the day the rules are the rules Daz - Ricarrdo's inference that the forum (or Mods) tolerance of supply is unfounded IMHO, unfortunately though I'd agree if the inference was about memebers in general as very few reports of PM's soliciting supply or sources had occurred until recently though we had some anecdoctal comments about this occurring (case in point being you not reporting the Mod's PM that allegedly asked you to source ECA cycle :grin: ).

The sting was always going to be controversial, certainly the Mod team were quite polarised in our views on the different aspects / ethics of it. However a collective decision was made to address a problem we had been made aware of. Not to act may have potentially put the forum at legal risk or at the least been a case of burying our heads in the sand when someone raised an issue.

Riccardo is right in one sense, that not all members that were approaching others to supply (or source) were picked up at the time. But to use that as an excuse to reverse any sanctions is the same as someone appealing their drink driving conviction on the basis other drink drivers weren't picked up by the check point that night! :?

I've probably wasted enough time on this topic, I'll leave it to you guys to convince Pseudo and the Mod team Tom deserves to be re-instated! :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pseudonym Veteran member

Pseudonym

Posted
Posted

Sorry if I'm taking a bit longer to respond than normal, guys... Right now, every spare waking moment I have is going into testing the new site. (We're getting there, but man it's a huge task! :shock:)

Regarding Tom, I'm not sure that I can improve on what Nate has already said. But it seems like there's a bit of confusion over the events. Here's what happened:

- The mods were made aware of a situation where new members were being spammed by dealers offering them gear.

- This site cannot be seen to be the go-to place to source steroids, so the mods decided to set up a sting to remove as many of these dealers as we could.

- The mods agreed beforehand that this must be handled scrupulously fairly, and that regardless of who we caught, it would mean a permanent ban.

- Unfortunately (and I really do mean that) Tom was one of them.

I'd also like to address this post, Riccardo. I've got a lot respect for your posts, but the following is full of errors.

Bring him back, I think its a bit funny that he's been singled out allegedly offering to help out a newbie

1) He wasn't singled out. He got exactly the same treatment that everyone who broke the rules did.

2) "Help out a newbie" is a pretty emotive way of saying that he broke the rules.

when I have been hit up by multiple members who are still on here offering to supply gear and have blatantly done so using NZBB for years.

How many of these have you reported? If we are given proof of people using the forums to deal in gear (eg, their PM gets reported), we ban them. That has always been the policy, and it has never changed.

When you set a particular precedent for tolerance of such activity from the beginning then all of a sudden start enforcing rules to the letter without prior warning that you are going to start doing so, I think it's a bit unfair.

As I say, we've never tolerated this, and we can hardly warn people we're about to run a sting! As for prior warning, I think this, this and this should be warning enough.

I genuinely regret that we had to ban Tom. I agree that his posts were good value (well, half the time!) and his contributions will be sorely missed. I particularly wanted him to help breathe life into our new Crossfit forum. But the rules are the rules, and if we're worried about fairness, then the fair thing to do is to enforce them consistently. Not make exceptions for one person because he has a higher profile than the others.

That's not to say we're closing the door on him for all eternity. But it was a "permanent" ban, and so far it's only a little over a month. That's a long way from permanent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gym rat Veteran member

Gym rat

Posted
Posted

I thought that was the right move by the mods by banning Tom and it made my day when I notice banned under Tom's name and because of this it would have to be my highlight of the year so far on this site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Popular Contributors

    Nobody has received reputation this week.

×
×
  • Create New...