- This topic has 76 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 14 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
One of a moderators duties is to try and keep things tidy, if possible to stop duplicate threads on the same subject springing up all over the place.
Martin’s wish to express his disappointment should have been posted in this thread, it did not need another one started on the exact same topic.
In fact the one short post from DrDill in Martin’s thread did not pass any comment on Martin’s observations, it was in fact a mild rebuke of Martin,commenting on the very fact that another unnecessary thread had been started. 😉
I took my lead from DrDills concerns and removed the extraneous thread whilst informing Martin of the reasons it had been done.
Had Martin posted his views in this thread, which he is still able to do, it will not be touched in any way as long as it conforms to the very simple forum rules. 8)
Its worth noting that Ken Watts was not in favour of my actions but as a moderator I alone decided that in order to keep things tidy I would do it.
Jim.Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
iadom wrote:Had Martin posted his views in this thread, which he is still able to do, it will not be touched in any way as long as it conforms to the very simple forum rules. 8)
Fair enough, can I therefore please ask admin to restore the deleted thread* and add it to this one. 🙂
* in phpBB deleted threads can be fully restored from earlier database backup files.
Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
They can Martin, yes.
But I cannot do that, I’d need IT and since Sudeep is on annual leave until the end of the month, IIRC, it cannot be done quickly.
And, if it hasn’t been overwritten by that stage as it’s an automatic CRON job.
K.
Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
Lets calm down, all i want is to make sure that things dont get releted and we all play by the same rules, it would have been nice for someone to have sent me a message to say it was being deleted, martin says you sent him a message so why wasnt i afforded the same?
To answer the question about the “protractor” lets just say i am keeping an open mind as there is always 2 sides to every story and i do not speak for others or take council from others, thats why i sometimes drop my self in it!
I only want to try and voice my concerns and thoughts as i want the WTA to be as good as it can be and hope that there is no outside influence from othres with their own agenda.Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
Just out of interest, Whirl4 where did you pop up from, have you been on holiday? You seem to dissapear then pop up and you normally have the same point of view as the moderators. I know i sometimes get these thoughts but i do get the feeling that on these forums some posters seem to have the same twang to them, probably just me seeing something that isnt there again, but then again i was the only one that questioned the FME thing and then this happens.
Just my opinion.Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
This is really for everyone.
Some of the posts on here are obvious trolling, it’s an old thing I’ve had to deal with for many, many years on the internet in IRC, mailing lists and forums.
So much so that there is a site article from some years ago here on the subject.
That article clearly spells out how we deal with it and what we will do about it when we come across it. It was, at that point, put in writing for the benefit of a certain person so that it was clear, I will add that at the time this was in the public forums. It has been referenced once or twice after for both trade and public.
However, the policy is clear enough I think.
You may also see this image if you search the forum:
So far as I am concerned the OP is trolling and was when he began this thread.
Many people have asked me why I let it run, why I didn’t just ban him and so on.
Well, the answer is that would feed the delusional notions that he would appear to hold and add credence (in some measure) to the wild claims and accusations that have been made. So, I allowed it for a while. After it was getting a a bit out of hand and, under pressure from moderators and others, I agreed to moderate all his posts.
Now I am refusing to answer his messages, including the offensive and abusive ones being sent through other media formats to myself and others. Some of which is not only infuriating for myself but it affects others around me as well.
For the WTA team members, well it’s just completely out of order.
Now, others are being dragged into this debacle who, have got nothing to do with it but find themselves being goaded to act or speak to try to disrupt the site and make attack on people’s integrity. Myself and Lawrence being the apparent and obvious recipients of this treatment, but there has been others.
Under the weight of that I am now being pressured not only to keep this thread heavily locked down, to stop others from sprouting up but also to completely ban the person involved. Thus far I have stopped short of that action.
The post that was removed resulted in three rejections of the same message by a poster attempting to “troll” using thinly disguised supposed hypothetical scenarios (which were either untrue or filled with inaccuracy) in a blatant attempt to besmirch myself and others.
Those posts were all rejected, the reason given to the poster.
The poster has subsequently refused to accept that decision.
The deleted thread was only allowing the incitement of further trolling, it was therefore removed as the comments added nothing new and only allowed the infection to spread as it were. I was not personally directly involved in that action, it was taken by the moderation team.
I am sorry that many of you had had to see this ugly affair but, had it not been allowed to run its course accusations would have been made and may well have been taken as apparently being factual, even if they were not.
I could certainly have lived without the hassle and I think the above offers enough of an explanation.
K.
Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
No. There is no specific target, just the statement as is.
K.
Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
Ok, let me just say this, i do not agree with the way the OP has handled this at all, i can only hope that the WTA statement on this will be of sufficient weight in dismmising the Op’s points and putting all us members at ease and we can look forward to the WTA supporting us members equally.
If there was anything untoward in the WTA then now would be a good time to erradicate them so we cam lay this episode to bed.
I will say no more here and i will await the WTA statement in this thread and the wta forum.Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
Haha! ‘Trolling’ is classed as bringing public issues that readers & Paid Members might be affected by…? Really? Or is it cast off as ‘Trolling’ to take the focus off the content & Place it on the poster?
I also look forward to the statement from the WTA. I know the people personally and how they deal with this will be a proper test of their persons 🙂
Ade
Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
No, you are trolling. You have been since the start.
You are trying to cause harm and offence to others due to actions that were taken by you and you alone.
You have repeatedly sworn, branded direct insults at myself and others and tried to besmirch my and others character. In direct violation of the forum rules as well as common decency.
This is known as trolling and it will be dealt with in line with site policy.
The unwanted contact that you have made outside of this media to members and deliberate attempts to incite others to act on your behalf is also considered to be unacceptable behaviour by a site member.
Your recent rejected posts have been designed deliberately to try to not breach the posting rules but are obvious trolling posts. They have therefore been rejected and, any posts of the same or similar nature will also be rejected, in line with site policy.
I would doubt very much that in any statement from the TA that they will allow themselves to stoop to the level displayed here and get drawn into your little slagging match. I consider that a very good thing.
But as you are no longer a member and, technically haven’t been for a while, you have no right to demand much of anything from the TA IMO. Although like other points, you don’t want to go there and cause yourself still further embarrassment, you just want to continue on your very obvious and clumsy attempt to cause harm to the TA and myself.
K.
Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
kwatt wrote:you just want to continue on your very obvious and clumsy attempt to cause harm to the TA and myself.
K.
Absolutely not. I was there the night we formed the TA. Why would I want to see harm come to it?
My only motivation in questioning some actions and Team Member viabilities, are as a direct consequence to emails flying around over Sunday last week within the WTA Team that shocked me and has made me question why on earth I have been a part of it for so long.
I’d like nothing more than the WTA as a ‘Vehicle’ to succeed, but as I’ve pointed out to other people, the way the structure is at the moment needs addressing.
You know the content of the emails that flew about Sunday… You’ll know deep down why questions are now being asked by someone that was once ‘One of your own’, regardless of what you say in these threads 😉
Pretty much done now on this subject anyway… It did happen, WTA Team did know about it… Nothing more can be said bar to call me a liar!
Ade
Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
No, you have, in my opinion, twisted the facts to suit your own agenda. You are not questioning fact at all, merely trying to twist fact to suit what you are trying to imply. Seemingly as you don’t like the end results.
But, in doing so have been extremely unpleasant and not followed any sort of protocol whatsoever and displayed no decorum, not what should be expected from a site or TA member IMO.
You also fail to mention why your posts in defence of and, promoting, your own commercial endeavour where removed. And this, although I cannot be 100{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} as I was not involved in all the conversations, is the reason that you were compelled to resign as a team member. Although, given what you’ve done now, had you not resigned you would have almost certainly have been asked to leave I should think.
Is that a failure of the WTA, I don’t think so.
I will allow you to then explain why you were subsequently removed as a TA member, as before.
Now you appear to be bitter, twisted up about it all and are just out to cause mischief, along the way causing as much offence and grief as possible to all that you (in your head) are responsible for the position you find yourself in through your actions.
In other words Adrian, you’ve nobody to blame but yourself IMO.
K.
Re: A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!
The Whitegoods Trade Association is a progressive, supportive, independent trade association designed to assist members gain the best support available in the Independent Service Industry. It is administered by its own members, elected to serve on the Council.
Council members are delegated specific tasks, duties and responsibilities to spread the workload evenly across the group. One of the delegated tasks is the continual development to trade associations Constitution. This task was specifically delegated to former Council member Mr Adrian Welke.
Whilst under his direct control and responsibility, Mr Welke amended the Constitution to make it a requirement for any nomination for election to become a full Council Member would require the member seeking nomination to have been a member of the Trade Association for a minimum period of three full years. The original required within the Constitution was two full years.
I and another Council member were advised by Mr Welke of this change to the Constitution and I as Chairman provisionally accepted the amendment. I was aware such a change could only become effective once it had been approved by the requisite number of members attending a constitutionally held meeting and AFTER due notice of the amendment had been given to the members.
No such vote to amend the Constitution at any constitutionally held meeting has ever taken place and accordingly NO amendment to the original and approved Constitution of the association has therefore taken place. The original Constitution is and has always remained in place and will continue to be so until the full conditions and requirements of any amendments have been placed before the association members and so approved by the association members present at that meeting.
Having had the opportunity to investigate the matter further, I am able to confirm that no nomination from any member of the association to join the full Council team has been received which could have been affected by such a change in the Constitution, had one occurred.
Events of the past week have however demonstrated that the Constitution needs to be looked at carefully to ensure it does the job it is supposed to and above all remains fair to all members of the association. I have therefore requested the Council together with an outside independent advisor look at all aspects of the Constitution and report back to me their findings and if necessary any recommendations for amendments they consider are required. The results of this inquiry will be published and sent to all subscribing WTA members in due course.
L Carey
Chairman
Whitegoods Trade Association
- The topic ‘A Naughty WTA Change Constitution!’ is closed to new replies.