• Howdy! Welcome to our community of more than 130.000 members devoted to web hosting. This is a great place to get special offers from web hosts and post your own requests or ads. To start posting sign up here. Cheers! /Peo, FreeWebSpace.net
managed wordpress hosting

Community feedback

i paid attention, but, in my opinion, you are biased towards them for past behavior and have a personal problem with them that effected your decision on banning them. neither one did anything yesterday that really deserved that. Roger even apologized for the referral link and said that he forgot no referrals were allowed and didnt create an issue over it. neither ban really seems justified. there have been times that it was, but, yesterday, i really think you are in the wrong this time man. people do change, and you didnt really give them a chance to show you that they will be good members that contribute useful info due to the past record, but, i bet if you talk to Jan, she will be the first to tell you that i created a lot of problems when i first started here and that i have changed the way i act on here. set your personal feelings aside and give them an actual chance.
 
As I thought you didn't pay attention at all. The ref had nothing to do with it. And calling someone a "-----" is now what qualifies as an apology?
 
i would bet that was probably after getting the ban. also, im more talking about Charles's ban being un-justified. Roger typical does something, but, the initial infraction for the ref link was not needed. could have been a simple warning.
 
No, again you assume things that just aren't true. I've received no apology for any of this abuse by anyone of those two. On the contrary we received several abusive messages prior to the ban from both of them while looking into this issue.

You can go on with your misinformed trolling expedition if you like but the decision is not going to change.
 
yep, im trolling. thats what i do. and for some reason, i dont believe you. i also never said that roger or anyone apologized to you. im assuming you know how to read English since you seem to type it well, so, maybe you just like to make things up in your head. i said "Roger apologized..." never to who. i dont doubt that he called someone a b*tch after the ban, that sounds very much like him.

and the abusive messages, again, im sure came after you perm b& Charles for a BS reason of scam/spam. yeah, see, here is the difference between you and them. they are posting all the stuff showing what you said and what they said. you just cant admit that you jumped the gun and b& them for little to no reason. i would be mad too if i was b& for a BS reason. you say i dont know what i'm talking about, then prove it.
 
No, the abusive messages from both of them have been going on for many months including shortly prior to the ban. That's part of why they got banned. I explained the situation already while they were not banned and I recieved another round of abusive messages. You see it was sent over pm. You can't do that while banned. So, no the abusive messages came prior to the ban. I don't think they dispute the chronology. I think I've only received one email from each one of them after the ban.

Let's break this down. If you expect to be a part of a community one thing you can do is not start a hate forum about that community and then try to promote it at the community you wish to belong to. Then do it again after being told not to do that. Add the fact that you have been recently banned for repeated abuse and are doing this together with your disgruntled banned partner.
 
just so you are aware, it is NOT a hate forum. is just a forum that promotes hosts that are legit and some of the ideals we would have liked to see implemented here. that being said, you guys are the topic of a lot of subjects due to the ban, that this time, wasnt really necessary. you will disagree that it was, and i will say it wasnt, and many other members here will say this time it wasnt, so, it doesnt really matter at this point. but, maybe if you knew how to take an apology when it was given to you instead of holding on to a grudge, things may have been different. Roger likes to push buttons and im sure is more willing of the ban than charles, but really, you perm b& him? that is not needed. and charles DID apologize to you, admit it or not. you just have a grudge, and that is understandable, but, when someone admits being wrong and apologizes, you should give another chance over holding on to your hate for him. he made many contributions here that were great. i just ask that you reconsider the perm ban.
 
If you post nazi images and call us communists and nazis and what not it's a hate site. And yes, again that was posted prior to the ban.

Nope, Charles have not apologized to me for any of this. When, where, how?
 
Ok, I see I have received some sort of apology in an email now from him. I'll look into that and respond tomorrow as it's getting late here.
 
Jordan, in all the time I have been moderating (and even before), if a member goes public about a ban/infraction, he/she never tells the real reason, just starts with the "mods abusing power", "nazi moderators" tactics. They seem to have a problem admitting they were doing something wrong to get that ban/infraction. Roger and Charles have stretched the elastic too far and it finally snapped on them. The majority of members who get a warning never break another rule again. Warnings are given as a reminder that there are rules which must be adhered to.

Roger did indeed apologise for the referral link and before I could respond, Charles was beating down my PM box with the problem of his URL being censored. I was 99% sure that wasn't the URL I removed from Roger's sig, so I had to find out what happened there.
 
Peo said:
If you post nazi images and call us communists and nazis and what not it's a hate site. And yes, again that was posted prior to the ban.

Nope, Charles have not apologized to me for any of this. When, where, how?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if I am being hated or not now, but according to the screen shots, the email was sent several hours ago.
9020p4.png

About our discussions over there, actually we are now fear to post any reply here and take refuge to express our dissatisfaction at there.
Everyone is now fear to discuss about the admins right or wrong here.
We have no more place to express our fear and dissatisfaction, and we all know, our expression which posted here, might face the chance of getting deleted, and it brings possibility for infraction or banning.

I hope you can understand, the fears you and Jan created to the members, has caused some dissatisfaction post regarding FWS at the other forum.
I don't know whether this reply will cause me any troubles or not.
All I wish you to know, is we are all living in fear now in this place...
 
There's no need for you to fear anything. Do the right thing and there won't be a problem, simple! :)
 
Jan said:
Jordan, in all the time I have been moderating (and even before), if a member goes public about a ban/infraction, he/she never tells the real reason, just starts with the "mods abusing power", "nazi moderators" tactics. They seem to have a problem admitting they were doing something wrong to get that ban/infraction. Roger and Charles have stretched the elastic too far and it finally snapped on them. The majority of members who get a warning never break another rule again. Warnings are given as a reminder that there are rules which must be adhered to.

Roger did indeed apologise for the referral link and before I could respond, Charles was beating down my PM box with the problem of his URL being censored. I was 99% sure that wasn't the URL I removed from Roger's sig, so I had to find out what happened there.
Click to expand...

When you give out warnings/infractions when no rules have been broken, I'd have to disagree with you. Let's recap on what happened so far:

1) You globally banned a URL from the forum for no apparent reason and there were no rules being broken.
2) I made a post in the reputation thread, then deeplist posted after me. You removed deeplists post and locked said thread.
3) I made a thread called "Fight the censorship" which you deleted only minutes later for no reason -- no rules were broken. I proceeded to re-post it 2-3 times and each time they were deleted. The last time it was deleted I was given a infraction and when I asked what rule had been broken, I was told no rules had been broken and that "you shouldn't do it again".
4) Deeplist was banned for no apparent reason.
5) You permanently banned deeplist. I'm assuming it was because of this:

Screenshot-2011-11-01_18.34.12.png


You know, if the ban was justified I'd be fine with it but from my perspective based on what I know about the ban so far, I'd say it wasn't. I obviously may be lacking details on the events surrounding the ban, which will likely never come to light -- so I can only assume you banned him for a more personal reason and not just because he's insulting you on another forum.

I guess what I'm trying to say is everybody here is getting tired of how this forum is being run. It's kind of unbelievable on how you guys are going out of your way to blacklist a specific site simply because you don't like the owner and handing out infractions to people who call you out on it and going out of your way to delete any threads/post that mention the forum in any context is just ridiculous.
 
Tyler, did you read what I posted? I've explained what happened and why they got banned. It wasn't caused by that pm no. I didn't even mention that pm or the other pm from him. Although the second one didn't exactly make things better.

iBrightDev, I have acknowledged receiving that email shortly after I posted my message and his email has been posted already. I'll respond to it soon.
 
Tyler said:
I obviously may be lacking details on the events surrounding the ban
Click to expand...
Very obviously.
I guess what I'm trying to say is everybody here is getting tired of how this forum is being run. It's kind of unbelievable on how you guys are going out of your way to blacklist a specific site simply because you don't like the owner and handing out infractions to people who call you out on it and going out of your way to delete any threads/post that mention the forum in any context is just ridiculous.
Click to expand...

The forum is being run no differently, in fact we gave the two main contenders too much leeway which they wouldn't have gotten in the past. As already mentioned this isn't the first forum that was censored. Forums that aren't censored are those who tried to replicate this one but don't use it as an outlet to insult the staff here. Why should we let anyone freely advertise such a forum? Can you tell me any forum owner that would allow that?

Also we never infract "for no reason". There is always a reason, just the complainer won't admit it.
 
Peo said:
iBrightDev, I have acknowledged receiving that email shortly after I posted my message and his email has been posted already. I'll respond to it soon.
Click to expand...

the point is that you received the apology before this whole situation went down, which you had denied till now ever getting one. Now you need to formulate a response that makes it sound like you are the good guy? if not, then why cant you just answer it right away? This is what I meant when I said you are being biased and maybe had jumped the gun a little on the perm ban. i do however know that a perm ban may be acceptable at this point considering what has happened since this all started, but, if you hadn't let your own personal feelings cloud your judgement get in the way, we wouldn't be sitting here discussing this.

@Jan, sometimes you infract when a warning would be better suited. you too carry a biased towards certain members here, including myself in the past (and possible still now), but, that is besides the point. for you to say that you never infract for no reason is completely hysterical. when you have a problem with someone, you totally seek out what that person is doing and saying so that you can continue to infract them. just as we may do about giving -rep to someone we dont like, it's simple humane nature, and to say you dont is just not believable in any way. second of all, you infracted me a few years back for advertising for yeoldeforum.com saying i wasnt allowed to advertise, but, i was allowed to put it in my signature. you never said it wasnt even allowed to be mentioned. you also allow people to mention webhostingtalk.com and other forums without infractions, but, you completely censored , and that is just bullsh*t. charles and others may not be able to advertise it per your rules that are in place, but, to not be able to mention it or have it in your signature without it being censored is just hypocrisy, and that is what @Tyler was getting at.
 
iBrightDev said:
the point is that you received the apology before this whole situation went down, which you had denied till now ever getting one.
Click to expand...

No, that email from what I can see was sent about an hour after I first posted that I had not recieved any apology from either one of them yesterday. A couple of hours later while I thought that I had not received any such message, I said so again. Minutes later I noticed an email from him and posted the correction here.

As for your point directed at censoring a url that's already been explained. See previous posts in this thread by me.
 
iBrightDev said:
@Jan, sometimes you infract when a warning would be better suited. you too carry a biased towards certain members here, including myself in the past (and possible still now), but, that is besides the point. for you to say that you never infract for no reason is completely hysterical. when you have a problem with someone, you totally seek out what that person is doing and saying so that you can continue to infract them. just as we may do about giving -rep to someone we dont like, it's simple humane nature, and to say you dont is just not believable in any way. second of all, you infracted me a few years back for advertising for yeoldeforum.com saying i wasnt allowed to advertise, but, i was allowed to put it in my signature. you never said it wasnt even allowed to be mentioned. you also allow people to mention webhostingtalk.com and other forums without infractions, but, you completely censored , and that is just bullsh*t. charles and others may not be able to advertise it per your rules that are in place, but, to not be able to mention it or have it in your signature without it being censored is just hypocrisy, and that is what @Tyler was getting at.
Click to expand...

If I was biased I wouldn't be a mod. Like I have nothing better to do with my freaking time than to follow members around looking for an excuse to infract them. I also don't know why everyone is accusing me of censoring that URL, but it was NOT me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top