Iron filings all over Play d'eau

[benjenbav]

Thanks John for the common sense. Jimmy is right - the posting order matters in a thread like this. If you reinstate I will edit to a standard that even Queen Victoria would approve of. Only catch is I can't do it till about 11pm tonight. And as you say, it would be a bonus if you got fired

Mildly funny story re Queen Victoria:

Errant Sandhurst cadet is ordered to quickmarch to Queen Victoria's statue and ask for guidance on matters of attire and parade ground etiquette.

Cadet, watched by entire parade-ground, does so and then returns.

Colour sergeant booms: Well, what did the Queen say?

Cadet: She said we could all have the afternoon off.

 

[jfm]

Right I'm all Victoria-ed up. In dayglow red :encouragement:

 

[Portofino]

Right I'm all Victoria-ed up. In dayglow red :encouragement:

Wearing a similiar pair of goody two shoes just to confirm again I have no communication with the mods complaining ever .

 

[Cheery]

Right I'm all Victoria-ed up. In dayglow red :encouragement:

I assume you will be covering all the table legs when you get home as well?

 

[MapisM]

5.2 is the only place where the marina can try for a limitation. This is quite the worst bit of legal drafting I've seen in a very long time.

I had, and still have, zero interest in being proven correct (or not) when I awarded that as one of the most "Point of Sale" bits of contracts I ever came across.
Nonetheless, it's refreshing to hear that my brain can still separate the wheat from the chaff on these matters, thanks for the clarification! :encouragement:

On a separate note, in the meantime I also received an "Advisory Notice" from "Forum Admin Team", related to my post (now deleted) where I warned you that also by mentioning the World Taekwondo Federation in its abbreviated form you were risking to be sanctioned.
I even anticipated that I could have been sanctioned myself by relaying that - Q.E.D.

No worries anyway, my skin is thick enough to survive this, but makes me wondering:

1) why on earth I got only an "Advisory Notice" and no points?
Is there any online form to be filled for claiming missing points, as with most airlines?

2) why am I not given the chance to edit my post removing the criminal abbreviation? I already thought to change it for "MCC".
And before anyone ask what Metropolitan Community Churches have to see with all this, MCC is simply the IT version of the Taekwondo thing.
Apropos, maybe we could adopt MCC as a new standard... Ain't this an international forum, after all?

 

[Piers]

Dear All,

Progress report #1

Whilst Play d'eau is on the hard at Marine & General (M&G) in St Sampson's, Guernsey, we are staying in a local holiday flat. I'm working with (well, overseeing and feeding coffee and fruit cake) to two really competent M&G engineers as they painstakingly work to remove the filings which are literally everywhere. From rubbing strakes and topsides to the radar arch and pony mast. Removal is painstaking and slow, with many filings having to be 'dug out' using a sharp point rather then being polished out. Labour intensive, manual work, but being done with such care.

Having completed the topsides, work has started (weather permitting) on the Fly Bridge. With the dinghy removed, more filings have been found hiding underneath where the wind had blown them. The tricky bit will be in reaching the top of the pony mast requiring a crane with a sentry box from which the guys can work.

To fact:

1) Let me thank everyone for their guidance, especially JFM and more recently, benjenbav. I'm really grateful for their guidance.

2) Matters are now back in the hands of the insurers, and the legal element of our insurance is kicking in.

3) Any lawyers used will have to know Guernsey law which can be very different from that in the UK. (Lawyers in Guernsey are called Advocates)

4) We are collecting examples of the filings in case there's any dispute of their source.

5) Having read and re-read the posts above, I believe the key information is contained in JFM's 120 & 129, and benjenbav's 132. Am I missing anything?

Again, thank you all for your concern. Pics will follow as soon as I can remember how to post them.

 

[MrB]

[Content removed]

I think that covers the recent "over moderation" of the forum

 

[Piers]

[Content removed]

Please don't ever think of cutting JFM off. He is one of the key, most reliable, sound and factually correct contributors to the forum. His input is invaluable.

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

Please don't ever think of cutting JFM off. He is one of the key, most reliable, sound and factually correct contributors to the forum. His input is invaluable.

Yes, completely agreed. It is also entirely his fault that I am writing this from my boat in the bright spring sunshine in the south of France :encouragement:

 

[MapisM]

I don't see it just as a matter of cutting someone off (or not) depending on how valuable the contribution is.
It's pretty obvious by now that whoever is continuing to dish out points, send silly PMs and so forth, is a person who sees forum moderation as an opportunity to affirm his/her ego, rather than help the forum running smoothly, which is what moderation should be all about.
This kind of moderation is useless for the forum as a whole, and the sooner it comes to an end, the better.

PS: on second thought, delete the above "useless", and replace it with "detrimental".

 

[longjohnsilver]

[Content removed]

:encouragement::encouragement::encouragement:

 

[jrudge]

I don't see it just as a matter of cutting someone off (or not) depending on how valuable the contribution is.
It's pretty obvious by now that whoever is continuing to dish out points, send silly PMs and so forth, is a person who sees forum moderation as an opportunity to affirm his/her ego, rather than help the forum running smoothly, which is what moderation should be all about.
This kind of moderation is useless for the forum as a whole, and the sooner it comes to an end, the better.

PS: on second thought, delete the above "useless", and replace it with "detrimental".

Spot on. Moderation rarely rears it head, but when it does it simply makes them look daft.

What is even more funny / daft / other adjective is that they don’t comment on moderation policy! This is not gchq ( uk spy base ). I suspect this is as the moderation policy probably states that anything said against an advertiser is removed. Now they can deny this until the cows come home but unless they publish the policy then I for one would simply not believe it.

JFM. A a freedom of information request would probably show who reported the post in the first place as by definition it is electronic information held against your name and I can’t see witness protection policy kicking in !

They don't invest in the forum platform as the recent Photobox issue highlighted this is a huge and real business risk which they choose to ignore ( Still !!!!!! and it has happened!!!!)

A facebook group is only a click away with hugely superior functionality. The forum value is in two things only (a) its historic content and (b) its members. A huge chunk of the historic content vanished. Moderation can easily move members. Look how popular the UK boating facebook group is.

For Mallorca specific info i now post on the Mallorca facebook boating forums on facebook. For Fairline specific info... gosh there is a Facebook group full of Fairline ex employees and so on.

It astonishes me that Time ( or whoever own it now) in the face of diminishing advertising revenue for the magazine can treat such a valuable asset with such commercial naivety.

 

[Moderator]

[Content removed]

I would like to point out that the post to which you refer wasn't "deleted by the Mods", nor do the Mods dish out points - ever. If you have a complaint, please take it up via the appropriate channels and please cease insulting the Volunteer Moderators.
Thank you.

Rod.

 

[Blue Sunray]

I don't see it just as a matter of cutting someone off (or not) depending on how valuable the contribution is.
It's pretty obvious by now that whoever is continuing to dish out points, send silly PMs and so forth, is a person who sees forum moderation as an opportunity to affirm his/her ego, rather than help the forum running smoothly, which is what moderation should be all about.
This kind of moderation is useless for the forum as a whole, and the sooner it comes to an end, the better.

PS: on second thought, delete the above "useless", and replace it with "detrimental".

+1

I would like to point out that the post to which you refer wasn't "deleted by the Mods", nor do the Mods dish out points - ever. If you have a complaint, please take it up via the appropriate channels and please cease insulting the Volunteer Moderators.
Thank you.

Rod.

Volunterism is not an overarching excuse for lack of competence. This is (was) one of the most informative and useful threads on the forum before it was butchered.

 

[Croftie]

Getting rather silly/juvenile when Mod's posts are being edited by Forum Admin Team.
About time they grew up, this forum is populated by adults but seems to be overlooked by children.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Spot on. Moderation rarely rears it head, but when it does it simply makes them look daft.

What is even more funny / daft / other adjective is that they don’t comment on moderation policy! This is not gchq ( uk spy base ). I suspect this is as the moderation policy probably states that anything said against an advertiser is removed. Now they can deny this until the cows come home but unless they publish the policy then I for one would simply not believe it.

JFM. A a freedom of information request would probably show who reported the post in the first place as by definition it is electronic information held against your name and I can’t see witness protection policy kicking in !

They don't invest in the forum platform as the recent Photobox issue highlighted this is a huge and real business risk which they choose to ignore ( Still !!!!!! and it has happened!!!!)

A facebook group is only a click away with hugely superior functionality. The forum value is in two things only (a) its historic content and (b) its members. A huge chunk of the historic content vanished. Moderation can easily move members. Look how popular the UK boating facebook group is.

For Mallorca specific info i now post on the Mallorca facebook boating forums on facebook. For Fairline specific info... gosh there is a Facebook group full of Fairline ex employees and so on.

It astonishes me that Time ( or whoever own it now) in the face of diminishing advertising revenue for the magazine can treat such a valuable asset with such commercial naivety.

I've really and truly got better things to do than get into lengthy discussions about some of the matters, but there's a bit of naivety about what happens behind the scenes regarding moderation.

Most of the times that moderation takes place, the general users of the forum don't notice. There are all sorts of people and organisations that try to access and abuse the forums and a lot of the work is to keep the place clear of the spam bots and people who troll and take the proverbial. Nothing to offer, except a chance to be a keyboard warrior and disrupt the useful information and banter that is exchanged. The times people notice is when it impinges on someone who feels they have a right to express themselves in whatever language they choose. The editor has a very clear policy and if people wish to push the boundaries (no matter how victorian or silly you might think those boundaries are) then Admin will invariably step in. Because the majority of people just follow the T's and C's, the whole things runs smoothly most of the time, but sometimes people forget themselves and they get advised. (by Admin) Some people play silly buggers and carry on infringing and to keep count, Admin runs a points system. Infringe enough times and you get a short ban. Come back and do it again and the ban will be longer. Keep doing it and you get chucked off permanently.

Posts often don't get reported at all, but get 'noted' by the volunteer mods. I've been known to ignore minor infringements as life's too short to start getting all het up about a regular contributor who gets in a sweat and forgets and uses an acronym that includes a word that the editor doesn't allow. I know all of the moderators and none of us are snowflakes in any sense of the word. You'd be surprised at the length and depth of experience that is behind (stand fast myself naturally).

The volunteer moderators don't give out points and the only bans I ever process is to an obvious spammer or someone who goes so far over the top that it's obvious that something needs to be done. The latter used to happen occasionally but hasn't happened for a couple of years.

We spend a lot of time discussing what's best and making representations to the staff and admin regarding the forums... Please remember that the moderators don't make the rules. If you want to complain about the rules and T's and C's, then I'll give you details below.

I'm quite happy to discuss the principles of moderation but NOT individual cases as that would be invidious and experience says that it leads no-where. I can't comment on whether Time Inc are business savvy when it comes to the way they run their website and forum. They don't pay me, but it would be inappropriate to make comment as I volunteer for them. (Not for much longer at this rate.)

If you want to make representation to the Administrators of the forums use this link: http://www.ybw.com/forums/sendmessage.php

Otherwise the online editor for Time Inc is Stef Bottinelli stef.bottinelli@timeinc.com

 

[pks1702]

How sad I had thought the snowflake generation would not yet have made Time Inc but clearly it has. It really is pretty petty to award points for an a esoteric naughty word in a prior quoted post that a Times Crossword expert would have difficulty in deciphering. It really speaks volumes about the minds of the moderation team, seems to be an increasing media PC trend in deciding faux offence.

Is procreation on the 'allowed' list?

A forum will only be visited if it is interesting and informative JFM and others fall into this category one reason why folks visit and value his and other opinions. Carry on Mod's hope you can grow Tumbleweed!

Sorry Piers for the Fred Drift.

 

[Piers]

When I was flying for BOAC in the 70s, we were number 18 in a long, long waiting queue for take-off at New York, Kennedy. Someone in the queue made an taxying error and whether it was he or someone else, the words came over the radio, 'Oh S**t.' The radio went deathly silent. Then Kennedy Tower called up, saying, 'The airplane which said that word will identify itself.' Silence. Again, 'The airplane which said that word will identify itself.' Silence. 'The airplane which said that word will identify itself, immediately. We do not tolerate such language.' Suddenly, a series or replies came back, 'Pan Am 241 didn't say s**t.' 'TWA 938 didn't say s**t.' Lufhansa 73 didn't say s**t.' 'Air France 2653 didn't say merde.' 18 planes responded. Flights decks must have been laughing and laughing. I wonder who won?

 

[john_morris_uk]

How sad I had thought the snowflake generation would not yet have made Time Inc but clearly it has. It really is pretty petty to award points for an a esoteric naughty word in a prior quoted post that a Times Crossword expert would have difficulty in deciphering. It really speaks volumes about the minds of the moderation team, seems to be an increasing media PC trend in deciding faux offence.

Is procreation on the 'allowed' list?

A forum will only be visited if it is interesting and informative JFM and others fall into this category one reason why folks visit and value his and other opinions. Carry on Mod's hope you can grow Tumbleweed!

Sorry Piers for the Fred Drift.

With respect you haven't really read what I wrote.

Please write to the editor about policy and stop trying to blame the moderation team...

 

[MrB]

When I was flying for BOAC in the 70s, we were number 18 in a long, long waiting queue for take-off at New York, Kennedy. Someone in the queue made an taxying error and whether it was he or someone else, the words came over the radio, 'Oh S**t.' The radio went deathly silent. Then Kennedy Tower called up, saying, 'The airplane which said that word will identify itself.' Silence. Again, 'The airplane which said that word will identify itself.' Silence. 'The airplane which said that word will identify itself, immediately. We do not tolerate such language.' Suddenly, a series or replies came back, 'Pan Am 241 didn't say s**t.' 'TWA 938 didn't say s**t.' Lufhansa 73 didn't say s**t.' 'Air France 2653 didn't say merde.' 18 planes responded. Flights decks must have been laughing and laughing. I wonder who won?

That's very funny but i guess it will get pulled.