Request to Quaddriver

[Lord Jim]

I don't speak for the good of the board, no one does, unless they've done a poll.

I must rise to disagree with that...on several levels.....

First, anyone may speak "for the good of the board" as they see it, so long as they sincerely have what they believe to be "the good of the board" at heart...

Second, polls only show what polls show...they show how the folks who decide to vote in them (and a number of folks here have said they don't vote in polls, regardless of the question) feel about the question presented at the moment they voted in them; nothing more and nothing less...

The owners of a board have rights and responsibilities vis a vis "the good of the board" that go far beyond the incomplete and inexact opinion gauge of a poll...

For example, it would not be in the best interests of a forum board for the owners of that board to tolerate conduct or participants that put them in legal jeopardy, or that could result in the site being brought down by the web host, or even that would cause most participants to no longer want to participate...

There is no way that the toleration of any of those things could be said to be "for the good of the board"
no matter what any "poll" results might say.

[BoSoxGal]

Who are you quoting, LJ?

[Lord Jim]

I was quoting LoCa...(I guess you have her on foe)

ETA:

She seemed to be indicating that in her view that "speaking for the good of the board" is synonymous with speaking for a majority vote in a board poll; I was taking issue with that.

[Joe Guy]

Is a quote really a quote if the quoter doesn't name who was quoted?

[Daisy]

Daisy, you've probably just committed one of Quad's 'Federal Offences'. Don't worry chuck, we'll bail you out.

Shit ... Are they gonna do a McKinnon on me?

[Lord Jim]

Is a quote really a quote if the quoter doesn't name who was quoted?

I apologize if who I was quoting wasn't clear; (I assume it probably was to everyone who didn't have LoCa on foe)

I don't speak for the good of the board, no one does, unless they've done a poll.

[BoSoxGal]

Thanks, yes, I went back to try to find the post you were quoting but must have missed one of hers - I do have her on ignore and have to open the posts manually.

[Lord Jim]

I've had a cryptic response from the poster involved.

Gee, now there's a shock...

[Joe Guy]

I'm just checking here to see if quad has apologized to me and BSG yet.

It doesn't appear that he has done so.

Maybe he is with LoCAtek and Andrew and they are helping him work on a draft of a multi-apologetic heartfelt prepared post in which he will beg for forgiveness from all of us.

Yeah... that's the ticket... a multi-apologetic post...

[rubato]

Proof of mental defect: Caring what quad posts about anything.



yrs,
rubato

[Joe Guy]

Proof of mental defect: Caring what quad posts about anything.

yrs,
rubato

You have a good point.

It's right on top of your head.

[Lord Jim]

Proof of mental defect: Caring what quad posts about anything.

yrs,
rubato

Now that's what I call a coincidence....

I was just thinking the same thing about rube...

[Andrew D]

Maybe he is with LoCAtek and Andrew and they are helping him work on a draft of a multi-apologetic heartfelt prepared post in which he will beg for forgiveness from all of us.

What the hell do I have to do with this?

Until now, I have not posted a word in this thread.

Why have I been dragged into it?

[loCAtek]

I'm afraid you're next.

[Sean]

Speaking of which... Are you planning to respond to Daisy's offer of mediation lo?

[loCAtek]

Sent the PM hours ago ...no response yet.

[Sean]

It's night time in the UK.

So you aren't up to being public about it like Hen is?

[The Hen]

That's a bit weak and cowardly Lo. Moving to PMs instead of having it remain in public.

I am guessing it was all a bit much for you and you will now be backing out of wanting mediation.

Why am I not surprised? Oh that's right, because it's you.

[loCAtek]

Frankly, my privacy request was for you, mainly, in a last ditch show of respect; my latest discourse was embarrassing, while further revaluations will be damaging, to you & Gob. If you want that disclosed publicly, I thank you for your permission.

[Gob]

Frankly, my privacy request was for you, mainly; my latest discourse was embarrassing,

It certainly was, you made a complete arse of yourself, and no one, not one single person on the board agreed with what you have posted. You thick cunt.

while further revaluations will be damaging, to you & Gob.

We're valued quite nicely. You thick cunt.

If you want that disclosed publicly, I thank you for your permission.

Go ahead.