Are the forum rules not fit for purpose?

[Champers]

Jul 18, 2021 19:21:57 GMT 1 @htafc4steve said:

Jul 18, 2021 19:19:12 GMT 1 Champers said:

You're the one claiming the problem exists. I'm telling you it doesn't. If it exists to the level that you're spending so much time whingeing and whining about it then you would be able to pluck me an example from the search you're on about wouldn't you? You might even be correct, but don't make accusations if you're not prepared to back them up. That, Steve, is copping out.

I didn't say I wasn't prepared to back it up, I said I'm not your employee and suggested you try doing your own work instead of delegating it.

Trouble is, I'm hardly going to spend time looking for something that I don't believe exists am I? I could claim that there's an alien living in my garden shed, but unless I can back that claim up with evidence, then there's a very decent chance that I'm lying. I don't want to call you a liar, Steve, but you're doing a pretty piss poor job convincing me otherwise here.

[Champers]

Jul 18, 2021 19:29:14 GMT 1 turbo2 said:

Jul 18, 2021 19:19:12 GMT 1 Champers said:

You're the one claiming the problem exists. I'm telling you it doesn't. If it exists to the level that you're spending so much time whingeing and whining about it then you would be able to pluck me an example from the search you're on about wouldn't you? You might even be correct, but don't make accusations if you're not prepared to back them up. That, Steve, is copping out.

I’ve seen it dozens and dozens of times

Some smart arse with a degree in being the brighter person.

Not making it a pun fest where someone writes the wrong word in the wrong place ( although I’ve seen plenty of them)

Crazy how we all see something different then. I remember lots of people banging on about it when I first joined, 99% of it probably being down to the word "fred", but other than the occasional correction on the there/their/they're conundrum, I can't say I believe it's a regular occurrence. Although I probably only read 25% of the content on here so maybe these "bullies" are more abundant on the threads I ignore?

[Deleted]

Jul 18, 2021 19:29:14 GMT 1 turbo2 said:

Jul 18, 2021 19:19:12 GMT 1 Champers said:

You're the one claiming the problem exists. I'm telling you it doesn't. If it exists to the level that you're spending so much time whingeing and whining about it then you would be able to pluck me an example from the search you're on about wouldn't you? You might even be correct, but don't make accusations if you're not prepared to back them up. That, Steve, is copping out.

I’ve seen it dozens and dozens of times

Some smart arse with a degree in being the brighter person.

Not making it a pun fest where someone writes the wrong word in the wrong place ( although I’ve seen plenty of them)

Thank you turbo2.

[Champers]

Jul 18, 2021 19:33:06 GMT 1 @htafc4steve said:

Jul 18, 2021 19:29:14 GMT 1 turbo2 said:

I’ve seen it dozens and dozens of times

Some smart arse with a degree in being the brighter person.

Not making it a pun fest where someone writes the wrong word in the wrong place ( although I’ve seen plenty of them)

Thank you turbo2.

Yes, thank you, Turbo.

One last thing from me on the subject though. You two are both seemingly for the return of Otium, a poster who was quite possibly the absolute worst offender for "having a degree in being the brighter person". Barely a month passed where he didn't brag about his supposed IQ, amongst many other things.

I'm just wondering why I don't recall seeing either of you ever being bothered then and calling him out for that? He really couldn't have made it any easier for you.

[El Mel]

Jul 18, 2021 19:45:02 GMT 1 Champers said:

Jul 18, 2021 19:33:06 GMT 1 @htafc4steve said:

Thank you turbo2.

Yes, thank you, Turbo.

One last thing from me on the subject though. You two are both seemingly for the return of Otium, a poster who was quite possibly the absolute worst offender for "having a degree in being the brighter person". Barely a month passed where he didn't brag about his supposed IQ, amongst many other things.

I'm just wondering why I don't recall seeing either of you ever being bothered then and calling him out for that? He really couldn't have made it any easier for you.

Can I step in?

It might have been due to Otium having an interesting point of view that provoked discussion, compared to (let's say) nick, who came across as somebody who had been labotomised.
But even Nick provoked discussion in his own unique way.

Variety is the spice of life

[Deleted]

Jul 18, 2021 16:53:18 GMT 1 Porrohman said:

Jul 18, 2021 14:38:17 GMT 1 @halifaxterrier1 said:

Here's a rule. The most petty and targeted rule going in fairness. God help those that turn off spellchecker and have dyslexia. Writing on a forum is now an essay, otherwise you'll be yellow carded. Pathetic really



This also includes consistent poor spelling - The users of this forum have expressed their preference for posts to be written in 'clean' English - there are no excuses for badly spelled posts, as all forum users have spell checkers at their disposal, even on mobile devices. Certain slang / nicknames / acronyms are acceptable in the context of a post. Blatant misuse of the English language will not be accepted however.

That will be from Nick being a prick. He could post completely normally when he wanted to, he does so on FB and Twitter.

It can't make people that angry that someone's being so sad to spell wrong on purpose though surely? Can't folk just ignore it and laugh at it. Bit extreme making a rule about it, that's all I'm actually getting at tbh. Anyway rules will stay the same, as will people that are banned, so zero point arguing the toss anymore

[Deleted]

Jul 18, 2021 19:45:02 GMT 1 Champers said:

Jul 18, 2021 19:33:06 GMT 1 @htafc4steve said:

Thank you turbo2.

Yes, thank you, Turbo.

One last thing from me on the subject though. You two are both seemingly for the return of Otium, a poster who was quite possibly the absolute worst offender for "having a degree in being the brighter person". Barely a month passed where he didn't brag about his supposed IQ, amongst many other things.

I'm just wondering why I don't recall seeing either of you ever being bothered then and calling him out for that? He really couldn't have made it any easier for you.

Oh dear, look up my history with Otium before making assumptions. I, for the first, made a comment in defence of him quite recently. Within that comment I put it in context what I usually think of him. It hasn't been pleasant reading for Otium, but as you know he has a thick skin.

[Deleted]

Jul 18, 2021 16:45:05 GMT 1 Chips Longhorn said:

" Some on here are in the ear of certain Admins "

Want to name any names ? Want to provide any evidence? Because that is a pretty big accusation to be throwing about . You seem to have gone a bit "Donald Trump" also

Pretty big accusation. My god you're sad if that's a big accusations. Its an observation, that there's alot of cliques and certain ones quick to moan and bitch to admin. I don't doubt you're one too considering your post against me yesterday after calling you a knob head, which you are. Your life seems to be this site Teddy Bear and you go for people if it doesn't suit you. Started for me yesterday, cos you're a knob head obviously

[Champers]

Jul 18, 2021 19:52:32 GMT 1 El Mel said:

Jul 18, 2021 19:45:02 GMT 1 Champers said:

Yes, thank you, Turbo.

One last thing from me on the subject though. You two are both seemingly for the return of Otium, a poster who was quite possibly the absolute worst offender for "having a degree in being the brighter person". Barely a month passed where he didn't brag about his supposed IQ, amongst many other things.

I'm just wondering why I don't recall seeing either of you ever being bothered then and calling him out for that? He really couldn't have made it any easier for you.

Can I step in?

It might have been due to Otium having an interesting point of view that provoked discussion, compared to (let's say) nick, who came across as somebody who had been labotomised.
But even Nick provoked discussion in his own unique way.

Variety is the spice of life

Couldn't agree more, and so long as things stay within the boundaries set I think the diversity of opinions is what makes this one of my favourite places to visit on the internet.

But it's a little bit hypocritical to moan about others calling out spelling or grammar mistakes when you're advocating the return of someone who not only made you feel insignificant, but delighted in telling you that you were.

Still, to balance it out, I don't think there will be many on this forum who haven't been guilty of a little bit of hypocrisy at some point, myself included.

[Champers]

Jul 18, 2021 19:54:42 GMT 1 @htafc4steve said:

Jul 18, 2021 19:45:02 GMT 1 Champers said:

Yes, thank you, Turbo.

One last thing from me on the subject though. You two are both seemingly for the return of Otium, a poster who was quite possibly the absolute worst offender for "having a degree in being the brighter person". Barely a month passed where he didn't brag about his supposed IQ, amongst many other things.

I'm just wondering why I don't recall seeing either of you ever being bothered then and calling him out for that? He really couldn't have made it any easier for you.

Oh dear, look up my history with Otium before making assumptions. I, for the first, made a comment in defence of him quite recently. Within that comment I put it in context what I usually think of him. It hasn't been pleasant reading for Otium, but as you know he has a thick skin.

Absolutely fair comment. Wrong of me to assume 👍🏼

[Chips Longhorn]

Jul 18, 2021 19:56:56 GMT 1 @halifaxterrier1 said:

Jul 18, 2021 16:45:05 GMT 1 Chips Longhorn said:

" Some on here are in the ear of certain Admins "

Want to name any names ? Want to provide any evidence? Because that is a pretty big accusation to be throwing about . You seem to have gone a bit "Donald Trump" also

Pretty big accusation. My god you're sad if that's a big accusations. Its an observation, that there's alot of cliques and certain ones quick to moan and bitch to admin. I don't doubt you're one too considering your post against me yesterday after calling you a knob head, which you are. Your life seems to be this site Teddy Bear and you go for people if it doesn't suit you. Started for me yesterday, cos you're a knob head obviously

Ok so you don't know anyone who's "in the ear of the admins " . You just made it up . Cos that's the kinda guy you are. Cool

[Deleted]

Jul 18, 2021 20:19:29 GMT 1 Chips Longhorn said:

Jul 18, 2021 19:56:56 GMT 1 @halifaxterrier1 said:

Pretty big accusation. My god you're sad if that's a big accusations. Its an observation, that there's alot of cliques and certain ones quick to moan and bitch to admin. I don't doubt you're one too considering your post against me yesterday after calling you a knob head, which you are. Your life seems to be this site Teddy Bear and you go for people if it doesn't suit you. Started for me yesterday, cos you're a knob head obviously

Ok so you don't know anyone who's "in the ear of the admins " . You just made it up . Cos that's the kinda guy you are. Cool

Likely you in fairness as you're the Datm knob head 😘

[Chips Longhorn]

Jul 18, 2021 21:18:22 GMT 1 @halifaxterrier1 said:

Jul 18, 2021 20:19:29 GMT 1 Chips Longhorn said:

Ok so you don't know anyone who's "in the ear of the admins " . You just made it up . Cos that's the kinda guy you are. Cool

Likely you in fairness as you're the Datm knob head 😘

You need to read the forum rules .

[drumriggend]

Aye I totally agree..


I reckon you should be able to act like a reyt c##t as often as you like without any punishment..



And talk shite about how you’ve just won thirty grand betting on polish lesbian football cup matches..



Speaking as a white suprematist homophobe I’m shocked how this forum has become so insensitive to alternative views..


Let’s all just try to love one another ..




Utft..



🥂

[Deleted]

Jul 18, 2021 21:27:40 GMT 1 Chips Longhorn said:

Jul 18, 2021 21:18:22 GMT 1 @halifaxterrier1 said:

Likely you in fairness as you're the Datm knob head 😘

You need to read the forum rules .

Can't swear now can we? Is me saying you knob head quite too much? It's me calling you a casual knob head, not direct and forcefully. Wear it with pride

[Chips Longhorn]

Jul 18, 2021 22:08:43 GMT 1 @halifaxterrier1 said:

Jul 18, 2021 21:27:40 GMT 1 Chips Longhorn said:

You need to read the forum rules .

Can't swear now can we? Is me saying you knob head quite too much? It's me calling you a casual knob head, not direct and forcefully. Wear it with pride

I really don't give a shit what someone so insignicant in my life calls me . But it's in contravention of the rules of the forum . Which you should know being someone who keeps throwing teddies out of pram then popping up with a different user name . Unfortunately you are so dull I doubt you'll get a 20 page thread if you get banned . So maybe try stay amongst us . Enjoy the football chat, keep your nose clean and be a good boy ?

[Jimuano]

For me, if someone is being a bellend/abusive/threatening/unpleasant then clearly there needs to be action taken, and the admins do a great job generally in this and other areas.

However, for simpler issues (eg housekeeping), it would be great if polls/ opinions - especially those with such strong favour towards one particular option - were looked at rather than stubbornly dismissed by admins for their own personal preferred outcome.

It's like having a leader who doesn't care about or listen to the people.

[Deleted]

Jul 18, 2021 22:18:29 GMT 1 Chips Longhorn said:

Jul 18, 2021 22:08:43 GMT 1 @halifaxterrier1 said:

Can't swear now can we? Is me saying you knob head quite too much? It's me calling you a casual knob head, not direct and forcefully. Wear it with pride

I really don't give a shit what someone so insignicant in my life calls me . But it's in contravention of the rules of the forum . Which you should know being someone who keeps throwing teddies out of pram then popping up with a different user name . Unfortunately you are so dull I doubt you'll get a 20 page thread if you get banned . So maybe try stay amongst us . Enjoy the football chat, keep your nose clean and be a good boy ?

Shut up you condescending old fart.

Popping up with a different username. Deleted my old one because it was stuff and people like you that put me off staying, joined with the same username.

It's always tit for tat with you. I didn't want to engage with you, you just started being a total knob head yesterday for no reason. So you keep yourself to yourself and off replying to me and we will get on fine

[Chips Longhorn]

Silly boy

[Deleted]

❤️❤️

[Porrohman]

Jul 18, 2021 22:32:33 GMT 1 Jimuano said:

For me, if someone is being a bellend/abusive/threatening/unpleasant then clearly there needs to be action taken, and the admins do a great job generally in this and other areas.

However, for simpler issues (eg housekeeping), it would be great if polls/ opinions - especially those with such strong favour towards one particular option - were looked at rather than stubbornly dismissed by admins for their own personal preferred outcome.

It's like having a leader who doesn't care about or listen to the people.

Grim = Bozo 😯😯😯😁

[El Mel]

Jul 19, 2021 7:16:22 GMT 1 Porrohman said:

Jul 18, 2021 22:32:33 GMT 1 Jimuano said:

For me, if someone is being a bellend/abusive/threatening/unpleasant then clearly there needs to be action taken, and the admins do a great job generally in this and other areas.

However, for simpler issues (eg housekeeping), it would be great if polls/ opinions - especially those with such strong favour towards one particular option - were looked at rather than stubbornly dismissed by admins for their own personal preferred outcome.

It's like having a leader who doesn't care about or listen to the people.

Grim = Bozo 😯😯😯😁

Fuckin hell that's harsh.

[bigtruck]

FFS this isn’t the G20. It’s a footy forum. The admins aren’t a collective of Mugabe, Stalin and Saddam. They’re 3 people trying to make sure this place runs smoothly and that homophobic and racist comments etc are dealt with. As much as some want to believe the rules are convoluted in essence they’re simple. Don’t be a dick.

[Manx Terrier]

I think everyone would agree that the rules have to be fair and appropriate for the offence. These are blatantly not fair in some cases and
need looking at again. I haven't been through all the pages and have no idea what Otium said but it may be if there wasn't an intended victim he should not have been banned for life.

I really feel fresh faces are needed.

For example :

1. Lifetime bans for repeated and blatant misuse of the English language !! Ha Ha. Someone who likes a tipple banned for life !! The punishment needs to be proportionate with the offence. Maybe a month for each transgression if you've been really really bad.

2. Ridiculously harsh to move from 1 month suspension for 1st Red card to a lifetime suspension for any subsequent red card. Draconian nonsense.

3. Posts or links of any kind that contain overt hatred of any race, faith, or sexual group needs rewording.

The hate could only be unlawful under the Equality Act if it was discriminatory, that means a person being treated unfairly and not that he is or might be just upset by a comment.

If it is intended to cover a hate crime (which I think needs a specific victim and would not include comments about a group) then say so so that posters are not put off making general comments. Maybe such as " Posts constituting criminal behaviour where the perpetrator is motivated by hostility or demonstrates hostility towards the victim's disability, race, religion, sexual orientation or transgender identity ".

[Essex Terrier]

An option for "I don't give a shiny shite"?

Banning Nick was the thin end of the wedge.

It seems we all have to come to terms with the concept of being "cancelled" at some stage.

Like death and taxes, it has become one of life's inevitablities.

[Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser)]

Jul 19, 2021 10:58:22 GMT 1 Manx Terrier said:

I think everyone would agree that the rules have to be fair and appropriate for the offence. These are blatantly not fair in some cases and
need looking at again. I haven't been through all the pages and have no idea what Otium said but it may be if there wasn't an intended victim he should not have been banned for life.

I really feel fresh faces are needed.

For example :

1. Lifetime bans for repeated and blatant misuse of the English language !! Ha Ha. Someone who likes a tipple banned for life !! The punishment needs to be proportionate with the offence. Maybe a month for each transgression if you've been really really bad.

2. Ridiculously harsh to move from 1 month suspension for 1st Red card to a lifetime suspension for any subsequent red card. Draconian nonsense.

3. Posts or links of any kind that contain overt hatred of any race, faith, or sexual group needs rewording.

The hate could only be unlawful under the Equality Act if it was discriminatory, that means a person being treated unfairly and not that he is or might be just upset by a comment.

If it is intended to cover a hate crime (which I think needs a specific victim and would not include comments about a group) then say so so that posters are not put off making general comments. Maybe such as " Posts constituting criminal behaviour where the perpetrator is motivated by hostility or demonstrates hostility towards the victim's disability, race, religion, sexual orientation or transgender identity ".

I'll start by saying this is not aimed personally at Manx Terrier - this could have been directed at a number of posts/posters.

This is becoming par for the course in this discussion. I must have read easily 15 or 20 posts from people who have not familiarised themselves with the specifics of the issue that have brought this scenario about, which is baffling to me.

As for the rules, they have remained largely unchanged for several years and were implemented before I was an admin (I am currently the longest serving admin). There have been, year to date, 8 occasions where accounts have been banned for life. No one cried foul for the other 7. We certainly didn't see the admins getting insulted and abused in those cases, nor did we say widespread requests to overhaul the way the site has worked for the best part of a decade (probably more).

If anyone wants to review the action log (which details posts we have sanctioned, but not those we have decided not to) they can do so here:

downatthemac.proboards.com/thread/109816/datm-admin-action-log

If anyone wants to review the latest incarnation of the rules they can do so here:

downatthemac.proboards.com/thread/115461/datm-forum-rules

For the record, March 2021's update to the rules was merely a simplification of the rules. No wholesale changes were made whatsoever, with the sole exception of introducing a rule regarding the explicit abuse of club officials.

I would suggest that before anyone else comments with an opinion that Otium's ban is an indicator of how draconian the rules are, how unfairly we admins apply them of how power crazed we all are, they:

1. read the rules
2. Take a quick look at the log
and 3. Familiarise themselves with the specifics of this case

[Manx Terrier]

Jul 19, 2021 11:07:32 GMT 1 Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) said:

Jul 19, 2021 10:58:22 GMT 1 Manx Terrier said:

I think everyone would agree that the rules have to be fair and appropriate for the offence. These are blatantly not fair in some cases and
need looking at again. I haven't been through all the pages and have no idea what Otium said but it may be if there wasn't an intended victim he should not have been banned for life.

I really feel fresh faces are needed.

For example :

1. Lifetime bans for repeated and blatant misuse of the English language !! Ha Ha. Someone who likes a tipple banned for life !! The punishment needs to be proportionate with the offence. Maybe a month for each transgression if you've been really really bad.

2. Ridiculously harsh to move from 1 month suspension for 1st Red card to a lifetime suspension for any subsequent red card. Draconian nonsense.

3. Posts or links of any kind that contain overt hatred of any race, faith, or sexual group needs rewording.

The hate could only be unlawful under the Equality Act if it was discriminatory, that means a person being treated unfairly and not that he is or might be just upset by a comment.

If it is intended to cover a hate crime (which I think needs a specific victim and would not include comments about a group) then say so so that posters are not put off making general comments. Maybe such as " Posts constituting criminal behaviour where the perpetrator is motivated by hostility or demonstrates hostility towards the victim's disability, race, religion, sexual orientation or transgender identity ".

I'll start by saying this is not aimed personally at Manx Terrier - this could have been directed at a number of posts/posters.

This is becoming par for the course in this discussion. I must have read easily 15 or 20 posts from people who have not familiarised themselves with the specifics of the issue that have brought this scenario about, which is baffling to me.

As for the rules, they have remained largely unchanged for several years and were implemented before I was an admin (I am currently the longest serving admin). There have been, year to date, 8 occasions where accounts have been banned for life. No one cried foul for the other 7. We certainly didn't see the admins getting insulted and abused in those cases, nor did we say widespread requests to overhaul the way the site has worked for the best part of a decade (probably more).

If anyone wants to review the action log (which details posts we have sanctioned, but not those we have decided not to) they can do so here:

downatthemac.proboards.com/thread/109816/datm-admin-action-log

If anyone wants to review the latest incarnation of the rules they can do so here:

downatthemac.proboards.com/thread/115461/datm-forum-rules

For the record, March 2021's update to the rules was merely a simplification of the rules. No wholesale changes were made whatsoever, with the sole exception of introducing a rule regarding the explicit abuse of club officials.

I would suggest that before anyone else comments with an opinion that Otium's ban is an indicator of how draconian the rules are, how unfairly we admins apply them of how power crazed we all are, they:

1. read the rules
2. Take a quick look at the log
and 3. Familiarise themselves with the specifics of this case

No hurry but would be very interested to hear your comments on the points in my post other than Otium and fresh faces being needed   ?
The thread is about are the rules fit for purpose.

[Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser)]

Jul 19, 2021 10:58:22 GMT 1 Manx Terrier said:

Ok, here goes:

1. Lifetime bans for repeated and blatant misuse of the English language !! Ha Ha. Someone who likes a tipple banned for life !! The punishment needs to be proportionate with the offence. Maybe a month for each transgression if you've been really really bad.

This was a rule specifically created to address a specific issue by the previous incarnation of the admin team. Some posters, one of note, would deliberately post comments or start threads which would often become indecipherable due to their insistence on overloading them with deliberately mis-spelled words. The main culprits posts were frequent, and were something many posters would get incredibly frustrated by as they threatened to derail otherwise high quality threads. This poster was coached and encouraged by the admin team to improve and things would improve for a week. To be clear this was not designed to catch out the odd typo or otherwise. This was also not designed to be prejudicial against people with issues like dyslexia. This was a poster whose conduct was intentional (for whatever reason) and vastly detrimental to the board. Everything was tried and it was felt that to address this case (and maybe any future ones) the rules as they were did not cover this kind of disruptive behaviour. To me knowledge it has only resulted in one person being banned. I would suggest that focusing on this rule could become a bit of a red herring in any discussion about the rules being fit for purpose, as I'm certain if it wasn't in pace it would have been called for by the general DATM population long before now. In day to day terms, this is a non-issue.

Jul 19, 2021 10:58:22 GMT 1 Manx Terrier said:

2. Ridiculously harsh to move from 1 month suspension for 1st Red card to a lifetime suspension for any subsequent red card. Draconian nonsense.

This is highly subjective. We escalate from one week to one month. We could include one year but by that stage we'd be looking at someone braking the rules seriously enough for 6 yellow cards. All values/trigger points will be arbitrary but the feeling within the admin team is that 5 previous chances is sufficient. Facebook, for example, has a similar escalating approach and (as far as I know) after a 30 day ban the next one is lifetime.

Jul 19, 2021 10:58:22 GMT 1 Manx Terrier said:

3. Posts or links of any kind that contain overt hatred of any race, faith, or sexual group needs rewording.

The hate could only be unlawful under the Equality Act if it was discriminatory, that means a person being treated unfairly and not that he is or might be just upset by a comment.

If it is intended to cover a hate crime (which I think needs a specific victim and would not include comments about a group) then say so so that posters are not put off making general comments. Maybe such as " Posts constituting criminal behaviour where the perpetrator is motivated by hostility or demonstrates hostility towards the victim's disability, race, religion, sexual orientation or transgender identity ".

Not sure why the rule here has to match the criminal law. You seem to be suggesting we should only act on posts that are hateful against a minority to the extent that the police would take action. I certainly disagree with this, and believe the other admins do too. There are plenty of grey areas around what might be acceptable on a forum like this and what is criminal behaviour. I believe erring on the side of caution to protect the rights/feelings of those who may subjected to those views is the right approach.

[El Mel]

You can tell by the amount of people that have fucked the forum off that the admins are doing an impeccable job of upholding the unquestionable and unwavering rules.

[Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser)]

Jul 19, 2021 11:42:36 GMT 1 El Mel said:

You can tell by the amount of people that have fucked the forum off that the admins are doing an impeccable job of upholding the unquestionable and unwavering rules.

Interestingly, I've had more people tell me they no longer frequent this site because of the behaviour of some posters (including those involved in and related to this discussion) than the conduct of the admins. Indeed, on Saturday morning at my son's footy training I was chatting with a DATM member who admitted to having considered no longer visiting here. They also confirmed they had often considered challenging posts like this that resulted in Oti's ban but thinking better of it as they felt they'd immediately become a target.

Do I think we admins are perfect? far from it
Do I believe we all have the best interests of the wider board at heart? Absolutely

This board remains the only real forum of note for Town fans. Others, as you know, have come and go. We get, typically, hundreds of members viewing daily and even more guests. I can't speak for Kenny or Rigsdon (despite what you have asserted) as they have their own minds, but I do sometimes ask myself why I bother giving up time to admin this place, given the abuse it brings from people that I would otherwise not get. But when issues like this crop up, we get private messages of support from the silent majority. Those who do shy away from commenting on the more contentious topics for fear of putting themselves in the crosshairs. These massages are often the reason I decide not to return to the fold and hang up my admin "hat". That, and the power makes me harder than industrial strength viagra, as you well know.