TRUE BELIEVER APPEAL PROCESS AND POLL

[CQ SAINT]

so I'd imagine Simon wouldn't care too much if we gave him a permanent ban.

but you do care !!!
(if u are banned)


***

can i just say in relationship to this drift

we all love SS
its 'our place'

simon is one of ours
as i am one of yours


(i'd never be any part of any 'process'
that could be construed as a hostile takeover)

to become
what 'we' fight against , IS THE TRAP.

I like this.

[kosifantutti]

How many breakaway forums have there been already?

Did any of them survive?

I think this type of forum is being overtaken by Facebook groups and WhatsApp groups. But that's OK. As long as the decent supporters outweigh the nuffies I'll keep coming back.

[saynta]

How many breakaway forums have there been already?

Did any of them survive?

I think this type of forum is being overtaken by Facebook groups and WhatsApp groups. But that's OK. As long as the decent supporters outweigh the nuffies I'll keep coming back.

Plus one.

[CQ SAINT]

This has become a private forum. Hasnt it?

[saynta]

This has become a private forum. Hasnt it?

Always was, is my understanding.

If Simon thinks he has trouble now, it would be nothing compared to what he can expect if he lets us nuff nuffs partially fund the forum.

[asiu]

How many breakaway forums have there been already?

Did any of them survive?

I think this type of forum is being overtaken by Facebook groups and WhatsApp groups. But that's OK. As long as the decent supporters outweigh the nuffies I'll keep coming back.

the orange hatters
were the only 'breakaway' that i remember

he was not one of ours
... he was an SS mod ffs

but 'we' ... stopped their ... saints footy .com
forum plans ... by knocking off their .com/.com.au
opportunity

'we' in this instance
being the SS General Forum participants
who were the first experiencers
of Simon's BIG STICK takeover

having jackbooted his way through the GF
he then in his hubris
re-named the GF
as the ... The New General Forum
AND
declared that anyone who disagreed
with 'his' way
could go and start their own website

queue big laughs at that moment
'we' already had

and survive ... We do.

(it was set up to be our offsite GF)

there's basically no interest in anything other

(but we'd possibly/probably/maybe if we could bothered
bring Linton St online
... or SaintsFooty ... coz we own it
if the plug gets pulled on SS)

but probably not

at least we know we can trust each other
in our little 'gathering'
to not be manipulated by group think
(coz there is none)
or back room dobbers n robbers
(coz there's none of them either)

no grounds are fertile
for either extreme
... thats why 'we' are, still alive

[asiu]

so

our basic first move
even whilst we were being kicked to death
on our site

was to protect
our site

go figure ... ay




ps (at 2.10 pm)

were were bigger then
than now

some left coz we were too left wing
some left coz we were too right wing

go figure ... ay

[kosifantutti]

How many breakaway forums have there been already?

Did any of them survive?

I think this type of forum is being overtaken by Facebook groups and WhatsApp groups. But that's OK. As long as the decent supporters outweigh the nuffies I'll keep coming back.

the orange hatters
were the only 'breakaway' that i remember

he was not one of ours
... he was an SS mod ffs

but 'we' ... stopped their ... saints footy .com
forum plans ... by knocking off their .com/.com.au
opportunity

'we' in this instance
being the SS General Forum participants
who were the first experiencers
of Simon's BIG STICK takeover

having jackbooted his way through the GF
he then in his hubris
re-named the GF
as the ... The New General Forum
AND
declared that anyone who disagreed
with 'his' way
could go and start their own website

queue big laughs at that moment
'we' already had

and survive ... We do.

(it was set up to be our offsite GF)

there's basically no interest in anything other

(but we'd possibly/probably/maybe if we could bothered
bring Linton St online
... or SaintsFooty ... coz we own it
if the plug gets pulled on SS)

but probably not

at least we know we can trust each other
in our little 'gathering'
to not be manipulated by group think
(coz there is none)
or back room dobbers n robbers
(coz there's none of them either)

no grounds are fertile
for either extreme
... thats why 'we' are, still alive

There was also true sainters.
If you search hard enough here you will find some links. My strong advise would be not to click on them because they don't lead anywhere that you would want to go. Well not anywhere I would want to go.

[asiu]

that had nothing to do with us


there's sortof/maybe a memory (for me)
of that

but ... see first sentence

[Sanctorum]

Just a footnote to this ridiculous event.

If ever the SS community wanted to take over control of SS then all that is needed is for the community to register a Web address called saintsatuonal.com.au and come up with the very small funds required to run the site.

And Simon is booted out of tbe house.

It's that easy.

Exactly what is your problem with the conduct of this forum Vortex that causes you to drag your coat in such a provocative way and in effect slap Simon in the face??

I consider your inference "And Simon is booted out of the house" to be highly contemptuous and shameful.

[Vortex]

Just a footnote to this ridiculous event.

If ever the SS community wanted to take over control of SS then all that is needed is for the community to register a Web address called saintsatuonal.com.au and come up with the very small funds required to run the site.

And Simon is booted out of tbe house.

It's that easy.

Exactly what is your problem with the conduct of this forum Vortex that causes you to drag your coat in such a provocative way and in effect slap Simon in the face??

I consider your inference "And Simon is booted out of the house" to be highly contemptuous and shameful.

I feel hurt by your negative comments.

[Sanctorum]

Just a footnote to this ridiculous event.

If ever the SS community wanted to take over control of SS then all that is needed is for the community to register a Web address called saintsatuonal.com.au and come up with the very small funds required to run the site.

And Simon is booted out of tbe house.

It's that easy.

Exactly what is your problem with the conduct of this forum Vortex that causes you to drag your coat in such a provocative way and in effect slap Simon in the face??

I consider your inference "And Simon is booted out of the house" to be highly contemptuous and shameful.

I feel hurt by your negative comments.

If only that was true - the least you could do is apologise to Simon for your intemperance!

[Vortex]

Just a footnote to this ridiculous event.

If ever the SS community wanted to take over control of SS then all that is needed is for the community to register a Web address called saintsatuonal.com.au and come up with the very small funds required to run the site.

And Simon is booted out of tbe house.

It's that easy.

Exactly what is your problem with the conduct of this forum Vortex that causes you to drag your coat in such a provocative way and in effect slap Simon in the face??

I consider your inference "And Simon is booted out of the house" to be highly contemptuous and shameful.

I feel hurt by your negative comments.

If only that was true - the least you could do is apologise to Simon for your intemperance!

The least you could do is get yourself a history lesson before coming in hot and half cocked.

[Dis Believer]

Firstly, I need to warn you that although my incisive intellect and rapier wit normally result in a concise, riveting and stimulating post, this is an exception. This is more of a long and learned dissertation, something more like you are used to seeing from say, Aeon Flux, just without the videos and swooning over Rodger.

I want to start by reiterating my thanks to those who very recently showed me support; it was most unexpected, and deeply gratifying. Being part of an on-line community can be a strange thing, as in most cases you never actually meet each other in “real life” and so the people with whom you interact so regularly are not necessarily thought of as mates! However the speed and wholeheartedness with which many jumped to my defence when I was unable to defend myself was something that genuinely surprised me. That is the sort of behaviour one expects from ones mates, so thanks to all my mates!
So, to the points I wish to really bring to the table. Firstly, I appreciate all of those that have, and continue to, contribute time, money and energy to keep this community intact. Whether or not I agree with their methods, standards or intents, I still appreciate their efforts and dedication.

What I would also say to those currently charged with the responsibility of this community, is that my recollection is of there being multiple offers of contributions of time and finances to ensure that SS would survive and thrive, and I believe those offers were ultimately rejected. I personally offered financial input and I know of others that did likewise. I cannot guess another’s mind, so my supposition of why those offers met with rejection will remain with me.

However we have now arrived at a place where the perception (correctly or otherwise) is that this forum is the “property” of one person. That is not ideal, no matter how well intentioned a single person may be, as the only thing of value here is the membership. That membership seems to be in a permanent state of decline, especially given that no new members are being admitted. The larger the base of contributors, the more vibrant and healthy the community, and the less issues that occur with problematic posters, as their troublesome activities are more diluted if carried out within a larger community.

I believe that something needs to be done to return the “ownership” of this community to the members, as this community is nothing without the contributions (postings) of its members, it exists only as the thoughts of the collective. The perception should not exist that this forums “belongs” to someone.

This then leads me neatly into the issue of moderation and standards. I was allowed due process under rules that I did not know existed. Thank you to those who ensured the fair application of those rules on my behalf, and thank you to Simon for sticking to due process. However a couple of key points that arose.

Firstly – the first I knew I had been banned was when I could not log in. Surely, if a ban that is to be permanent is to be imposed, a person should have the opportunity to speak on their own behalf and explain themselves, recant a post if they were unaware it has transgressed or at least understand the position they are facing. I was completely unaware and did not even know why I had been banned until I did some digging around.

Secondly – reporting of posts. I posted a rehashed old joke in response to a post by another poster in the Toby Greene thread. The other poster had a light-hearted swipe at a couple of prominent conservatives and I rolled that into a light-hearted regurgitation of a joke that is about 70 years old. Now maybe my use of such an old joke warrants banning, who am I to say? But it appears that my post was reported, whilst the other posters post was not reported, hence why I received a ban. Now not for a moment do I think that the other poster should have received a ban, that would have been laughable, but if a ban is enforced purely on the basis of a report, than surely that is “weaponizing” the system? And I believe that the other poster was not reported because they were taking a swipe, as light hearted as mine, at an acceptable political target.

I read some ridiculous statements about what I posted – that I was “advocating violence”, that it was “political baiting”. The people responsible for such ludicrous waffle know who they are, and to them I say, ease your grip if the end of it is going blue, otherwise you’ll do yourself a mischief. I posted a joke, and if the system had enabled a conversation to occur, it could have been explained to me that “some people” would interpret my post as “political baiting” and I could have simply edited it out of existence and all’s fair. However political baiting is also VERY subjective, and whilst I am not here for politics, the tilt to the left in how this place runs nowadays is also very noticeable, and I think that needs to be arrested, the place needs to be apolitical.

It is also evident that the standards of moderation and rules that see us where we are now are absurd. This is a football forum, and in the real world, the people that want to discuss the AFL and the Saints in an online football forum are overwhelmingly male adults. There are some female SSer’s, although I suspect greatly diminished in number now, and the presence of someone under 18 is almost unicorn territory. Hell, someone under 30 on this type of forum is a youngster.

Yet here we are saddled with an approach to moderating and rules that I refer to as “Disney Channel”. I don’t know if the vision was that this place would become some family friendly “broad church” with a large active membership, but moderating to accommodate 12 year old girls when most of your members are 40 year old men, is absurd. That doesn’t mean common decency and decent behavioural standards should not be expected, but it’s a football forum, not Sunday School.

In winding up on my little venting session, I would like to add that I am a member of a number of other forums. Amongst them is Big Footy, and I saw a statement someone posted about BF that read “In my experience, even in active threads on BF, if you could find one, the posts were either colourless, unimaginative, boring or just plain ignorant.” Well I can tell you they have plenty of activity, in fact something in the order of about 100 to 150 times the level of activity that this place has, which someone else already pointed out, is the reverse of what it used to be.

Bigger is not necessarily better, but it certainly beats being non-existent. If this place is to survive, it needs to grow some membership and be more user- friendly. Maybe a group could be formed tasked with figuring out how to reinvigorate the place, how the “ownership” and running costs could be distributed amongst the group, and how to transform SS into being an inviting, boutique haven for loyal Sainters.....

Another forum that enjoys my membership is a private one. Membership is by invite only, and you cannot enter without being a signed up member. Interestingly, there are no rules and no moderation. Yet there are very few altercations, and the standards of behaviour are impeccable. Admittedly selective membership probably helps, although if anyone wants to invite a new member in, they simply do it. And I acknowledge that being private and unaffiliated means there are less concerns with legal ramifications than would be the case here. There is no swear filter, but by agreement some language is self-censored at the request of some members, but there is little swearing full stop. I guess that treating grown-ups like grown-ups tends to see them behaving like, you guessed it, grown-ups.

So, have at it, add your thoughts and have some honest, open dialogue like grown ups. I was very prepared to walk away if the vote went against me, and I am very prepared to cop flak if anyone has their nose put out by this post, but I am big and ugly enough to stand up for myself, and I am wise enough to accept that maybe the way I see things is unique to me and everyone else wants something different. If people are happy swimming in ever diminishing circles until they end up talking to themselves in an echo chamber, then who am I to try and convince them otherwise.

[ace]

Firstly, I need to warn you that although my incisive intellect and rapier wit normally result in a concise, riveting and stimulating post, this is an exception. This is more of a long and learned dissertation, something more like you are used to seeing from say, Aeon Flux, just without the videos and swooning over Rodger.

I want to start by reiterating my thanks to those who very recently showed me support; it was most unexpected, and deeply gratifying. Being part of an on-line community can be a strange thing, as in most cases you never actually meet each other in “real life” and so the people with whom you interact so regularly are not necessarily thought of as mates! However the speed and wholeheartedness with which many jumped to my defence when I was unable to defend myself was something that genuinely surprised me. That is the sort of behaviour one expects from ones mates, so thanks to all my mates!
So, to the points I wish to really bring to the table. Firstly, I appreciate all of those that have, and continue to, contribute time, money and energy to keep this community intact. Whether or not I agree with their methods, standards or intents, I still appreciate their efforts and dedication.

What I would also say to those currently charged with the responsibility of this community, is that my recollection is of there being multiple offers of contributions of time and finances to ensure that SS would survive and thrive, and I believe those offers were ultimately rejected. I personally offered financial input and I know of others that did likewise. I cannot guess another’s mind, so my supposition of why those offers met with rejection will remain with me.

However we have now arrived at a place where the perception (correctly or otherwise) is that this forum is the “property” of one person. That is not ideal, no matter how well intentioned a single person may be, as the only thing of value here is the membership. That membership seems to be in a permanent state of decline, especially given that no new members are being admitted. The larger the base of contributors, the more vibrant and healthy the community, and the less issues that occur with problematic posters, as their troublesome activities are more diluted if carried out within a larger community.

I believe that something needs to be done to return the “ownership” of this community to the members, as this community is nothing without the contributions (postings) of its members, it exists only as the thoughts of the collective. The perception should not exist that this forums “belongs” to someone.

This then leads me neatly into the issue of moderation and standards. I was allowed due process under rules that I did not know existed. Thank you to those who ensured the fair application of those rules on my behalf, and thank you to Simon for sticking to due process. However a couple of key points that arose.

Firstly – the first I knew I had been banned was when I could not log in. Surely, if a ban that is to be permanent is to be imposed, a person should have the opportunity to speak on their own behalf and explain themselves, recant a post if they were unaware it has transgressed or at least understand the position they are facing. I was completely unaware and did not even know why I had been banned until I did some digging around.

Secondly – reporting of posts. I posted a rehashed old joke in response to a post by another poster in the Toby Greene thread. The other poster had a light-hearted swipe at a couple of prominent conservatives and I rolled that into a light-hearted regurgitation of a joke that is about 70 years old. Now maybe my use of such an old joke warrants banning, who am I to say? But it appears that my post was reported, whilst the other posters post was not reported, hence why I received a ban. Now not for a moment do I think that the other poster should have received a ban, that would have been laughable, but if a ban is enforced purely on the basis of a report, than surely that is “weaponizing” the system? And I believe that the other poster was not reported because they were taking a swipe, as light hearted as mine, at an acceptable political target.

I read some ridiculous statements about what I posted – that I was “advocating violence”, that it was “political baiting”. The people responsible for such ludicrous waffle know who they are, and to them I say, ease your grip if the end of it is going blue, otherwise you’ll do yourself a mischief. I posted a joke, and if the system had enabled a conversation to occur, it could have been explained to me that “some people” would interpret my post as “political baiting” and I could have simply edited it out of existence and all’s fair. However political baiting is also VERY subjective, and whilst I am not here for politics, the tilt to the left in how this place runs nowadays is also very noticeable, and I think that needs to be arrested, the place needs to be apolitical.

It is also evident that the standards of moderation and rules that see us where we are now are absurd. This is a football forum, and in the real world, the people that want to discuss the AFL and the Saints in an online football forum are overwhelmingly male adults. There are some female SSer’s, although I suspect greatly diminished in number now, and the presence of someone under 18 is almost unicorn territory. Hell, someone under 30 on this type of forum is a youngster.

Yet here we are saddled with an approach to moderating and rules that I refer to as “Disney Channel”. I don’t know if the vision was that this place would become some family friendly “broad church” with a large active membership, but moderating to accommodate 12 year old girls when most of your members are 40 year old men, is absurd. That doesn’t mean common decency and decent behavioural standards should not be expected, but it’s a football forum, not Sunday School.

In winding up on my little venting session, I would like to add that I am a member of a number of other forums. Amongst them is Big Footy, and I saw a statement someone posted about BF that read “In my experience, even in active threads on BF, if you could find one, the posts were either colourless, unimaginative, boring or just plain ignorant.” Well I can tell you they have plenty of activity, in fact something in the order of about 100 to 150 times the level of activity that this place has, which someone else already pointed out, is the reverse of what it used to be.

Bigger is not necessarily better, but it certainly beats being non-existent. If this place is to survive, it needs to grow some membership and be more user- friendly. Maybe a group could be formed tasked with figuring out how to reinvigorate the place, how the “ownership” and running costs could be distributed amongst the group, and how to transform SS into being an inviting, boutique haven for loyal Sainters.....

Another forum that enjoys my membership is a private one. Membership is by invite only, and you cannot enter without being a signed up member. Interestingly, there are no rules and no moderation. Yet there are very few altercations, and the standards of behaviour are impeccable. Admittedly selective membership probably helps, although if anyone wants to invite a new member in, they simply do it. And I acknowledge that being private and unaffiliated means there are less concerns with legal ramifications than would be the case here. There is no swear filter, but by agreement some language is self-censored at the request of some members, but there is little swearing full stop. I guess that treating grown-ups like grown-ups tends to see them behaving like, you guessed it, grown-ups.

So, have at it, add your thoughts and have some honest, open dialogue like grown ups. I was very prepared to walk away if the vote went against me, and I am very prepared to cop flak if anyone has their nose put out by this post, but I am big and ugly enough to stand up for myself, and I am wise enough to accept that maybe the way I see things is unique to me and everyone else wants something different. If people are happy swimming in ever diminishing circles until they end up talking to themselves in an echo chamber, then who am I to try and convince them otherwise.

Welcome back Believer

[Dis Believer]

Thanks Ace...

[Vortex]

I think it may be appropriate to have a discussion about your proposition True Believer.

The value of this site is created by the membership and the content is created by the members. Take that away and it is dead in the water.

The coup that took place by Simon is slowly killing the joint into extinction one poster at a time.

Simon's admission he is happy to shut the place down whenever it suits him should be evidence enough it is time for change. To actually threaten such a thing gives great insight into his mindset.

It's time for the dictator rulership to end and to return SS back to a community cooperative.

[roskilde]

Well said and welcome back TB -- oops I mean DB.

[saynta]

Welcome back TB. I thought that the ban imposed upon you was a joke, just like the one day ban I copped around the same time.

As the missus said, someone "being a bit precious are we" and she is pretty insightful.

But the real villains are the vicious, vengeful posters who reported said posts, not Simon FFS.

And yes, I posted the bit about Big Footy quoted by you and I make no apologies for stating what I believe to be the truth.

I would much rather have Simon run things than some of the posters agitating to overthrow him or get a bigger say in how the place is run. At least Simon is impartial, unlike said agitators.

From memory , according to the poll 7 or 8 posters voted to keep you banned. I haven't a f****** clue what their problem is if it wasn't political. Yeah, I know I'm swearing , just like most people do in the real world.

End of my rant and as I said at the start, welcome back mate.

[Dis Believer]

Well said and welcome back TB -- oops I mean DB.

I see what you did there......

[The Fireman]

Disney Channel moderation...luv it

[asiu]

yep

also

... and the presence of someone under 18 is almost unicorn territory.


eloquently expressed
me ol bently



though
shirley to no surprise to anyone

the 'weaponisation of the dobbing feature'
was where i went ...
YES
THAT

Fix THAT !!!

[Devilhead]

I am glad you used paragraphs DB

[Dis Believer]

I am glad you used paragraphs DB

My pleasure, and one of the few remaining vestiges of a decent education, a fact which probably saddens my parents.....

[Sanctorum]

Just a footnote to this ridiculous event.

If ever the SS community wanted to take over control of SS then all that is needed is for the community to register a Web address called saintsatuonal.com.au and come up with the very small funds required to run the site.

And Simon is booted out of tbe house.

It's that easy.

Exactly what is your problem with the conduct of this forum Vortex that causes you to drag your coat in such a provocative way and in effect slap Simon in the face??

I consider your inference "And Simon is booted out of the house" to be highly contemptuous and shameful.

I feel hurt by your negative comments.

If only that was true - the least you could do is apologise to Simon for your intemperance!

The least you could do is get yourself a history lesson before coming in hot and half cocked.

When it comes to the history of Saintsational Vortex, you have certainly featured prominently as I recall that you have been banned in the past under other nics, most recently Secret Kiel, only 12 months ago.

If you're really that disillusioned with the way this forum is moderated there's nothing stopping you from leaving and starting your own.