vaultofsouler Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Been out all night and just logged on to see what FOSLAND has been adding, if anything, to the "I Love eBay" thread.... and what I find is it has been locked.... WHY.... The "rest assured the moderators are discussing it"reasoning, mentioned in another thread by OoooRICKoooO, holds no water for me.... Who's getting penalised for honest opinions/comments.... true SOUL SOURCE members IMO ..... I thought this "forum board" was supposed to generate opinions .... If some "wanna be soul seller" from eBay joins to try and defend his items/actions then let him.... he'll soon realise that he can't sell stuff under false pretences and have no comeback.... or that no one will have a go at him for his listings.... Locking threads only serve to "protect" him.... they appear to "knock" all other proper SS members comments and stop US airing our opinions/thoughts.... It was mentioned that Mike & Co should ban him from the site on the "I Love eBay" thread.... I stated NOT.... reason being it could allow a response from said "seller" when WE commented on his ongoings.... no matter whether believable or comical.... OoooRICKoooO's thread again mentioned banning.... I again say NOT because of reason just stated.... How many threads have WE discussed "dodgy" USA sellers and their items with NO responses.... at least this gives US a chance to cast OUR OPINION and to TRY and get some answers.... I do believe in FOSLAND's case it all falls on deaf ears.... BUT at least WE say it.... I know it's a demanding/hard job for all the "mods".... but locking the threads, in my opinion, is where "big brother" is wrong in this instance.... I'm now beginning to think this post will get locked when read by the "mods" because it relates to previously locked threads but, hey, sh*t happens.... at least I've got my opinion off my chest.... p.s. don't penalise SS's for "honest" unthreatening posts .... Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Gavin Page Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Been out all night and just logged on to see what FOSLAND has been adding, if anything, to the "I Love eBay" thread.... and what I find is it has been locked.... WHY.... The "rest assured the moderators are discussing it"reasoning, mentioned in another thread by OoooRICKoooO, holds no water for me.... Who's getting penalised for honest opinions/comments.... true SOUL SOURCE members IMO ..... I thought this "forum board" was supposed to generate opinions .... If some "wanna be soul seller" from eBay joins to try and defend his items/actions then let him.... he'll soon realise that he can't sell stuff under false pretences and have no comeback.... or that no one will have a go at him for his listings.... Locking threads only serve to "protect" him.... they appear to "knock" all other proper SS members comments and stop US airing our opinions/thoughts.... It was mentioned that Mike & Co should ban him from the site on the "I Love eBay" thread.... I stated NOT.... reason being it could allow a response from said "seller" when WE commented on his ongoings.... no matter whether believable or comical.... OoooRICKoooO's thread again mentioned banning.... I again say NOT because of reason just stated.... How many threads have WE discussed "dodgy" USA sellers and their items with NO responses.... at least this gives US a chance to cast OUR OPINION and to TRY and get some answers.... I do believe in FOSLAND's case it all falls on deaf ears.... BUT at least WE say it.... I know it's a demanding/hard job for all the "mods".... but locking the threads, in my opinion, is where "big brother" is wrong in this instance.... I'm now beginning to think this post will get locked when read by the "mods" because it relates to previously locked threads but, hey, sh*t happens.... at least I've got my opinion off my chest.... p.s. don't penalise SS's for "honest" unthreatening posts .... Good point well made. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Been out all night and just logged on to see what FOSLAND has been adding, if anything, to the "I Love eBay" thread.... and what I find is it has been locked.... WHY.... The "rest assured the moderators are discussing it"reasoning, mentioned in another thread by OoooRICKoooO, holds no water for me.... Who's getting penalised for honest opinions/comments.... true SOUL SOURCE members IMO ..... I thought this "forum board" was supposed to generate opinions .... If some "wanna be soul seller" from eBay joins to try and defend his items/actions then let him.... he'll soon realise that he can't sell stuff under false pretences and have no comeback.... or that no one will have a go at him for his listings.... Locking threads only serve to "protect" him.... they appear to "knock" all other proper SS members comments and stop US airing our opinions/thoughts.... It was mentioned that Mike & Co should ban him from the site on the "I Love eBay" thread.... I stated NOT.... reason being it could allow a response from said "seller" when WE commented on his ongoings.... no matter whether believable or comical.... OoooRICKoooO's thread again mentioned banning.... I again say NOT because of reason just stated.... How many threads have WE discussed "dodgy" USA sellers and their items with NO responses.... at least this gives US a chance to cast OUR OPINION and to TRY and get some answers.... I do believe in FOSLAND's case it all falls on deaf ears.... BUT at least WE say it.... I know it's a demanding/hard job for all the "mods".... but locking the threads, in my opinion, is where "big brother" is wrong in this instance.... I'm now beginning to think this post will get locked when read by the "mods" because it relates to previously locked threads but, hey, sh*t happens.... at least I've got my opinion off my chest.... p.s. don't penalise SS's for "honest" unthreatening posts .... Thinking the same myself,only differently...... Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Val (Chunky) Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Andy this is a fantastic site giving insight, useful information and a lot of enjoyment about all things soulful. The 'fosland' thread is one of interest to a lot of people on here for one common reason, to stop some poor sucker from getting ripped off. Which to my mind is a great service from the guys on here. Why block that? .....it's my opinion anyway Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Bring back fosy Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Pete S Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I agree with all of you (no surprise there) and it's a shame that threads get locked - HOWEVER - you've got to take into consideration the legal ramifications and the site owners could be in trouble if they allow certain statements to go into public domain - at least I think that's why topics get locked (last was was the Manship/Rambler one which could have run and run for ages). In this case, it looked like a public service was being done! Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Brian Ellis Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Have to agree absolutely. WHY lock these threads - where is the explanation from the moderators? Is it to 'punish' Fosland - surely that serves no useful purpose whatsoever; in fact if he is dodgy dealing then burying our heads in the sand by blocking the opportunity to discuss his activities actually frees him up to do more, i.e. no one able to bring to the attention of the wider soul community what he is up to. If the SS forums are to become so clinically cleansed and 'nice' in nature then we're in danger of becoming the WI of the soul scene - surely we've never been about that! This is definitely one censorship step placed firmly in the wrong direction? :angry: Brian Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Baz Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Just read the last few posts on said thread! i can fully understand why it was closed. The postings were turning to insults and generly attacking fosland, not discussing the subject in matter, so i can see why 'mods' decided to lock it Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Pete S Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Just read the last few posts on said thread! i can fully understand why it was closed. The postings were turning to insults and generly attacking fosland, not discussing the subject in matter, so i can see why 'mods' decided to lock it He was being very beligerent and practically inviting insults and people were taking the bait - totally different to an out and out attack on someone. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Dan Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 rachel closed it so up to her to say exactly why but i bet if any of you had been moderating it you'd have done the same thing eventually (i know i would, just rachel beat me to it ) basically: - the points had been made and were just being re-made - lots of 'wanker' symbols and general abuse being chucked around, which doesn't add anything really and just ends up in a downwards spiral of insults - also, what was going to be said next? you've got to go to bed eventually and giving everyone the chance to cool down overnight was a sensible thing to do. as i said these are my personal views, not necessarily rachel's. also personal view - fosland is out of order and i won't be buying anything off him but just keeping calling him a wanker doesn't take us very far...as someone said, better just to ignore the guy i reckon. also feel i ought to say two things: 1) i know i'm just the same when i've got a bee in my bonnet, and probably worse 2) none of the moderators are doing it for some sort of power trip - someone has to do it, we were asked, we said yes. quite happy to hand over the job to anyone who wants to take a turn pete, did you get my email re those two 45s btw? Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Just read the last few posts on said thread! i can fully understand why it was closed. The postings were turning to insults and generly attacking fosland, not discussing the subject in matter, so i can see why 'mods' decided to lock it Dont believe you Baz,you where doing the baiting.......besides one of these ,is a badge of honour down my way Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Sanquine Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Agree with you all. If your gonna buy big, you'd be a fool not to have checked it out first, same as survey on house or second opinion on car etc. Fossland and sellar's like him should be stopped, he know's exactly what he's doing, very clever with wording with intent to deceive. Unsure if site owner's would be held responsible for statement's made by ss member's, would imagine the member's themselve's would be liable! Wondered if some form of collective statement from ss member's to Ebay would have a greater effect than individual email's? Maybe a section on ss "Headed buyer beware" would benefit other's, if nothing else can be done - better than nothing. Don't think thread's should have been closed though! :angry: Anyone noticed Rambler now unregistered! Karen Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Pete S Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Anyone noticed Rambler now unregistered! Karen Or is he????? Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Dan Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Unsure if site owner's would be held responsible for statement's made by ss member's, would imagine the member's themselve's would be liable! i don't think anyone has said anything libelous karen - there's a defence called 'fair comment' which would probably apply, even if 'justification' (ie it's true) didn't! but as a general rule, the site owners definitely would be liable if someone was libeled on here (as would the person making the statement and, possibly, the moderators). which may explain occasional twitchiness Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Brian Ellis Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Whilst I agree that there were some insults flying about and the symbol was over frequently in evidence (if the use of that symbol is likely to cause the lock-up of debates then why not remove the symbol!), I do think that having got Fosland out in the open so-to-speak and bringing him into the debate there might have been some chance of getting to the bottom of what he was really up to. Forcing him back underground means the heat is off him. OK individuals on SS will probably never buy from him as none of us are taken in by his Cairos-type offers - but many other unsuspecting buyers will be. When there was a strong body of opinion, fuelled by the forum, there was a chance that a powerful case might have been made to eBay; but now that the body of opinion has been nuetered it will be left to individuals to make the case in isolation, and with no vehicle to provide support I suspect the enthusiasm to take this further will dissapate and Fos will be able to get on with his business of selling 'rare and hard-to-find' northern soul records. Brian Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Been out all night and just logged on to see what FOSLAND has been adding, if anything, to the "I Love eBay" thread.... and what I find is it has been locked.... WHY.... The "rest assured the moderators are discussing it"reasoning, mentioned in another thread by OoooRICKoooO, holds no water for me.... Who's getting penalised for honest opinions/comments.... true SOUL SOURCE members IMO ..... I thought this "forum board" was supposed to generate opinions .... If some "wanna be soul seller" from eBay joins to try and defend his items/actions then let him.... he'll soon realise that he can't sell stuff under false pretences and have no comeback.... or that no one will have a go at him for his listings.... Locking threads only serve to "protect" him.... they appear to "knock" all other proper SS members comments and stop US airing our opinions/thoughts.... It was mentioned that Mike & Co should ban him from the site on the "I Love eBay" thread.... I stated NOT.... reason being it could allow a response from said "seller" when WE commented on his ongoings.... no matter whether believable or comical.... OoooRICKoooO's thread again mentioned banning.... I again say NOT because of reason just stated.... How many threads have WE discussed "dodgy" USA sellers and their items with NO responses.... at least this gives US a chance to cast OUR OPINION and to TRY and get some answers.... I do believe in FOSLAND's case it all falls on deaf ears.... BUT at least WE say it.... I know it's a demanding/hard job for all the "mods".... but locking the threads, in my opinion, is where "big brother" is wrong in this instance.... I'm now beginning to think this post will get locked when read by the "mods" because it relates to previously locked threads but, hey, sh*t happens.... at least I've got my opinion off my chest.... p.s. don't penalise SS's for "honest" unthreatening posts .... OK Dan stop picking on me . As an afterthought your maybe right! Cant we just send him a turkish copy of the Cairos with Bird Flu on it?? Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Pete S Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 pete, did you get my email re those two 45s btw? Emailed you mister Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Dan Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 OK Dan stop picking on me . As an afterthought your maybe right! Cant we just send him a turkish copy of the Cairos with Bird Flu on it?? maybe a copy of 'the duck' would be better (btw sorry rick, wasn't picking on you or anyone, just putting a p-o-v) Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest rachel Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) Thanks Dan, basically it had gone from discussion to name-calling and thought it was best to let things cool down overnight. Admittedly could have put up a fuller explanation at the time but thought it was fairly obvious (plus it was late and we're only human!) Ultimately, what to do about 'controversial' threads is up to Mike but he wasn't around so did what I thought was best at the time. Edited January 17, 2006 by rachel Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Supercorsa Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Thanks Dan, basically it had gone from discussion to name-calling and thought it was best to let things cool down overnight. Admittedly could have put up a fuller explanation at the time but thought it was fairly obvious (plus it was late and we're only human!) Ultimately, what to do about 'controversial' threads is up to Mike but he wasn't around so did what I thought was best at the time. You have my support Rachel, for the decision that you made. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Rbman Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Thanks Dan, basically it had gone from discussion to name-calling and thought it was best to let things cool down overnight. Admittedly could have put up a fuller explanation at the time but thought it was fairly obvious (plus it was late and we're only human!) Ultimately, what to do about 'controversial' threads is up to Mike but he wasn't around so did what I thought was best at the time. The right move IMO Rachel. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Mike Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 There's a few comments about site policy in this thread, have tried to clear up one regarding the request of banning of members in the site section will post later there on the legal side of site. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
vaultofsouler Posted January 17, 2006 Author Share Posted January 17, 2006 rachel closed it so up to her to say exactly why but i bet if any of you had been moderating it you'd have done the same thing eventually (i know i would, just rachel beat me to it ) basically: - the points had been made and were just being re-made - lots of 'wanker' symbols and general abuse being chucked around, which doesn't add anything really and just ends up in a downwards spiral of insults - also, what was going to be said next? you've got to go to bed eventually and giving everyone the chance to cool down overnight was a sensible thing to do. as i said these are my personal views, not necessarily rachel's. also personal view - fosland is out of order and i won't be buying anything off him but just keeping calling him a wanker doesn't take us very far...as someone said, better just to ignore the guy i reckon. also feel i ought to say two things: 1) i know i'm just the same when i've got a bee in my bonnet, and probably worse 2) none of the moderators are doing it for some sort of power trip - someone has to do it, we were asked, we said yes. quite happy to hand over the job to anyone who wants to take a turn pete, did you get my email re those two 45s btw? Hi Dan and other "mods".... Whilst standing by my original post I can also respect in one sense why the "I Love eBay" thread was locked by Rachel due to the "w*nker smilie" being displayed, as Dan suggests, thus being deemed "turning insultive" and also "not knowing what was going to be said next".... although I didn't read the thread as being insultive as it stood though hence my original post.... maybe removing the "w*nker smilie", as Brian suggests, could be a way to detract from posts appearing insultive to the general reader and preventing threads going "in a downwards spiral of insults".... Anyway.... I veiwed the thread as a chance to get some reasons from "fosland" for his ongoing dubious listings.... and drawing unsuspecting buyers who read SS, but not post, to that fact.... this, hopefully, has been done now.... I made replies to all parts of his first post re the item, countering his reasoning and comments on points and issues which he either missed or just ignored.... was just hoping to draw him on those points again.... this would have been a point re-made as you state was the case Dan, but one I was wanting a response to so was wanting to highlight them again.... Suppose there's the PM route but, hey, will I get a reply .... I for one don't think any "mods" are on a "power trip" (except Shane of course ).... as stated in original post, I think it's a hard/demanding job.... one I don't envy anybody doing.... so whilst I may not agree in this instance I respect the decision and reasoning.... feel free to lock this if you wish as points have now been made and answered here and by Mike in Site Stuff.... With respect, love and soulfulness to all .... Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest rachel Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I for one don't think any "mods" are on a "power trip" (except Shane of course ).... as stated in original post, I think it's a hard/demanding job.... one I don't envy anybody doing.... so whilst I may not agree in this instance I respect the decision and reasoning.... feel free to lock this if you wish as points have now been made and answered here and by Mike in Site Stuff.... Will do Mark (Mr Etherdidge ) Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Recommended Posts