Censorship/Moderating Standards

[Doozer]

I assume it was deleted carlos as you were nominating an escort regulater from the community which was deemed innapropriate .

[thehighwayman]

Pms are'nt open and transparent Doc..........for one it's against the rules to forward the contents of a pm or to post it on a forum without the consent of the parties involved. A post on an open forum was deleted and a thread was closed........a "moderator's comment", which is both open and transparent would have dealth adequately with the situation........unless of course, E-I do not want to be publicly seen to be going beyond the rules to stiffle valid debate?

But on one thing, I am sure we can both agree........moderating must certainly be a more relaxed activity than when it was first introduced almost three years ago. For starters, a good proportion of those who had any opinions of worth and who were prepared to extend their participation here beyond "Last one to post wins" are no longer here for one reason or another, or have become a lot quieter. Then again, being able to moderate without having to justify ones actions to the members would also tend to simplify the whole task.

I'm a curious sod................are there still real debates in the Patcave, or do people follow orders, as in posting links to E-I's sister sites in their signatures?

Obviously I can't go into any great detail about what goes on in there. You know yourself what goes on in the Patcave stays in the Patcave Believe it or not life went on when the old mods left No it didn't turn into a yes man society It might be hard to believe but the new mods have a mind of their own too like former mods Plenty discussions and humour just like before. The links in the signatures isn't an order. That was one of the mods idea to promote the other sites. I think it was a great idea. It's not compulsary for a mod to have it. By the way I'm sitting on your chair these days. The first time I sat on it one of those darn butt plugs was on it

[benin]

ahh chillax carlos... the patcave is a great place im sure it was fun back in your day aswell.... ill ask my great great great great grandfathers uncle....lol

[Doozer]

ahh chillax carlos... the patcave is a great place im sure it was fun back in your day aswell.... ill ask my great great great great grandfathers uncle....lol

Might be easier to ask myself and hwm

[benin]

Might be easier to ask myself and hwm

will ye not bore me rigid with long winded inane drivel you call replys...ohh wait im getting mixed up...ok do tell....lol

[Doozer]

will ye not bore me rigid with long winded inane drivel you call replys...ohh wait im getting mixed up...ok do tell....lol

Its ok benjy I'll tell it through the medium of nude ladies

[anon361]

I'm just curious why certain escorts were allowed to be down right rude to another poster no matter what his point is and yet he is the only one singled out for a quiet warning, even make unsubstantiated remarks without the need for proof, would we be allowed make such comments about them? I like most on here but it would seem a few ladies are allowed over step the mark, especially when it would seem to be a popular stance or the poster isn't doing themselves any favours and yet if one of us was to speak to an escort like they speak to certain posters there would be uproar..
Don't get me wrong, there contribution to the boards is most welcome but a bit too bitchy and a little too much mud slinging hopeing some will stick for my liking..

[Forrest]

I assume it was deleted carlos as you were nominating an escort regulater from the community which was deemed innapropriate .

I don't know how anything in the deleted post by Carlos could have been deemed inappropriate,
unless someone has an ability to read between the lines and see something that's not there.

I'm sure those involved in deleting it will give a full and frank explanation when they are back on duty.

[Lucy Chambers]

I'm just curious why certain escorts were allowed to be down right rude to another poster no matter what his point is and yet he is the only one singled out for a quiet warning, even make unsubstantiated remarks without the need for proof, would we be allowed make such comments about them? I like most on here but it would seem a few ladies are allowed over step the mark, especially when it would seem to be a popular stance or the poster isn't doing themselves any favours and yet if one of us was to speak to an escort like they speak to certain posters there would be uproar..
Don't get me wrong, there contribution to the boards is most welcome but a bit too bitchy and a little too much mud slinging hopeing some will stick for my liking..

I presume my comments were allowed because of SR71'S comments and conduct elsewhere Anon. As for hoping mud will stick, no not really, he went and wallowed in it.

[qcumber]

as a relative newbie, i sense a mod + escort V's Clients thing going on ! i think there is a slight bias towards the girls, and if the punters dont agree, the mods and ladies 'gang' up on em. Certain people seem to spend more time on here being condecending to other people and declaring their infallability on everything than working.
Just my observation, and MY opinion !
(im ready)