Now I'm annoyed...

* Finally, can we talk about astronomy for a change!

Is this the right forum this that? :lol:

Michael,

I am in no way annoyed with the previous thread. The debate was heated and that was fine.
Locking the thread was a big no no and an abuse of position as far as I am concerned. I think I deserve an explaination why the thread was closed. I'm just not buying the 'round in circles' excuse. That is no reason to lock a thread. My argument was effectively silenced. This cannot happen again. Clear guidelines need to be in place regarding the locking of threads- it's been a contentious issue before.
Even if the thread is reopened at this stage who is going to contribute effectively to such a hot potato? New threads have been started since, with guidelines blanking my arguments.
I'm sorry, but if I just kiss and make up the principle of what I am saying with be lost in the ether. I'm not going to pretend I'm OK with this. I'm not.

Dave P

I'm sorry, but if I just kiss and make up the principle of what I am saying with be lost in the ether. I'm not going to pretend I'm OK with this. I'm not.

Right, since Dave clearly wants to continue this in public rather than email...

In case anyone cares...

Earlier this evening I mailed Dave and Bart suggesting that we reopen the previous thread, and delete this one with its allegations. This would deal with Daves main objection earlier in this thread that he wanted the original thread unlocked, and why he refuses to participate in future discussions on the design of the website. It would also remove the allegations and comments posted here which if nothing else reflect badly on IFAS.

Bart was happy to do this seeing the suggestion as 'a sensible and fair way forward'.

Dave was most definatly not in agreement with the suggestion.

I am disappointed that a concensus could not be reached, and this matter resolved. Since Dave wants to continue this in public, I thought it appropriate to point out that people involved did try to resolve this privately.

Clear skies (freezing cold, but clear skies!)

Dear Moderator, I respectfully request answers to the following two questions:

1. Why was the 'Major update to the boards' thread locked?

2. Once locked, why did Albertw White and Voyager continue to post to that thread?

Thanks in advance


Dave McD

I think I made that quite clear in my response email:

As long as the disagreements stay on a professional level I have no difficulty with them. Al, I believe it would be more damaging to delete my post. The best way to demonstrate that IFAS is not a censorship operation is not to bury these arguments and pretend everything is just fine. However my concerns are genuine. At this point I have no good reason to take either of you on good faith. The best way to deal with this issue is to appoint an arbitrator and clearly define some policies on the board. It's better to clear the air publically than behind closed doors.

You continued to push this approach, which really wouldn't solve anything. It's not that I don't appreciate the effort, but I'm annoyed because my argument was very effectively silenced through these actions. I don't see how this is addressed by eh, silencing me further. This matter concerns everyone. Moderators can not just simply lock threads they don't agree with. The thread was locked and new threads were started with the stipulation that my argument was null and void. This cannot happen again.

Jeeez what a lousy way to hit my 300th post...