Moderation of Community

[cbarling]

Hi All,

I wanted to provide the following information for regular community members.

A couple of months ago (and for the first time ever) we had to cancel the membership of one of the members of this community. We did this with a heavy heart, and only after we had attempted to engage in a discussion with the person in question. We had sent several emails in our attempts to talk about issues, but did not receive any replies.

Following this, we believe that this member re-registered under another name, providing false details. We attempted to establish the true identity of the new member, but once again received no replies to our emails. Unfortunately, the member continued to break the forum guidelines and continuously launched attacks on Actinic. We have finally decided that enough is enough and deleted their user id and posts. We are now considering whether to take legal action against them.

There are clear guidelines about postings. In particular, these state that the forum should be friendly and useful and is about Actinic products. We do not suppress constructive criticism of our offerings, but for obvious reasons we can't allow the promotion of competitive products.

I hope this offers some context to our decision to cancel this particular membership. Please don't hesitate to contact me directly is you have any specific concerns.

Regards,

Chris

[TraceyHand]

I'm not surprised to hear it.

I knew..but I knew Chris(D) knew (or had suspicions) from something he posted a while back too so I hadn't said anything in the open forum really.

At the end of the day, one person or two, the "crime" is the same so the "punishment" is too

[dave_finlayson]

Sounds like a perfectly resonable decision to me. Constructive critiscism is good for anyone and it should always be encouraged (not that it needs to be on this forum!!). Anything else is just a waste of time and frankly, people really should have better things to do with their lives!

Thanks for the explanation though, now I just have to work out who it was!! Call me Sherlock until further notice!

[leehack]

BPJ.......

[dave_finlayson]

Get you Clouseau! I'll put my Deerstalker and pipe away!

[RuralWeb]

the promotion of competitive products

I looked at them all and they were rubbish.

[jont]

I looked at them all and they were rubbish.

The majority are genuinely appalling.. makes you wonder how long they will take before jumping back into the fire with another "this cart is pants check out the best cart ever here" post on their respective support forum.

And if people do not want to play by the rules of the forum then they should be removed - especially if failing to cooperate or respond to requests from the mods. If you don't like something move on and be done... there are more important things to be done than continual bitching.

[Jan]

And if people do not want to play by the rules of the forum then they should be removed

Except for the really nice ones ...

what does BPJ mean Mr Hack?

Regards,

[jont]

What does BPJ mean Mr Hack?

Lee and Mals best mate.. BusPassJohn

[RuralWeb]

If you don't like something move on and be done

Most people with websites that are failing tend to latch onto any reason that is outside of thier control to blame it all on rather than face the facts that thier site/product is rubbish.

GC was a classic example.

[jont]

Most people with websites that are failing tend to latch onto any reason that is outside of thier control to blame it all on rather than face the facts that thier site/product is rubbish.

GC was a classic example.

Never a truer word spoken. It is very easy to polarise your issues onto a very small item when a global stance is often required.

[Jan]

Not in this case though, his sites were very successful, I've watched his business grow over the last few years.

Regards,

[Luddite]

Following this, we believe that this member re-registered under another name, providing false details.

At last - I now understand why someone that I'd never heard of seemed to know about me and my site. All becomes clear. (although I have to admit to not knowing any of the details which led to the person being banned)

Nick

[RuralWeb]

his sites were very successful

IF we are talking about the same person then I remember him posting that although his turnover was large he was only due to move into profit next year.

[Jan]

IF we are talking about the same person then I remember him posting that although his turnover was large he was only due to move into profit next year.

I didn't realise that, that's a shame.

Actually John has contacted me to say that his sites are now profitable and the only reason for them not showing a profit on the books previously was down to reinvestment.

I think that he did deserve to be removed (sorry John but some of your posts were outrageous) but I really don't think that it was because his business was failing.

Regards,