Each Doctor’s Strengths and Weaknesses

Rob Filth wrote:Okay I can see that I'm not being taken seriously here and everyone's awkwardly trying to be evasive and dismissive rather than address the point, so I'm off.

There's not a debate to be had on a forum with a power mad Hitler mod who lauds his opinion over others.

Enjoy your Gallifrey Base v.2 guys.

There's better uncensored and unstifled debates to had elsewhere on the web than this obviously neutered place.

Cheerio, and give Rani my regards if he ever turns up again, I'm outta here, laters.

Just to reiterate and to address the point properly: I am certainly against the idea of your posts being put into locked threads, and I object to anyone using those measures. Regardless of my stance on the topic itself, I don’t see how doing as such is good for debate at all, and does lend a certain authoritarian stance to the place similar to that of the other forums. My silence is broken. Does anyone else agree here?

I removed myself as an admin a few weeks back because I didn't like the idea of being in a higher position than the rest of you. The only thing I do now as a moderator is censor hardcore pornography (much to my chagrin) and photos of Sue Perkins. If this was my forum and we didn't have to abide to forumotion's rules then I would let you post as many pictures of Angela White's oily tits as you wanted.

Throwing Rob's comments in separate threads and locking them wasn't a smart thing to do and should be rectified immediately.

Pepsi Maxil wrote:I removed myself as an admin a few weeks back because I didn't like the idea of being in a higher position than the rest of you. The only thing I do now as a moderator is censor hardcore pornography (much to my chagrin) and photos of Sue Perkins. If this was my forum and we didn't have to abide to forumotion's rules then I would let you post as many pictures of Angela White's oily tits as you wanted.

Throwing Rob's comments in separate threads and locking them wasn't a smart thing to do and it should be rectified immediately.

I think you did a good job of being a moderator. Since we're being honest I'll say that I never liked Adam as moderator. A few years back a troll was stirring up shit here by reporting people, and he thought it was me. He had no evidence it was me and blocked me from the entire forum (whilst still allowing people to slag me off here behnd my back.) I suspect he just wanted me off the forum as he didn't like a lot of my posts (from a political point of view. He already locked another thread when he didn't like what I was saying earlier, and he even deleted a few of my posts.)

He later had to unblock me and apologise when it became clear it was just an anonymous troll, but still to have a guilty until proven innocent, and block someone for a few weeks was a really shitty thing to do. I also didn't like the way he tried to make out he was better than us, about how our conversations rotted his brain. (To be fair that's true, but I doubt he's since gone to the Empire club to discuss the meaning of existence either.)

Bernard Marx wrote:Just to reiterate and to address the point properly: I am certainly against the idea of your posts being put into locked threads, and I object to anyone using those measures. Regardless of my stance on the topic itself, I don’t see how doing as such is good for debate at all, and does lend a certain authoritarian stance to the place similar to that of the other forums. My silence is broken. Does anyone else agree here?

I will say there was a two-to-one in favour among us toward my move and lock thread approach, to Rob's nuisance posts. I did gauge the opinions of other mods first, so I didn't do it rashly without deliberation.

But I appreciate it's not been a popular move among the forum, so we'll reverse that now.

Ever since I've been on this version of the forum, I can't say I've ever noticed much, if any; mod activity, so kudos to the admin for that.
Which makes me all the more surprised to read about posts being removed or things being locked or whatever. For what it's worth, I don't think that's a very good thing to do, so I understand Rob's beef on that point alone. Transparency is always best in my opinion.
As for the rest of it, to be honest I started skim-reading or flat out ignoring the whole Warriors of the Deep thing days, if not weeks ago.
Tannmann can come across as a bit obsessive about it, but my position is that it's his right to do so if he wishes, and if I start to find it tedious I have the option of scrolling on by. Obviously it irritated Rob, which is fair enough too. He has as much right to respond to anyone's posts without any mod interference so long as it's not breaking any legal shit.
As for insulting the whole forum, I can't read Rob's screenshot properly on my phone, but it's nothing more than people here do about other forums, and frankly who cares. It's just the Internet. I've met enough DW fans from forums to know that there's a lot more to most of us than than the shit we bang on about online. We all have a certain degree of Internet persona.
As for Pepsi, I think you've done more than a good enough job as admin. As far as I can see, you've never let any argument or debate get to you to the point where you've used your admin powers. Even when you get pissed off with people, it strikes me than you'll just take a few days break rather than let something affect your judgement as admin. You've got nothing to worry about if you ask me.

I'll just say this in defence of my modding in this situation.

There have been prior occasions where we’ve moved other posts about and merged them with other threads to try and streamline discussion.

The “Why did JNT stay so long” thread did blow up a bit, and there was an argument between me and Maxil that did spill over into another thread. I’ll admit immaturity there, but it was seemingly decided after that it was better to cut and paste the portions that had spilled over into that thread back to the relevant thread, so the derailed thread could be restored to normal. I hasten to add not by me, as I’d taken a break from modding at that point.

It just made things more user friendly, and it didn’t seem to become an issue.

The way I saw it, this was applying pretty much the same principle. Rob to my eyes was just being disruptive all round, and hounding me on threads that were not even relevant to his beef (or indeed to the stories or period we were arguing about). To me that went beyond a right of response into the realms of pursuing a vendetta of intimidation. And this went on for months, and I realized it wasn’t going to stop. Then last week it got particularly out of control.

Now granted, because I was the target of it,  I might've been singly inclined to see Rob as more of a disruption to the forum than others did, but judging from this thread I don't think I was anymore in the end.

I could’ve moved the posts somewhere where me and him were already deep in argument (as I have done in the past), but it just seemed to me, wherever I moved them, they’d be disruptive to an ongoing thread, so I decided to give them their own thread. Since they were posts addressed specifically to me, and I had no interest in responding, I saw nothing wrong with putting them on lock to communicate that (again, there are other locked topics on the forum).

I personally didn’t and still don't see it as really censorious, since what he had to say was still visible for all to read, nothing he said was deleted and still hasn’t been (and I suspect Rob knows this and is just grandstanding and playing the martyr). It was just no longer derailing other posts.

Sure I’ll admit it was maybe a little vindictive of me, but I could say the same of his three-month campaign against me, and unlike him I was prepared to be fair and reasonable to a point.

I still think it seemed the best approach to streamline his vendetta against me away from other threads and contain things from getting out of control, but maybe the locking of the thread was too much, and it would’ve been better to just streamline them into an already existing argument and letting it run its course (ad infinitum).

For the record, a number of posts have been moved about, but the only posts that have ever been removed in the sense of being deleted altogether were generally things that could be interpreted as hate-speech by either Bowelstreak or Ed Barlow, and those are the rare exceptions where we’ve enforced a ban. The one time we perhaps overstepped the mark was when one of us deleted one of BeKind’s posts that was apparently quite inflammatory against Terrance Dicks in the thread where it was announced he’d died, but perhaps that was down to it being a sensitive time. Personally I might’ve favoured relocating it instead, but again that wouldn’t be easy to manage.

As for Adam, I came in just as he was about to chuck in and leave, and so I only managed to exchange a few PMs with him.

He saw me as a problem member at first, but I think when I PMed him and explained my issues and where I was coming from, he was willing to be more understanding and give me the benefit of the doubt. He did somewhat confide in me that things can come to a head (and a headache) easily here, so perhaps he understood, and I did get the sense that me and him might've been quite like-minded, and that I'd won his trust.

Though I think at that point he was just willing to hand the keys over to anyone.

I enjoy reading both Rob's and Tanmann's posts, (until the recent shitfest which I just got bored with), surely you guys can work this out. For what it's worth, I didn't think moving those posts to a locked thread was really fair either.

I had just got to the point where I was ignoring these threads. I had even rewatched Revelation and Resurrection last week and was going to post about them in a couple of those threads, but just decided given what was going on not to bother and to let you guys have at it.

Fendelman wrote:I enjoy reading both Rob's and Tanmann's posts, (until the recent shitfest which I just got bored with), surely you guys can work this out.

I don't think we can, sadly.

A lot of the Hive knows Rob well and knows him long.

But I feel I'm the only one here who actually knows him as an enemy, and I can tell you, once he decides you're his enemy (particularly his political enemy), his carefree act drops, he is not prepared to be reasonable anymore and he will not let it go, to the point he can become bloody demonic. All he's interested in is antagonizing and provoking until he gets an explosive reaction, which gives him a power-trip. He got that from me once, and he is desperate to get it again.

There's been various feuds with other members I've had on the Hive (usually goaded/stirred up by him) and mostly we've managed to smooth things over eventually and even come to an understanding, and sometimes actually become friends. Or at least if it's not resolved and members still dislike me, we still manage to agree to let it pass for the sake of the forum.

Rob is the only one here I've found that impossible with. He's just not interested, and frankly is unreachable on that score.

For what it's worth, I didn't think moving those posts to a locked thread was really fair either.

Well, I can only reiterate that it's not been unprecedented for us as mods to sometimes move posts or full-blown arguments that have derailed threads to their proper place to try and keep things streamlined, so I didn't think it would present a problem (at least to the rest of the members) to take that approach further.

Some of what I did (the way they were titled and locked) was a bit vindictive of me, but then Rob sometimes makes me feel that way.

However, I have unlocked them now, and tried (to the best of my memory) to put his posts back where they originated. And I do bear in mind no-one wants that approach repeated again.

I had just got to the point where I was ignoring these threads. I had even rewatched Revelation and Resurrection last week and was going to post about them in a couple of those threads, but just decided given what was going on not to bother and to let you guys have at it.

I'm actually dismayed to hear that. I would've liked to hear your take.

I did try to ignore Rob and let discussion carry on but it just didn't work.

However, I think he might've thrown in the towel (if his dramatic exit was sincere), so I think that's the end of our beef, so maybe it's safe to post your thoughts there.

Alternatively you could post them in the Which Who Stories Have you seen lately? thread in the Truwho miscellaneous board.

Just to say I don’t have a problem with either you or Rob. Back in the old days of the DW2005 and Logopolis Metropolis forms I found the Rob & Rani stuff pretty tedious when it used to break out over various threads, but since then; although I’ll admit to throwing out the occasional sarcastic observation, I just find it pretty easy to ignore stuff I find tedious and just scroll on by. You could argue that that’s a philosophy that Rob should adopt, but he obviously feels as strongly about Saward/WotD as Tannmann does, so frankly I’m just inclined to let them get on with it.
I’ve had the odd handbag fight with Pepsi and IanK, but at the end of the day, as the cliche says: it’s only a tv programme. I’m far more likely to get wound up by politics than Dr Who. That’s why I don’t venture in there very often these days.

Ludders wrote:
I’ve had the odd handbag fight with Pepsi

Ludders: "Pepsi"
Literally everyone else: "Maxil"

You always have to be different, don't you?

Actually, I usually think of you as Peps these days, without the ‘I’. It’s meant favourably. You should be honoured.

Ludders wrote:Just to say I don’t have a problem with either you or Rob.

That's fair enough.

I just find it pretty easy to ignore stuff I find tedious and just scroll on by. You could argue that that’s a philosophy that Rob should adopt, but he obviously feels as strongly about Saward/WotD as Tannmann does, so frankly I’m just inclined to let them get on with it.

Well he could walk by, but he's too much like a dog always sniffing around me in the hope I react the way he wants.

Also, I'd somewhat contest what's apparently obvious with Rob's behavior and beliefs. He's a man of many clown masks, after all.

I don't entirely believe he actually cares that much about those Saward stories or points. I suspect he only harps on about them and doubles down on his uncompromising positions, not because he believes them, but to bait a reaction from me.

I don't think *anything* he's been determined to argue with me about really has anything whatsoever to do with the true source of his 12-year grudge against me. It's just stuff he can weaponize and spin a narrative about me with (or rather he used to be able to, and thinks he still can).

Maybe Warriors genuinely aligns with his hard-left politics (or at least enough for him to know the hymn sheet to recite if nothing else). But if he was genuinely left-wing, I don't think he'd come out with half the more conservative, reactionary views he has regarding Captain Jack's promiscuity (like suggesting his kissing the 9th Doctor might pass on an STD).

Likewise if he really despised JNT-bashing and saw it as fan disloyalty, you'd think he'd have equal contempt for Saward for doing the dirty on him, and not defend him like he does.

Which is why I don't think he really cares. I don't think he really cares about free speech either, because he has gloated over my banning from the Anorak Zone. Which is why I find it a bit hard to take his harping about the free speech principle here that seriously because I don't think it's a principle he really holds to.

He just says what stirs and outrages, because he loves a crowd and he loves to make the outraged party fall into his passenger seat.

-

As for the Rob and Rani thing, I used to think, based on those cartoons, that there was actually an underlying fonder friendship beneath the banter and they liked having each other to bounce off of.

In Rani's absence, I've become a bit disabused of that poignant notion since I sense no fondness at all when Rob reminisces on him. He just seems to see Rani as a useful idiot he was happy to throw under the bus.

I'm not going to coment on that. I like Rob, and it's not for me to say how I think he should conduct himself. You obviously have a history between you that's not really my business, and with Rob being one of the old guard of the original Hive, I was glad to see him around again; but that's no reflection on you, as he seemed to make it his business to troll you.
C'est La vie.

I would like to apologise to the forum for a temporary lapse of judgement on my part. The recent drama wasn't entirely Tanmann's fault, as I did give him permission to create the locked threads while Maxil was taking his break. I've been going through an extremely difficult time in my personal life recently, and pretty much haven't slept at all for the past two weeks. Had I been thinking more clearly, I would have advised that the whole exchange be moved to an impartially-titled, unlocked thread.

You have my word that nothing like this will happen again.

ClockworkOcean wrote:I've been going through an extremely difficult time in my personal life recently, and pretty much haven't slept at all for the past two weeks.

I'm so sorry to hear that, man. Seems like most of us are going through some sort of difficulty at the moment. I hope things get better for you.

Pepsi Maxil wrote:I'm so sorry to hear that, man. Seems like most of us are going through some sort of difficulty at the moment. I hope things get better for you.

Thanks, I appreciate that.