[*Hector*]

In light of certain conflicts recently on the forum.. Mainly between Andrew Laurrey and James Roffey....

I have a question to ask of Mike and the rest of the moderators....

~Why was Andrew banned for a week for non productive posts and James not??

after all

A form of obsessive-compulsive disorder. A collection of very irritating personality traits that include stubbornness, orderliness, and a desire to control others and their surroundings. It makes a person meticulous or fixated about little things, nit-picking or paying extreme attention to detail, and trying to control his or her environment and other people. They do things “by the book’’ with no flexibility in the way they complete tasks, and expect others to do and think as they. It’s their way or the highway, basically. They are the worst people to work for or live with. If things don’t go their way, they go nuts! Anally retentive people are usually very annoying...

being posted on every thread to the point of it being embarrassing is just as bad, if not worse, as James has been here for a few years now..

I have nothing against James neither am I in favour of Andrew...

What I am in favour of though.......... is fair justice for all.....

So please either let Andrew back or ban James for the same period..

Thank you...

[derek west]

CIU Welcomes any feedback given by members, potential members (who have been identified) or members of the public (again who show a right to reply other than on this forum), CIU strives to be receptive  to all ideas or suggestions, (and have been doing by other means, ie email, phone ) CIU offers an open  invitation (via tickets of course) to visit our Van fest day where any questions can be openly discussed.

 

[robert meldrum]

Have you become spokesman for CIU MR West or are you maybe practicing "committee " speak .

[Simon Gerrard]

CIU Welcomes any feedback given by members, potential members, muckspreaders (who have been identified) or members of the public (again who show a right to reply other than on this forum), CIU strives to be receptive  to all ideas or suggestions, (and have been doing by other means, ie email, phone ) CIU offers an open  invitation (via tickets of course) to visit our Van fest day where any questions can be openly discussed.

 

[Simon Gerrard]

Hector,
I think James, just like the rest of us, got mightily fed up with Andrew and his endless topics which were directed at Derek and I found that offensive.
So well done the mods.

Simon

[robert meldrum]

Just realised where this was lifted from ....

Reminded me that the CIU owner has and continues to market cleaning services to the nation through Internet and Printed media marketing.

[derek west]

Have you become spokesman for CIU MR West or are you maybe practicing "committee " speak .

you must be joking Bob, ive got it easy, wouldn't be a mod if you paid me.
I'm just practicing .  

[Mike Halliday]

Hector you make a very good piont, as I'm cleaning a million office chairs right now I  don't have the time needed to give your excelent question the answer it deserves

I would like to take this oppertunity to Thank you for your  question and  valuable  input you always bring to CIU.

I will answer it to the best of my ability later

[creighton foyle]

i agree andrew was begining to get on my nerves repeating himself and having a pop at tacca / derek all the time but i do not think he was at any time being offensive to anyone it was more of a well behaved  wind up really.

[Simon Gerrard]

I think the difference between Andrew and James is that James has been a respected member of CiU for a long time and has contributed a lot more than Andrew who just seems intent on being a pia.

Simon

[Mike Halliday]

i agree andrew was begining to get on my nerves repeating himself and having a pop at tacca / derek all the time but i do not think he was at any time being offensive to anyone it was more of a well behaved  wind up really.

A quick reply to Creighton, I agree that Andrews post were on he whole harmless and a bit of a wind up, and if it had stayed as that I would not have given him a 7 day ban, in my opinion he crossed the line when he changed his name, at this point  I believed he was boarding on harassment of a fellow member, which cannot be tolerated.

But i will add... On a whole his banning was due to  accumulative effect of the majority his post not just his final name change which is allowed.

My actions were done in what I concidered to be the best interest of CIU.

[creighton foyle]

mike i am sure your actions were done with the best of intentions and my past was more an observation than a critisism of you

[*Hector*]

and what about James constantly posting the same insults to Andrew no matter what Andrew posted..

I was to say the least becoming embarrassed by it, and it served to do nothing but inflame the situation...

I still think that both should have had the same treatment.

[Mike Halliday]

Hector to address your question...

you draw a comparison between Andrew & james saying both have been equally bad so both should be banned

if this was so (and they were as bad as each other) then you would be correct.

James posted what you consider to be an insult 5 times which is 0.002% of James total post. I agree with your sentiment it was (rather than insulting)  slightly childish but considering it was only a very small part of James contribution to this forum then it can be accepted as a bit of fun or at best a slight lack of judgment.

do you think these 0.002%  are an equal comparison of Andrews post that are 84% based around a single subject that was to some insulting and aggravating?

Also as I mentioned in a previous reply Andrews Banning was due to accumulative behaviour not one event, to try and compare james to andrew is in my opinion a flawed argument.

But I welcome your scrutiny of my actions  after all I'm only human and not infallible, if my actions do cause concern I appreciate valuable members such as your self bringing to the attention of the forum

[*Hector*]

fair enough Mike....

If not for people like me... who would moderate the moderators??

 

[Simon Gerrard]

fair enough Mike....

If not for people like me... who would moderate the moderators??

 

Hector,
Don't worry, we'd get someone with a brain

[*Hector*]

 

You have too much time on your hands still Simon 

[Doug Holloway]

Hector aka Steve

If we banned people for posting the same old stuff there wouldn't be many left.

Andrew has been pushing the boundaries and he has received a short ban, if he learns he could come back as a respected poster, his choice.

Cheers

Doug

[james roffey]

Will respond to any concerns you may have, i am not ignoring them.

I am out tonight so cannot respond to this topic in a in a manner that it deserves.

James

[*Hector*]

As I mentioned in the first post James... I have no concerns....

I just thought it not fair for 1 person to be banned and not the other..

2 Mods have now answered that, so no concerns at all, and please do not take it personally, because it was not meant in that way at all..

 
 

[elliott cleaning]

your last two posts are somewhat baffling Mike.

In the first you state that Mr Laurray's post were on the whole harmless & a bit of a wind up
Only banned for changing his name.

In your subsequent post you state his posts were insulting and aggrivating to some.


At the end of the day if nobody had responded to Mr Laurrey's post there would have been no issue.

Alas, Mr Roffey was the prime culprit trying to keep the threads going with his responses. Perhaps he has learned that in some instances silence is the best answer