Is EXEWEB upholding its own rules to avoid bullying, swearing & discrimination?

[Friend_of_Roger_Conway]

Re: Is EXEWEB upholding its own rules to avoid bullying, swearing & discrimination?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/webwise/guides/about-netiquette

 

[spanky]

Re: Is EXEWEB upholding its own rules to avoid bullying, swearing & discrimination?

Dear FoRC,

As owners of the site we have been made aware, by the media, of their interest in your "Yellow Card" thread. I'm sure they will be equally interested should you step forward with any other grievances.

Of course, that will mean disclosing who you are, and I doubt that's about to happen.

 

[AlanDevlin]

Re: Is EXEWEB upholding its own rules to avoid bullying, swearing & discrimination?

Who needs a forc-ing language filter anyway?

 

[Jason H]

Re: Is EXEWEB upholding its own rules to avoid bullying, swearing & discrimination?

From original post above: "should EXEWEB owners or web masters or moderators or administrators be posting as users - as potential for conflicts of interest & bias - is that like the Referee playing the ball?"

I'm a moderator of this site by dint, at a time when Exeweb was looking for new moderators many years ago, of being considered something of a "safe pair of hands", and the day I'm told I can no longer post on this site as a supporter of ECFC due to being a moderator of the site is the day I will tell the guardians of Exeweb to remove me from my moderator role. For the record I also contribute to Exeweb (match previews mainly) and in the past I was a club volunteer working on the club's official website before an official club journalist was appointed about 4/5 years ago.

Fortunately most people are able to distinguish between posts made as a supporter and posts made as a moderator/administrator/site owner.

I've been away and have only just returned sporadically to see a wave of threads on this forum and WoWS, and like others I am very suspicious about your motives - in my experience Roger has always been big enough and man enough to defend himself, indeed he has been in the past a semi-regular contributor to this forum. By launching into such a staunch defence, all the while criticising others and then attempting to play the men rather than the ball by invoking slightly misplaced legalese, something starts to smell fishy. I'd agree that any character assassination, where unwarranted, is unhelpful (to put it mildly).

Exeweb is, and always has been, an anonymous forum where people expect the right to remain anonymous - this is a double-edged sword at times as it allows for "keyboard warriors", and I personally know of supporters who refuse to post on the site due to its anonymity, but it also enables free discussion involving, at times, people with slightly privileged information who would feel unable to post legitimately were their anonymity to be compromised. We have had instances where the identity of anonymous posters has been revealed thus forcing them into hibernation.

 

[motorservices]

Re: Is EXEWEB upholding its own rules to avoid bullying, swearing & discrimination?

well this is taking my mind off the game tomorrow nicely, also so as an aside im chuffed to bits the PFA have been paid back and we can sign players, a MASSIVE THANK YOU to the club and TRUST (who now do an awesome job) for there hard work in getting it sorted for when they said


UTC

 

[contrabombarde]

Re: Is EXEWEB upholding its own rules to avoid bullying, swearing & discrimination?

I take exception to my mild humorous post about Morris dancers being discriminatory. Pull the other one it's got bells on.

 

[motorservices]

Re: Is EXEWEB upholding its own rules to avoid bullying, swearing & discrimination?

I take exception to my mild humorous post about Morris dancers being discriminatory. Pull the other one it's got bells on.

lmfao.............

 

[StroudGrecian]

Re: Is EXEWEB upholding its own rules to avoid bullying, swearing & discrimination?

I take exception to my mild humorous post about Morris dancers being discriminatory. Pull the other one it's got bells on.

Careful contra, you could end up in a right ding dong.

 

[RaeUK]

Re: Is EXEWEB upholding its own rules to avoid bullying, swearing & discrimination?

Nah, stick with it.

 

[Friend_of_Roger_Conway]

Re: Is EXEWEB upholding its own rules to avoid bullying, swearing & discrimination?

I'm a moderator of this site by dint, at a time when Exeweb was looking for new moderators many years ago, of being considered something of a "safe pair of hands", and the day I'm told I can no longer post on this site as a supporter of ECFC due to being a moderator of the site is the day I will tell the guardians of Exeweb to remove me from my moderator role. For the record I also contribute to Exeweb (match previews mainly) and in the past I was a club volunteer working on the club's official website before an official club journalist was appointed about 4/5 years ago.

Fortunately most people are able to distinguish between posts made as a supporter and posts made as a moderator/administrator/site owner.

I've been away and have only just returned sporadically to see a wave of threads on this forum and WoWS, and like others I am very suspicious about your motives - in my experience Roger has always been big enough and man enough to defend himself, indeed he has been in the past a semi-regular contributor to this forum. By launching into such a staunch defence, all the while criticising others and then attempting to play the men rather than the ball by invoking slightly misplaced legalese, something starts to smell fishy. I'd agree that any character assassination, where unwarranted, is unhelpful (to put it mildly).

Exeweb is, and always has been, an anonymous forum where people expect the right to remain anonymous - this is a double-edged sword at times as it allows for "keyboard warriors", and I personally know of supporters who refuse to post on the site due to its anonymity, but it also enables free discussion involving, at times, people with slightly privileged information who would feel unable to post legitimately were their anonymity to be compromised. We have had instances where the identity of anonymous posters has been revealed thus forcing them into hibernation.

Motivations:

a) Sticking up for a friend and (this may surprise a few)....RC did not know I was going to post the OP, nor did he approve, nor did he contribute to any of my Yellow Card posts (at any time). I got a Red Card for the OP!

b) There are issues of natural justice that we all recognise (may be part of habeus corpus?) - right to appeal whether the court process was correct (judge directions, non-disclosure of key evidence to defence etc) + right to appeal verdict + right to appeal the sentence.

c) Despite outcome, it is a shame that the Club and the Trust didn't also recognise Roger's contributions in time & effort over almost 6 years in an elected position and make reference to that in the press releases.

d) I think that pinning the blame to two people (EC & RC) that they alone are responsible for failing to spot the PFA loan express train hurtling down the tracks is wrong and there are others who have collective responsibility (see FD thread in WOWS).

e) I think ECFC is under-capitalised and income prospects look poor and you start this season with a £110K deficit - these are structural rather than personality issues (see FD thread in WOWS).

Dave.