Sweary Sean

[Jamma]

In today's utterly stupid 'bloody nappy valley' thread Sean McGabhan called another poster a fuckwit. And in response to a fairly sensible comment. That seems to break the rules on a few counts as far as I can see. Yet no action was taken. Are there different rules for different people?

[Administrator]

SeanMacGabhann has been sent a warning, and I can confirm that there are not rules for different people. I am only aware of these things when people bring them to my attention, thank you for bringing this to my attention.

I an now going to add fuckwits to the list of censored words.

[Jamma]

But as I understand it Sean is an administrator. He's taken down one of my posts in the past which was far more innocuous than some of his recent comments. If he can't police himself should he be allowed to police others?

[Administrator]

Yes, SeanMacGabhann is occasionally a moderator but I like what he does and trust him so yes, I allow him to "police" others.

[SeanMacGabhann]

ah Jamma bless you - rather than click on the report button you started a thread. Duly noted

In my (lame) defence when I typed the swearword I assumed the swear-filter would automatically **** the words it has in the past - I assumed wrong

As for the nature of my post what's you problem - someone registers and posts for the first time to explicitly called other people stupid with no foundation - and you consider that "sensible comment"?

[annaj]

Oooooo, by the time I read it was all asterixed out already.

What was the shocking swear word?

I do love a good scandal.

[KalamityKel]

Probably no worse than others have and do use quite regularly ;-)

[????]

Surely Sean needs a footnote a la Snorky

Maybe

*New agressive sweary Sean?

[RosieH]

Man, I missed this too - what was the word, what was the word?

Can I say tit? I thought the guy was being a bit of a tit, so not sure if Sean's word was worse than that. I have relied many times on the swear filter to change my words (although typed what I actually meant) and think that if it didn't do it automatically, I too would have had a warning by now.

[macroban]

Caesar cipher (+2)

HWEMYKV

[Ted Max]

I'm too fuckwitted to work that out.

[Jamma]

I didn't want to report the message. The word did not offend me particularly, I know and use much worse words on a daily basis. I am simply interested in fairness, even-handedness, justice one might call it.

I didn't think the person in question was being a (insert swearword of choice here) but if I did - and there are plenty of times when people on here say things that I think are really dumb - I would just ignore it rather than call them something designed to wound, humiliate or offend.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Not unfair points Jamma

I doubt they were humiliated or offended tho - I suspect they were glad they got the reaction they did

[????]

You are an easy catch Sean

[SeanMacGabhann]

You would think inflation would have set in by now and people would just throw me back in the water

regardless - too many *******s around. I'm calling it

[HonaloochieB]

Jamma, how did you know that SM sometimes dons the cape and mask of Administrator?

I have absolutely no idea who is or isn't, and assumed it was some sort of masonic duo who operated from the spire over the top of the MIND shop at Goose Green.

Seriously how did you know?

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Cognoscenti, old chap.

[macroban]

At one stage, albeit briefly, the admin/mods were listed on-site.

[HonaloochieB]

macroban Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> At one stage, albeit briefly, the admin/mods were

> listed on-site.

Their secret identities revealed?

Well I'm glad that was stopped, from a comic book superhero point of view, it breaks every rule in the (comic) book.

[silverfox]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ah Jamma bless you - rather than click on the

> report button you started a thread. Duly noted

>

> In my (lame) defence when I typed the swearword I

> assumed the swear-filter would automatically ****

> the words it has in the past - I assumed wrong

>

> As for the nature of my post what's you problem -

> someone registers and posts for the first time to

> explicitly called other people stupid with no

> foundation - and you consider that "sensible

> comment"?

Hello all. I'm the one that Sean reacted to yesterday. It's me who should be apologising. It was my first post (although I've registered previously and not specifically for that thread) and my intention was to have some fun. It was a wind up. I'm sorry it's caused this fuss.

Thanks for your concern as to my welcome forumites. Fortunately I'm old enough and ugly enough to take a bit of stick. I'll try to keep future posts more constructive but will find it hard not to do the odd bit of leg pulling.

Cheers Silverfox

[HonaloochieB]

silverfox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hello all. I'm the one that Sean reacted to

> yesterday. It's me who should be apologising. It

> was my first post (although I've registered

> previously and not specifically for that thread)

> and my intention was to have some fun. It was a

> wind up. I'm sorry it's caused this fuss.

>

> Thanks for your concern as to my welcome

> forumites. Fortunately I'm old enough and ugly

> enough to take a bit of stick. I'll try to keep

> future posts more constructive but will find it

> hard not to do the odd bit of leg pulling.

>

> Cheers Silverfox

Welcome Sil, may I call you Sil? You don't seem like a f@ckwit at all.

Please stick around and get involved and if there's a leg within arm's reach don't hesitate to give it a tug.

Now SM, you make kissy-face with SilverFox.

Go on.

Go on.

Go on.

[HonaloochieB]

I'm going to look in this section more often, I rarely have up 'til now.

It's been an education for me this evening I can tell you.

It's true what they say, three-quarters of the world don't know what the other half is getting up to.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Kudos to silverfox for that - let's hope we hear more good stuff from you sir!

Jamma - covered in glory. Not

[Keef]

This is all so March 22nd darling, meetalist Sean is well documented.

[Jamma]

What does 'covered in glory - not' mean? I made my point, it was never anything personal and you conceded a few days ago that it was 'not unfair'. End of.

Now you go all Waynesworld on my ass with a petty and personal dig. I can't understand under what circumstances writing 'covered in glory-not' would seem like a big or clever thing to do.