| www.CostaRicaTicas.com https://forum.costaricaticas.com/ |
|
| Who are Adm's of this board w/ barring authority? https://forum.costaricaticas.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=44358 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | DGD [ Mon Oct 28, 2013 10:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | Who are Adm's of this board w/ barring authority? |
It came to light yesterday that DonCarlos is also Admin3 of this board, self disclosed. I didn't know he was in that position and had high regard for all of his posts as DonCarlos. When this double role, and the proprietariness of a guy wearing secretly 2 hats and 2 board names and being a "cop" under Admin3, I had q's. I asked how he could be a secret admin/moderator and also a poster as DonCarlos. He explained it is a good policy for guys in his position as a board moderator to also be able to post in his regular board name to add good info to the board. I agree that he knows SJ. But I also think transparency is desirable and guys certainly would want to know if they comment negatively on a post, beforehand, if the original poster is the house cop who may ban him from the board. It isn't like there is a dirth of posters without extensive SJ/CR knowledge on the board so that DonCarlos' info is invaluable, though very good. So my advice for what peasely colones is worth to the current board owner is pick moderators/admin's who do just that, guys who know CR and understand board goofy behavior, but not allow them to post about CR under their CRT name; because as with me until yesterday, readers have no clue they are commenting on one of your agent's posts. Or let the current system go on but insist any Admin or moderator clearly ID himself in the post. Almost always, the good guys, a majority of this board I might, add, chime in quick when they see something queer, or think they can help or see a better idea. The days of a fella wearing 2 hats "secretively" by design or circumstance, on this board should end. |
|
| Author: | True Sportsman [ Mon Oct 28, 2013 11:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Who are Adm's of this board w/ barring authority? |
Gentlemen, IMHO, DGD has a point. Forum Rules, Regulations & Code of Conduct! 11. Multi-Accounting is strictly prohibited. If you are posting from multiple accounts, then we may take action against your accounts and use other technical controls to bar further access. This is in The Forum Rules...I know that others have been banned for this violation from the forum. It does not address the Admin`s participating. I know that my good buddy Admin 1 would post legitimate posts under different accounts/names etc. for hotel and restaurant reviews. What should be done? Is this really important? Can this be used to bully or ban others who disagree with posts? Good debate I think..... |
|
| Author: | Rac [ Mon Oct 28, 2013 11:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Who are Adm's of this board w/ barring authority? |
I agree with Bill that the issue is worthy of a good debate. But it can be difficult to have a good debate with a censor. |
|
| Author: | DGD [ Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Who are Adm's of this board w/ barring authority? |
With all due respect to a respected hotelier and gringo in the gulch, you are 1000% missing it. I know you have your hands full at SL so that's understandable. But, you are missing it, now 2x, and this goes to CRT being administered fairly. And since we communicated very early this am, Admin 3 also deleted my post which was what originally lead to your/ mine PM's early this am, and then locked the thread. He sent me a PM after it was deleted saying he did so because my post was violating rule 16 . I read R.16. It says don't question why a guy got barred or reprimanded. He also sent me a warning. I love that rule when there is ample reason why a guy got knocked out. But, never saw it used. Other rules should have got ******* knocked out years ago. But Livincr did not have it coming yesterday other then telling Admin3/DonCarlos/Dan Caro, Daniel ***** he was full of shit about, in this case, CR immigration manhunts for 90 day violaters. And I will join in with him. DonCarlos stepped on his dick at least 7x noverr 2 days and continues to make it worse. If you don't have the time to get the picture here, take my word for it and recommend he be reinsated. CRT becomes a sham, an organization, when it starts censoring guys like me and barring guys like the aforemenioned for who--an interested party who may be an owner with a hard on for *******? |
|
| Author: | BlueDevil [ Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Who are Adm's of this board w/ barring authority? |
Good debate is one thing. But the on-going pissing contest between these two guys has raised its ugly head, and this board is beginning to turn into a soup sandwich. |
|
| Author: | PacoLoco [ Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Who are Adm's of this board w/ barring authority? |
DGD wrote: CRT becomes a sham, an organization, when it starts censoring guys like me and barring guys like the aforemenioned Welcome to the new CRT. I couldn't care less about ******* or DonCarlo but nothing's worse for a board that posts being unnecessarily deleted from threads and members being banned for no good reason. This over-moderation with an iron fist is why so many long time posters gave up on this board after ownership changed. Men with thin-skin shouldn't run forums if they can't handle a little criticism and BS once in a while, especially if they bring it upon themselves. >Back to lurking mode before I post something bannable< |
|
| Author: | Admin 3 [ Mon Oct 28, 2013 2:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Who are Adm's of this board w/ barring authority? |
Public debate of the banning of a user or a warning for breaking the rules is a violation of forum rule #16. Members are free to make appeals by PM and email, and in many cases these appeals carry weight. For example when we started moderation several months ago several long term members were banned for making personal attacks. Those who were banned contacted their friends and after some consideration the bans were lifted. However, this debate took place via email, phone and PM, which kept the agreement out of the public forum where it would have served no value to the majority of the readers. Since this thread is a material violation of the rule it has been locked. I strongly encourage anyone who might have a concern to take it up via PM or through email or PM with The Admin. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|