Reminder: How to get troublemakers banned

HappyPoet · Post by **HappyPoet** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:40 am

AT TIMS, THE POWER IS WITH THE PEOPLE:

* To have troublemakers punished/banned, jimmylegs MUST receive at least five PMs.
* Each PM must complain "in detail" (can copy & paste offending posts).
* Each PM must contain a link to the thread (can copy & paste url).

ALL PMs ARE CONFIDENTIAL.

Start sending in those PMs people!!
jimmylegs needs at least 5 PMs before she can help us!!

THE POWER IS OURS -- SO LET'S USE IT.
.

shye · Post by **shye** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 6:11 am

HappyPoet

I am shocked.
Just what is a troublemaker?? I am getting the sense its definition here is anyone who disagress with the general trend of a thread--on this one in particular, it seems to be if you disagree with the urgency of CCSVI--even if you might be open to it, but want more proof--and god forbid, you question Dr Sclafani (he himself I think is much wiser, and would be MUCH more open to disagreement, not seeing it as a denial of himself.)

So, you are looking for a closed-in world? No questions, no sharing of opinions, just blanket approval of the consensus?

CCSVI itself would have already hit the dust if it had not been willing to buck the consensus.

HappyPoet · Post by **HappyPoet** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 6:48 am

shye wrote:HappyPoet

I am shocked.
Just what is a troublemaker?? I am getting the sense its definition here is anyone who disagress with the general trend of a thread--on this one in particular, it seems to be if you disagree with the urgency of CCSVI--even if you might be open to it, but want more proof--and god forbid, you question Dr Sclafani (he himself I think is much wiser, and would be MUCH more open to disagreement, not seeing it as a denial of himself.)

So, you are looking for a closed-in world? No questions, no sharing of opinions, just blanket approval of the consensus?

CCSVI itself would have already hit the dust if it had not been willing to buck the consensus.

Shye,

All I have done is repost the rules which are in effect now and were in effect when you and I (and everyone else) agreed to them at the time of registration.

~HP

concerned · Post by **concerned** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:23 am

Okay I sent the private messages. What more can we do now to help get rid of them?

EDIT: You are talking about those other guys, right?

silverbirch · Post by **silverbirch** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:33 am

concerned wrote:Okay I sent the private messages. What more can we do now to help get rid of them?[/u]

How very interesting!!! Im an avid reader of the forum and I cant recall anyone being rude maybe sounding off , a different oponion or maybe the few that follow each other around different threads makeing a spectical of themselfs but hey ...... it makes for a giggle tho

Hey hum

concerned · Post by **concerned** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:37 am

I was joking.

Does this thread really contribute anything new? Jimmylegs has posted those rules before and they're in a sticky. I think it [this thread] should be locked.

silverbirch · Post by **silverbirch** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:20 am

concerned wrote:I was joking.

Does this thread really contribute anything new? Jimmylegs has posted those rules before and they're in a sticky. I think it [this thread] should be locked.

I found it informative I never knew that rules were in place and just maybe a hidden message behind this thread !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! reminding some out spoken members to wind their neck in

For me I laugh at some members that should know better but for others they may find it off putting and silly ccomments just gives certain professions , media the wrong message

MrSuccess · Post by **MrSuccess** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 11:03 am

I'm finding this post , distracting.

And of no value.

If I am one of your irritants ..... please just scroll past my posts.

I might be adding a few more '' scroll pasts '' to my list , as posters not worthy of bringing anything of value to the debate.

Mr. Success

selkie · Post by **selkie** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 11:12 am

I sort of agree Mr. Success. I've never seen anyone I thought should be banned. To me banning has to do with profanity or abuse, and I've never seen that here. If abuse happens in PMs, that's different.

We often learn most from people we don't agree with (like correcting facts, repeating something already posted, etc., and with my memory being what it is I often get that - it's humbling but a reality and this forum is large so easy to miss what's gone on previously).

Can't we just accept & support each other?

malden · Post by **malden** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 2:43 pm

Pam ..... you forget this?

http://www.thisisms.com/ftopicp-110794.html#110794

With sincerest apologies to the readers of the thread, I have removed my post.

Warmly,
~Pam

I just signed on...

jimmylegs,

I sincerely apologize for causing you more work. I also sincerely apologize for promoting the book.

and if I might be permitted...

Lyon,

I apologize. Have no worries of any kind. My proper apology to you, and everyone else, will be forthcoming.

~HappyPoet

jimmylegs,

Thanks for your kind reply.

For the sake of TIMS, I'm leaving TIMS so no one needs to worry about anything, ever.

Best wishes all.

~HappyPoet

jimmylegs,

Your words kept coming back to me, pulling me back into the TIMS family. If I may say... You are an excellent Moderator. Thank you very, very much.

I would also like to thank my friend Johnson (and one or two other special people) for encouraging me to come back to TIMS. In the future, I will keep in mind using the EDIT button.

Feeling like a part of this phenomenal family is so wonderful -- I promise everyone that I will always try my best to be worthy of the honor and the privilege of being an active member of TIMS.

Edit: in answer to jimmyleg's question, "I Wish!"

~Pam