|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>I'm not a fan of posting private emails on a public board, regardless of their content. <br /><br />As far as the "show us your high-grade XXX" posts are concerned, I see no difference between those posts and the "Show us your Matty"-type posts that pop up on the board every day. If there's a "Show Us Your N162s" thread that pops up, and I don't have any, I don't get upset. Similarly, I don't have any cards that I could share in any of the "high grade" threads that have popped up lately - that doesn't mean I don't enjoy seeing the cards, though. It reminds me of the occasional scans that Marshall Fogel gives to Leon to post - Marshall doesn't contribute to the board, but man, it's awesome to see his cards once in a while. They're nice examples of cards I don't have, and being a lover of baseball cards, I do love to see them. In the case of these recent threads, they don't really belong in the "new pickup" threads, because they're not new pickups - just new scans that haven't been shared here before.<br /><br />People used to get on Jim for not ever sharing scans of his cards - now that he's doing that, I think it's really cool to see some of the things he's got. <br /><br />Just my opinion, which is worth exactly what you paid for it.<br /><br />-Al
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Dave F</b><p>I do think there is a big difference in what Jim has done on the board and what Bruce has done. Don't remember how far it was up this thread now, but I think someone mentioned something about the people that Jim and Bruce have both chased off...while Jim can be hard headed and easy to differ on opinions with...he is far from Bruce...Jim isn't a threat to anyone, nor has he ever to my knowledge spewed any hate or ill will to anyone.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>In my opinion, Jim is a lot less threatening because there's only one of him.<br /><br />-Al
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>I agree with Al on the high-grade posts. I enjoy seeing the cards. Imputations of the intent behind posters displaying high-grade cards is just that, a mere imputation. As Al said, people nagged Jim C. for not posting scans; now they complain that he does. I, for one, have thoroughly enjoyed seeing scans of some of his incredible cards.<br />JimB
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Jim is cool. Bruce could be...if he wanted to be.<br /><br />Peter C.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Chad</b><p>I like seeing 'em. I'd show mine more often but I don't want to make anyone feel ill. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />--Chad
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Dave F</b><p>thanks Chad. I puke enough over my own cards. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>I think the grades of all my T206 HOFers added together might add up to 9.<br /><br />-Al
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Dave F</b><p>by the way Chad, just sent another threatening email <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Chad</b><p>You are no longer cool. You're so uncool, you're almost a stamp collector! <br /><br />--Chad
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Dave F</b><p>My wife would agree with you on the uncool statement. However I still have my 2 year old daughter convinced. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Sorry for the break in topic...now back to diasecting Bruce.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jim is a lot less threatening because there is only one of him.<br /><br />And with that, Al wins the prize for best line of the day! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Steve Murray</b><p>"How do you spell Sybil"
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>There's time for a better line...the day is still young. These pretzels are getting mighty salty.<br /><br />Peter C.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>I'm giving Jim VB my vote for this one - even though there ARE too many commas <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>.<br /><br />"I've noticed, in my short time on this board, that many of us can go out of our way to be asses. Bruce just has the shortest commute"<br /><br /><br />What say a poll for funniest backhanders?<br /><br /><br />Daniel
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Aaron M.</b><p>leon, count me as someone who has also received "hateful" (although I would just describe them as crazy) private e-mails from Bruce (I think we are seeing a pattern here?), but I can see both sides of whether to allow private e-mails to be posted. <br /><br />I agree with T206 -- Maybe you should simply threaten Bruce that based on his history of doing so, if he continues to send unsolicited abusive private e-mails he will be banned from posting on this site? <br /><br />I'd hate for him to be banned as he is crazy funny, but under the same rationale that you don't want private e-mails posted on the forum, he shouldn't be allowed to bombard posters with unsolicited abusive e-mails that result from postings on this forum. <br /><br />When you step away from the board, you should be able to step away from the board.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>You have made the most persuasive argument so far. However, if I were to ask him to not send private emails then I am policing other areas besides this board. I don't have the time or "want" to do that. I do see your point though in that his email(s) were/are instigated from board behaviour.....Now you have me thinking again.....Crap.....I almost am to the point of considering exceptions for repeat offenders but again, this is a very, very slippery slope.....I really don't want to go here if at all possible. I also hate that I have to waste so much of my time, and the board's time, over such an idiotic issue as this. I need to contemplate this some more....
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />It goes back to an expectation of privacy, if people want everybody to see their posts then they would post on the board. However, when they send personal e-mail to board members they expect that e-mail to remain private.<br /><br />So when you pass rules just make sure that you only regulate conduct on this Board.<br /><br />If you get lots of complaints about any individual for their posting on this Board, then that's a good reason to ban.<br /><br />However, if it's complaints about what they said in private e-mails then that's not a good reason to ban.<br /><br />Peter C.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>CN</b><p> I think the Dorskind group should get together and have a meeting and hopefully they will be able to explain their alleged bizarre behavior and have a chance to defend themselves. CN
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>ps</b><p>I appreciate the distinction just drawn by Peter C. but disagree with it. If the emails are generated as a result of posts on the Board, I see it as sufficiently related to the Board that the moderator would be acting appropriately to react to extreme conduct.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>I agree with Leon, and we have spoken on this before (Hey Leon). It’s just too easy to post an email out of context or type things that were never there. So I for one say no to posting emails with names etc.<br /><br />For the most part I have a few folks here I have disagreements with most notably Jim C and perhaps Kevin; to me they are nothing more than differences of opinions although their perception may be quite different and I respect that.<br /><br />I will however go on the record and say as collector I respect Jim C and his collection and his passion about the hobby and his way of collecting, even though we tend to be like cats and dogs (hi Jim) my respect for him as a collector is still there even if we don’t see eye to eye most of the time. Have we taken shots at each other sure we have, par for the course just two very opinionated guys bound to happen. I can assure you the line stops at that. In no way would I personally bombard Jim with private emails with vulgar demeaning under tones nor would Jim to me I can only assume.<br /><br />We talk a lot about anonymity on this board, to have it or not. While for the most part I agree with no anonymity allowed and having emails and names along with your posts. <br /><br />I find it a total abuse of the honest system we have in place for someone to use peoples emails as some sort of odd pathetic ranting avenue, or self ego booster. We talk a lot about personal attacks here; a lot of those are nothing more than shades of gray or personal perception. However, death threats, lawsuits and just plain name calling via email is about as personal as it can get. <br /><br />Nobody deserves to be called an un-educated commoner, a bottom feeder. Nobody deserves to be threatened physically or any other way, just because of one person’s inadequacies and his ease of access to our available email addresses.<br /><br />Just my 2 cents.<br />
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>"In my opinion, Jim is a lot less threatening because there's only one of him."<br /><br />Now, that is, funnie.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>JT Burtchaell</b><p>This whole thing reminds me of an Andy Griffith episode that was on last night:<br /><br />Goober finds out Andy is taking Aunt Bee and Opie to the auto show in Raleigh and asks to go along, confident they'll get free samples when salesmen find out he's a "big operator". At the hotel, Goober calls up Roy Swanson, an old friend from trade school, to see how he's doing and to brag a little. They meet at the show and Goober is surprised to find out that Roy is a senior vice-president in charge of engineering with Amalgamated Motors. After hearing about a fellow student, Goober tells Roy he has a chain of stations instead of just one. When Roy meets the Taylors and invites them to dinner, Goober says it's his treat and chooses the finest restaurant in Raleigh. At dinner, Goober, out of his element, tries to act like a big shot but things don't work out and Roy finds out the truth. As they prepare to go home the next day, Andy unsuccessfully tries to cheer up a dejected Goober, who feels like a complete failure. Stopping for gas, Andy gets a bottle of pop and sees Roy, covered in grease, working on a car. He calls Goober over and asks him if he'd like to say hello to an old friend but Goober declines, saying he wouldn't want to embarrass him.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>ScottIngold</b><p>Aaron and CN= very good points.<br /><br />Whats wrong with a village idiot anyway ? I guess all sites have at least one.<br /><br />Usually i get a huge chuckle out of the Dorskind groups posts..... Just typing it in the plural was worth a laugh. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Tom Boblitt</b><p>that Al's post should be deemed funniest or best of the thread, and actually, best of the week.....<br /><br />There's only one of him!!!!! That is pure genious.....<br />Still laughing 10 minutes later.....<br /><br />
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>video on classroom manners, originally appearing in 1959, depicting the character of "Mr. Bungle" has highly relevant context to the Net 54 VBC forum.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.archive.org/details/lunchroom_manners" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.archive.org/details/lunchroom_manners</a><br /><br />
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Aaron M.</b><p>Yeah, ps, it's like Bruce knows that if he posts with that kind of vitriol and abusiveness leon would probably ban him -- not to mention that most posters would probably be appalled and would treat Bruce much worse than they already do. <br /><br />So what he does (and this is really a loophole) is respond to posts via private e-mail rather than in the thread in a manner grossly harsher than he otherwise would. It's like he feels he can harass, abuse, threaten and insult with impunity because posters aren't supposed to be disciplined for private e-mails. <br /><br />In any case, I am glad so many people have stepped forward and shared how often Bruce resorts to this tactic. It shows an obvious pattern on Bruce's part and while it clearly illustrates how troubled Bruce is, it also shows how many people Bruce has gone after and that jay isn't some isolated incident.<br /><br />Leon, I get your points and I wouldn't wish your oversight responsibilities on anyone, I think we really are dealing with an isolated poster here. Maybe I'm wrong -- are there other posters with a history of sending unsolicited abusive e-mails? <br /><br />If so, and since he seems to be using e-mail as a way to circumvent and overstep what he would be allowed to post, I don't see why a warning would be out of place. It could actually be helpful in keeping Bruce from going off and maybe forcing him to improve his communication skills.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>J Levine</b><p>Leon,<br />Is there a way to suspend someone's ability to click the email link on a post? This way, if enough complaints piled up, you could just cut them off from being able to email people on the board. Just a thought and not sure if it is feasible.<br /><br />Joshua
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Aaron M.</b><p>Scott, I think Bruce's posts are fun as well. The village idiot analogy is very appropriate as Bruce just sets himself up for mockery and I don't think he even gets that he's doing it. I guess the more mature reaction would be to refrain from laughing and try to help him communicate better, but you could also argue that he brings it on himself and is so disdainful of his fellow posters that it's OK to laugh and watch as he just keeps digging that hole deeper. <br /><br />But the private e-mails are a much more serious matter. Maybe you should ask jay to privately forward Bruce's e-mail to you.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I wish there was an easy answer to this issue. There isn't. If I ban Bruce for private emails sent then I get to go down that road with the precedent. So far I have spoken to numerous folks on the phone today (you know who you are) and so far it's unanimous that private emails shouldn't be allowed on the board. Unless it was overwhelmingly the other way I don't see a change happening. I think these emails Bruce sends are despicable and should be stopped. At the end of the day (I sort of hate that phrase) they are private and should be kept that way. The debate is still open. Also, please look at how many folks have said they think private emails SHOULD be allowed to be posted. With everything said, and those facts, what would you do if you ran the board? Everyone knows the inmates run the asylum around here....best regards <br /><br />edited to say....yes, there are other posters that have had this issue in the past...Bruce isn't the first. So do I go back and ban them too? It's very difficult......
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I know that Adam Moraine was a pain in the butt, but I can't remember what he did to get himself banned. I certainly don't remember him sending vile and threatening emails to people. Elkins was asking to be banned and got what he deserved. Anyone remember what Moraine did that was the final straw?<br /><br />I would think sending nasty emails to Net54 members would constitute at the very least a warning. Is there any doubt that Bruce obtained Lee's email address from this message board?
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>I too support the board rule on not posting private e-mails.<br /><br />But I do think that a compendium of the Dorskind Groups e-mails could be a best seller. Im going to check how many I have.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Adam Moraine is the only person banned by my right hand man. (that's why I say I have only banned 2 people but a total of 3 have been) I was on vacation at the time. I believe he went totally crazy and it was an easy decision. I certainly backed it....
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />Why don't you send Bruce a private e-mail and see if he wants to respond?<br /><br />Peter C.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Sean C</b><p>There is a very easy way to deal with this, Leon. Bruce is attacking members of the message board that YOU moderate over comments they made on YOUR message board that he may happen not to agree with. I agree that emails should not be posted on the boards either, but when you have 1 board member (no matter how many personalities may be rattling around in that royal "we" head of his) sending unsolicited attack emails to members of YOUR message board, YOU need to take action. <br /><br />Think of it this way: what would you do if some board member were sending unsolicited auction spam emails to your board members? Would you ban them from the site? If so, what make unsolicited, hate-filled emails more acceptable than auction spam?<br /><br />I am a moderator over another hobby message board, and we have to deal with garbage like this at least 5 times a day. Stop abdicating responsibility for the situation, and handle it like a responsible forum owner.<br /><br />For anyone that receives unsolicited emails from Bruce, forward the email (with internet headers) to his ISP. (abuse@aol.com, abuse@yahoo.com, etc.). They receive enough complaints, they'll take action. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Leon' post:<br /><br />I wish September 24 2007, 4:50 PM <br /><br /><br />I wish there was an easy answer to this issue. There isn't. If I ban Bruce for private emails sent then I get to go down that road with the precedent. So far I have spoken to numerous folks on the phone today (you know who you are) and so far it's unanimous that private emails shouldn't be allowed on the board. Unless it was overwhelmingly the other way I don't see a change happening. I think these emails Bruce sends are despicable and should be stopped. At the end of the day (I sort of hate that phrase) they are private and should be kept that way. The debate is still open. Also, please look at how many folks have said they think private emails SHOULD be allowed to be posted. With everything said, and those facts, what would you do if you ran the board? Everyone knows the inmates run the asylum around here....best regards <br /><br />edited to say....yes, there are other posters that have had this issue in the past...Bruce isn't the first. So do I go back and ban them too? It's very difficult...... <br />
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>ramram</b><p>Another tough question - <br /><br />If you were to ban Bruce, would you also have to ban the rest of his personalities?<br /><br />Rob M.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I completely disagree with you. I take heed from ALL members of this board. Most members DO NOT think private emails should be posted. Read all of the above posts.....YOU might do what YOU want to on YOUR board but I generally do what the majority wants on this one. I guess we are different in that respect...To me it sounds as YOU are taking the easy way out on YOUR board......next...
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Check me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Sean said anything about posting emails on the board...he's telling you that he bans people for using his board to send unsolicited emails. That's pretty simple. Dorskind is circumventing the board rules regarding attacks that cross the line by sending his attacks through emails. He deserves a warning...if he can't play nicely in the future then he should be banned. That's pretty simple to me.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Sean C</b><p>Did you even read what I said? I agreed that private emails should NOT be posted. Reread what I said:<br /><br />"There is a very easy way to deal with this, Leon. Bruce is attacking members of the message board that YOU moderate over comments they made on YOUR message board that he may happen not to agree with. I agree that emails should not be posted on the boards either, but when you have 1 board member (no matter how many personalities may be rattling around in that royal "we" head of his) sending unsolicited attack emails to members of YOUR message board, YOU need to take action. "<br /><br /><br />I'm in agreement with you that the emails should not be posted. <br /><br /><br />Leon's post<br /><br />Sean September 24 2007, 5:07 PM <br /><br /><br />I completely disagree with you. I take heed from ALL members of this board. Most members DO NOT think private emails should be posted. Read all of the above posts.....YOU might do what YOU want to on YOUR board but I generally do what the majority wants on this one. I guess we are different in that respect...To me it sounds as YOU are taking the easy way out on YOUR board......next... <br />
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Chris Bland</b><p>The emails are unsolicited and apparently are sent in response to posts made on here, the email addresses garnered from information on this board (yes, it is theoretically possible he gets them somewhere else, but why would he?). <br /><br />To me, that is reason enough to take action on someone.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>I kind of have to agree with Dan and Sean, I see how it’s a tough call Leon. <br /><br />But the message that’s getting sent is no personal attacks on this board, but feel free to obtain the persons email via the board, and bum them out in private with actions that would never fly on here.<br /><br />Lets also be honest with each other for a second, this isn’t some heated discussion about graded vs. non-graded, high grade vs. non-high grade. It’s not some discussion about altered cards, where both folks can have heated but valid points of views which can get a little ugly.<br /><br />This is just some sad person calling people names from behind a keyboard in an apartment somewhere, nothing more nothing less. The irony is that for someone who claims to be such a classy well educated individual, the upper crust of society if you will, his actions are the exact polar opposite. In fact dare I say I’ve seen “commoners” with better manners?<br />
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>what a BS thread...<br /><br />there should be no private emails posted on a public forum, next subject.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>Mike,<br /><br />Agreed on the posting of private emails, but do you feel its ok since you are requested to have an email to participate in certain threads that you should be open to the constant bombardment, personal shots and or threats?<br /><br />You don’t feel that there are some liberties being taken with the email addresses if that’s allowed to happen?<br /><br /><br />***I guess a good analogy would be like having an office phone list, its there if you need to notify someone your coming in late etc. It’s not there for you to get phone numbers of chicks in the typing pool to heavy breath on them via the phone on the weekend.***
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Chris Bland</b><p>Seems like this thread has gone in two different directions - The discussion about posting emails on the board (which nearly everyone seems against allowing), and now about what (if anything) should be done about people sending unsolicited emails of an "unpleasant" nature to people about posts they made on here.<br /><br />I would say the first subject is pretty much dead - no one really wants emails appearing on here, but I would argue the latter subject should be considered a little more IMO...
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>George H. Counter</b><p>Leon, lets run a poll at the top of the board asking if Bruce should stay or go.<br /><br /><br /><br />
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>What would football commisoner Roger Godell do in this instance? <br /><br />My e-mail is private so I have never had the pleasure of receiving an e-mail from "the plural", but it all goes back to what someone said a few dozen posts above...the internet allows us to act in ways we wouldn't if we saw them face to face. <br /><br />Private e-mails that are exposed only show the general public a side of a person that he does not want the rest of the world to see. By exposing a person to the Forum in a public way, you expose who they truly are. <br /><br />You ever meet Jerry Lewis? I have. When the camera is rolling, he's whacky, funny (I guess) and somewhat charming. When it's off, it's a different story. <br /><br />DJ
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>there was nothing ambiguous about his threat to me. He said that he wished someone would kill me or he might hire someone to do it himself. That's pretty crystal clear.<br /><br />As for how to deal with unsolicited emails, let it be known that hence forth any unsolicited emails involving personal attacks can and will lead to being banned. No need to back track. If people can't follow that simple rule, then give them the boot. <br /><br />As for Bruce's email claiming he never made threats. I'm not sure you got the same one I did because I was given a set of ground rules to follow for posting on the board, lol.<br /><br />I'm felling left out. I didn't get mentioned as someone that drive people away and used to be the uber bad guy around here <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Dj, Bill Cosby is the same way. During my limo driving days, I had the horrible experience of driving him. I took him to his destination and with my boss's permission, told him he needed to find another service to pick him up later that night. I lost all respect for him that day and he was one of my favorite comedians of all time.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />I have had two very pleasant experiences with the "Cos", but I heard from others that he can be like this though.<br /><br />DJ
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>John made a very important point that really needs to be addressed. This board offers a variety of resources, among them the email addresses of the majority of posters. If anyone sends threatening emails to fellow board members, and gets those addresses directly from this site, that is a violation of board protocol.<br /><br />I get regular emails from board members, many whom I don't even know. But they are all pleasant and typically involve a hobby question. But how does a stranger get my contact information? Directly from the section that we all provided for general reference.<br /><br />But that is not a free pass for anyone to just grab an email address and use it to send out threatening emails. And as a result, a ban is within reasonable boundaries.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>judsons hamlins</b><p>only one of him can stay
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p><b>JT Burtchaell</b> wrote:<br /><i>This whole thing reminds me of an Andy Griffith episode that was on last night:<br />Goober finds out Andy is taking Aunt Bee and Opie to the auto show in Raleigh and asks to go along...</i><br /><br />So let me figure out who's who: Bruce is Goober, Andy is Leon; Jim C is the Amalgamated Motors guy. Who does that make me? Opie?<br />
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Tony Andrea</b><p>Paul. Being Opie is better than being Aunt Bee.<br />I have a mental picture of how you'd look in her wig.<br />UUUGGGHHH!!!!!!!!!! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><p>Tony
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>My apologies. I went a different direction with your post. I still have to contemplate banning someone for private emails but I am closer to that than letting them be posted on the board. Banning is an alternative but still not one I would prefer to do..... Debate is ongoing....I think it's almost unanimous that emails shouldn't be posted...so we can scrap that part of it. Should someone be banned for private emails relating to board issues?
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Bob Pomilla</b><p>Earlier than the Andy Griffith show, there was a Honeymooners episode with the same plot, involving Ralph and an old flame of Ralph's wife Alice that Ralph ran into. Both claimed to be more successful than they were and it all came out n the end.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Did he get the emails off this board, and was that his sole source of contact information?
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>Tony, I think Joann is going to have to be Aunt Bea by default. Sorry Joann <img src="/images/sad.gif" height=14 width=14> . I've yet to figure out who plays Barney.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I get to be Andy....I always liked Andy......IF the world were full of Andy's it would be a better place. (Andy is/was much better than I am ....I am a bad guy....just ask Lee and Jay... )....regards
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Guys, please take the OT stuff to email. This is a very serious topic being discussed and there is already enough to read without having to filter out that garbage.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Paul- Barney was not in that episode. He left the show in 1965, before it went from black and white to color (although he did make four guest appearances).<br /><br />Edited to add Jay is right, we should get back on topic, but I think we all needed a five minute recess.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Bob Pomilla</b><p>"Should someone be banned for private emails relating to board issues?'<br /><br />No, not for private emails, per se, but to send threatening, insulting emails to fellow board members is an abuse of the privilege of belonging to this board and a misuse of the email addresses available on this board. Is there any member who, when they posted their emails, did so with the expectation that these type of abusive emails were to be part of the package?<br /><br />
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>Barry, not only are you a Seinfeld expert but an Andy of Mayberry one as well. You rock!<br /><br />Jay, you are correct. Apologies. However, I have also been added to Bruce's email list due to the my earlier analytic post.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Andrew</b><p>I read the first ten responses or so, but stopped as they were mostly about one ass on this board. In regard to not posting email addresses, my home computer doesn't connect to Outlook when I click the user name (a few others also have this issue.) I apologize if someone already chimed-in with the answer somewhere in this long thread. <br /><br><br>"Take your life in your own hands and what happens? A terrible thing: no one to blame." -- Erica Jong
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>This is a serious issue let's please do address it as such...so let's do stay on topic please. My bad on going off topic too.....I had to escape for a minute and I really liked Andy...I was so excited to get to be him I took the bait... <img src="/images/sad.gif" height=14 width=14> ....Shall we start another thread about the banning due to personal emails? The private email posting issue is done...
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>sounds like a good idea. A new thread without 100+ posts will get more people reading<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Edited to delete all content. I was typing it as the last dozen or so posts were added. <br /><br />It was more appropriate to the new thread Leon mentioned, so I'll save it for that.<br /><br />J
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Tony Andrea</b><p>Paul -<br />If I'm understanding you correctly, are you saying that because of your earlier post<br />you to now have received an email similar to Lee's and Jay's from the Bruce's??<br /><p>Tony
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Man, this is an exhausting thread. Obvious thought: do we really need to post private emails when it is clear that any victim of an obnoxious private email will quickly out the offender as well as the gist of the email on the board anyway? It's not like anyone is getting away with murder by sending private emails only to have their obnoxious behavior hidden forever due to the 'no posting of private email' rule. As for Bruce's condescending tone, if he thought he was so above the community here would he still bother to regularly share his thoughts with the rest of us? Isn't this also clear?
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>jay wolt</b><p>"Earlier than the Andy Griffith show, there was a Honeymooners episode with the same plot, involving Ralph and an old flame of Ralph's wife Alice that Ralph ran into. Both claimed to be more successful than they were and it all came out n the end"<br /><br />Bob - Yes! great episode where Ralph is left holding the check for<br />a fancy meal he cannot afford. His old friend Bill Davis was an<br />assistant plumber instead of a business exec and Ralph led Davis to<br />believe he was in charge of the Gotham bus company.<br /><br />Heh! Ya know this thread has gone down hill when The Honeymooners &<br />Andy Griffith Show are quoted
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Jeff, what is worse, discussing the actions of someone who uses email to make vile threats or a 55 year old man who sends them? <br /><br />If I'm still using this messageboard at age 55 and I'm using the King's language and threatening people through email then everyone has my permission to come over to my house and kick my ass. If you're a pacifist (Hi Barry!) then call my doctor.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Sean C</b><p>Apology accepted, Leon.<br><br>As for your question, I'll again respond with my question: Would you suspend or ban a board member for sending unsolicited auction spam to your board members? If so, then why would sending unsolicited hateful and/or threatening emails be acceptable? <br><br>You mentioned your previous post that you "generally do what the majority wants". So far, it's pretty clear that the board views Bruce's actions as unacceptble at best, an end-around of board policies at worst. He needs to go. <br><br>Leon's post<br><br>Sean C September 24 2007, 6:32 PM <br><br><br>My apologies. I went a different direction with your post. I still have to contemplate banning someone for private emails but I am closer to that than letting them be posted on the board. Banning is an alternative but still not one I would prefer to do..... Debate is ongoing....I think it's almost unanimous that emails shouldn't be posted...so we can scrap that part of it. Should someone be banned for private emails relating to board issues? <br>
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>Will I get a nasty hate filled email from JayB? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br /><br />Daniel
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Aaron M.</b><p>Joann, that's another excellent point. If we've all agreed not to post e-mails, and the person sending the abusive e-mails can't be disciplined by the board's moderator, then how does the recipient of the abusive e-mails fight back? <br /><br />He or she can't expose the writer of the e-mail to the board and can't go to the moderator for help. I don't know how else to say it, but that's just not cool. <br /><br />This board has to be one of the least anonymous message board's on the Internet. My e-mail address, blog address and other personal information are readily on this site. Plus the moderator has all of my personal info, including my full name. Other posters have even more personal information available, and we have a rule in place that demands that if you post on controversial topics you give up your anonymity. <br /><br />All of that requires an enormous amount of trust by and between users of this forum that they won't be attacked in their personal lives simply because they have consented to allow their personal information be available in good faith furtherance of our hobby. That means we trust that other users not to abuse the personal information that we have provided. If someone does abuse that trust we either have to have rules in place to protect us or we could end up seeing people read these horror stories and be less and less willing to share their information in the first place (which means this forum suffers).
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Dan, that was a funny post. Not sure which is worse...but it is amusing either way. Bruce's posts don't bother me because I am convinced it is completely an over the top act. As I said earlier, if he had so much disdain for the entire community here he wouldn't post; he clearly enjoys being the bad guy. I find other posts on the board much more offensive as I have little patience for idiocy.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>In answer to your question it is "no". I would not ban a person that sent an unsolicited email from an auction house. Not exactly sure what that means though? Each and every person that posts their email here (I do on every one of my posts) understands it could be the cause of unsolicited email. Not much I can do about that. As far as Bruce staying or going....I would prefer him to stay but tone it down and act in a civil manner and not be so aristocratic on the board. Looking down at others will only generate ill will and that is not what this hobby is about. The hobby is about having fun with our friend collectors and collecting exactly what you can afford and enjoy. I hope this answers your question. Also, since my thread about my phone call with Bruce, I hope we can put this to bed now....(am I using too many commas?)<br /><br />edited to say one more thing...I can count on 2 fingers the number of board members who have abused private emailing. Neither do it anymore that I am aware of.....but yes, I guess at some point I will protect board members if the emails were instigated from the board....That is somewhat of a duty. I want everyone to be happy (as they can be) not sad...
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Bob Pomilla</b><p>Does using too many commas make one commatose?
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Bruce is not going to change. For whatever reason he posts the way he does, it will remain that way. Although he agreed not to send any more private emails, and that is a positive step, as far as his being more down to earth and a little more compassionate, I don't see that happening. Don't ask me why he won't make a few concessions, and for that matter what pleasure he gets posting on this board in the first place, but it will be business as usual.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>It turns out I was wrong in several of my posts above. In the 18 words (two sentences) in which he bragged about his two Ivy League degrees, Wharton (Magna) 73 actually made 6 errors, not 5 as I stated earlier. 6 mistakes in 18 words describing his two Ivy League degrees - now THAT is funny. <br /><br />And as to his promise to stop sending private emails ... anyone got the pool going yet? <br /><br />OK. Sorry Leon. I'll be done now and let it go. But I am permanently disgusted by what he sent Lee. I hope in all honesty that he does stop with the emails as promised. <br /><br />Joann
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p><b>Tony:</b><br /><br />That is correct. I received a private email that directly responds to the subject matter of my post on this thread, and a bit more as well. Now, I have not read the email that was sent to Lee and Jay so I can't say whether/how it compares, or not. However, there is nothing in mine that I would perceive as a "threatening" tone.
|
NO Private Emails posted on this board - rule
Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>"It’s not there for you to get phone numbers of chicks in the typing pool to heavy breath on them via the phone on the weekend."<br /><br />John- how did you know i did that? haha...<br /><br />when are you coming up to NYC?????
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:39 PM. |