GreenAndy1981 has been a bad boy

Greenjock wrote:

Now Dane is the one being put under suspiscion on Pasoti, funny that as he has now started posting on here again as Saltash Green, and has stated his part in the ADT spoof site was on IJN's request. Another example of how IJN will try and get someone if they cross him, and how the other Pasoti mods will circle the wagons and join in once the lord and master has instructed.

I'm sure most of us would have Dane near the top of our lists as a suspect over this, but on this occasion having seen the play unfold, I would say he is being hung out to dry by the mob.

Dane is thick with those people... whenever certain things have happened involving others, he appears, followed by the usual baffoon apology ... it's so predictable.... and I've always understood his involvment to be part of their undermining shenanegins. But that does not mean his privacy should be hung out for all to see if he has broken no laws.
Each forum has it's own rules. What next ? a black list from Pasoti ? What happens if someone tries to register on this site using that IP supplied by that dodgy postcpode character who changes with a breath of wind.
The truth is Pasoti have far better ways of sniffing out details of that IP, but decided to involve ATD instead. How convenient, and just more of the same old stuff.

tonycholwell wrote:

Over on the other site, I have fought a losing battle for some time for them to be registered under the Data Protection Act as anyone that holds private data does, me included.

In that absense I suggested that they have a policy if not registering, to be bound by the principles of the DPA. I still think that.

I would hope in the light of these events thats this site will take the lead and if not register, come out quite clearly and state they will abide by the principles of Data Protection.

It would certainly resolve the issue in future for all concerned; Mods, posters and other sites.

Agreed Tony.

Penz wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

Now Dane is the one being put under suspiscion on Pasoti, funny that as he has now started posting on here again as Saltash Green, and has stated his part in the ADT spoof site was on IJN's request. Another example of how IJN will try and get someone if they cross him, and how the other Pasoti mods will circle the wagons and join in once the lord and master has instructed.

I'm sure most of us would have Dane near the top of our lists as a suspect over this, but on this occasion having seen the play unfold, I would say he is being hung out to dry by the mob.

Dane is thick with those people... whenever certain things have happened involving others, he appears, followed by the usual baffoon apology ... it's so predictable.... and I've always understood his involvment to be part of their undermining shenanegins. But that does not mean his privacy should be hung out for all to see if he has broken no laws.
Each forum has it's own rules. What next ? a black list from Pasoti ? What happens if someone tries to register on this site using that IP supplied by that dodgy postcpode character who changes with a breath of wind.
The truth is Pasoti have far better ways of sniffing out details of that IP, but decided to involve ATD instead. How convenient, and just more of the same old stuff.

To be fair Penz the information was not requested it was offered.............that's what really confuses me. If it was requested I would, to a degree, understand how a mistake could have been made given the emotional subject of St Lukes, but to make an offer is confusing and concerning, more so when the mods concerned were aware of the disapproval from some of us.

GOB wrote:

To be fair Penz the information was not requested it was offered.............that's what really confuses me. If it was requested I would, to a degree, understand how a mistake could have been made given the emotional subject of St Lukes, but to make an offer is confusing and concerning, more so when the mods concerned were aware of the disapproval from some of us.

Hang on a minute Gob. are you saying this site actually offered to do a 'check' on one it's IP addresses to get it's name out of the line of fire from some Pasoti gonk ?
Ali, Knecht, charlie ...... was it asked for or offered ? a simple question.

Sorry Gob but for me trust is everything and Penz is 100% right. No if's or but's of what might of happened that trust has been broke. Thanks for the time and laughs peeps, goodbye.

So some 16 year old school leaver starts working for a call centre and can access all sorts of private infrormation. He sees on the news that someone might or might not have perpetrated a hoax and decides to look up his firm's database and pass over the results of his 'scan' to some private individuals.
That's not a resigning offence. That's a sacking offence.

Highwayman wrote:

Sorry Gob but for me trust is everything and Penz is 100% right. No if's or but's of what might of happened that trust has been broke. Thanks for the time and laughs peeps, goodbye.

I'm not disagreeing HM, I'm just saying let's give the mods on ATD a chance to rectify the situation. If we're informed that an error of judgement has been made and reassured that rules will be placed to prevent similar occurrings in the future then I'm not sure we can ask any more?

Surely whoever it was wouldn't be dumb enough to post from the same computer they use on another forum anyway so the IP matching was probably pointless.

But then Dane is a few sandwiches short of a picnic and that hooligan whose banned from home park is a bit of a special case to so you never know

I take all your points on board, particularly Penz's, and can only apologise for an error of judgement. As I said previously there was an element of trying to protect this site in my actions, but also to reflect the feelings members had shown about the incident. That was my interpretation and mine alone.

My offer to resign is not one of petulance or anger but a genuine reflection that if I have lost the confidence of a number of members on here it is the honourable thing to do.

Perhaps members might like to PM Knecht or Ali if they think that's the course that should be taken. The last thing I want to do is provoke a split on the public boards.

I don't think I can usefully say anything more.

Charlie Wood wrote:

I take all your points on board, particularly Penz's, and can only apologise for an error of judgement. As I said previously there was an element of trying to protect this site in my actions, but also to reflect the feelings members had shown about the incident. That was my interpretation and mine alone.

My offer to resign is not one of petulance or anger but a genuine reflection that if I have lost the confidence of a number of members on here it is the honourable thing to do.

Perhaps members might like to PM Knecht or Ali if they think that's the course that should be taken. The last thing I want to do is provoke a split on the public boards.

I don't think I can usefully say anything more.

Charlie, you are an honourable person and I do not call for your resignation. In hindsight it appears an error of judgement was made, that is all. We all make errors of judgement. You were elected to moderate these boards and you have done a great job thus far.

I think ATD should learn from this and put to the membership suggested rules for dealing with requests of this kind for personal IP information or the like.

On a different point, I would not think Dane would have done this, he has too much to lose....loss of business credibility and loss of a managers position at Cullompton Rangers. I think he has been used as a smokescreen and seen as an easy target by the Dogs

Yes, thanks for that Charlie .... appreciated. We all make mistakes, and Red Star's post sums it up for me.

It's not easy to keep one's eye on the ball given the ubiquitous information blagging that goes on these days.... isn't that right Tony ?

If that Postcode character had more care for other folk and accepted internet protocol, he should have refused point blank any offer of information from here, and reminded you of what should be required of people holding personal information. But then Pasoti has a big record of divulging posters' private information without their consent, for all to see.... so that was hardly likely. to date this site has not done that.

The guys an absoloute idiot, constantly causing trouble, on the internet and at matches, i think he's serving a ban at the moment actually

On reflection, I believe an error has occurred, no need for any resignations though.

Being cynical, it would be all too easy for a pasoti mod to ask about a known IP addy/user, get confirmation of a match and then use that information as an excuse to ban somebody.

I don't believe that to be the case in the context of this thread but it could be open to abuse in future.

Charlie I don't think it's a question that you should be asking of the users, it's something that you should decide.

You may want to consider the grief that others have been put through simply for having communication with a pasoti mod, the grief you maybe subjected to for offering to assist a pasoti mod doesn't bare thinking about.

I'm still at a loss for the motive though and considering that your help to pasoti would have been of no benefit to St Lukes I'm unsure why you offered to help or even if this was a majority moderator decision?

I'm also unsure why you would prefer this to be handled by pm on a site that boast of its openess. I'm not sure that secrecy would be much of a benefit. or that this method would now be trusted.

There's always the possibility for abuse CG. In the past, the big worry was the main controlling pasoti cheese usually phoning or turning up on moderators' doorsteps trying to control the moderation of this site, without a cursory glance to the democratic nature of this site... but fortunately seen, with some mirth on occasion, as a deliberate policy of riding a horse and carriage through the principles of this site.

Thankfully until recently, these events were always reported back, but with the whole new Cerbera thing unravelling, one has to say there is a danger of that sort of stuff succeeding. I have long believed ATD should have a zero tolerance to this sort of moderating 'illegall approach' in football terminology. the site has an email address and PM ystem for those registered, and yet these Pasoti anti-democrats just refuse to use it.... they don't do democracy according to their own words..

I do agree Penz, there should be a zero tolerant factor to this which is why I suggest that Charlie takes this decision himself.

I have seen so many underhand dealings from our friends across the road that anything less than zero tolerance would leave the site and its users wide open for abuse and trust would evaporate very quickly, unfortunately it seems it already has for one user.

There must also be a consideration that as soon as something suspect crops up there will be fingers pointing and accusations chucked about...another thing to consider.

I don't have a problem with zero tolerance, it probably needs to be reinforced and reminded at times though. I don't believe todays incident should be used as a stick to beat the relatively new mods but rather a reminder of what they're elected to do.

The fact people here are bickering tells a story.

So the rools are...

Not sure I've got my head round this. Pasoti mods have already got access to the IPs of all posters (or they certainly did when I was one, which was bleddy years and at least one update ago), so they didn't need any help getting this one.

On balance, I don't think Charlie should go, though. He's put his hands up, and I assume the mod team are going to do something to make sure this doesn't happen again.

If it had just been about a donation to the staff fund, I don't think any of this would have arisen. It's the fact that St Luke's, who've looked after the loved ones of so many of us, is affected by it. Sadly, though, sometimes we have to remember to put our immediate emotions to one side so we don't lose sight of the bigger picture.

I would like the current Mods to stay.

GOB wrote:

I do agree Penz, there should be a zero tolerant factor to this which is why I suggest that Charlie takes this decision himself.

Sorry Gob, but that psycology is a pretty desperate attempt to put Charlie on a guilt trip.

I'm sure Charlie doesn't want to go, and I'm also sure he knows an overwhelming majority of ATDers accept he did what he did in good faith, and are happy to learn the lessons and move on.

oddball wrote:

I would like the current Mods to stay.

I agree

I have no problem with Charlie or the rest of the mod team.

Czarcasm wrote:

GOB wrote:

I do agree Penz, there should be a zero tolerant factor to this which is why I suggest that Charlie takes this decision himself.

Sorry Gob, but that psycology is a pretty desperate attempt to put Charlie on a guilt trip.

I'm sure Charlie doesn't want to go, and I'm also sure he knows an overwhelming majority of ATDers accept he did what he did in good faith, and are happy to learn the lessons and move on.

Then I think you need to ask Charlie that, as I have said, it's Charlie's shout as far as i am concerned.

GOB wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

GOB wrote:

I do agree Penz, there should be a zero tolerant factor to this which is why I suggest that Charlie takes this decision himself.

Sorry Gob, but that psycology is a pretty desperate attempt to put Charlie on a guilt trip.

I'm sure Charlie doesn't want to go, and I'm also sure he knows an overwhelming majority of ATDers accept he did what he did in good faith, and are happy to learn the lessons and move on.

Then I think you need to ask Charlie that, as I have said, it's Charlie's shout as far as i am concerned.

As far as you're concerned Gob I'm sure it is. I'm also sure how you'd like to see it pan out too.

But taking ATD as a whole - posters, Mods, Keyholders, I'd be surprised if you weren't in a minority of One.