Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Should LET users be allowed to discuss policies on LET? - Page 5
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Should LET users be allowed to discuss policies on LET?

12357

Comments

  • CVPS_ChrisCVPS_Chris Member, Patron Provider

    lol ok, you stay up and make sure that your "top seret information" stays seen!!! Im sure they will appreciate it, Im going to go do something productive with my life. You should do the same, you have big responsibilities coming.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    Jarland, I don't know what's worse:

    1. Whether your way off base making something out of nothing and literally talking to yourself.

    2. Posting a PM I sent you.

    Either way, thanks for being an active member of the community. :)

  • @jbiloh said:

    Obviously we created the user group. When did we ever say we didn't? If we didn't who would have? I mean this seems outrageous that I need to confirm an obvious fact -- that we did create the user group.

    http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/345460/#Comment_345460

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    Thanks. Hard to see with cheerleaders flooding the thread. Much appreciated.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    So in summary biloh had a user group made to activate a filter on certain users to remove vpsboard links. Users that he did NOT reach out to about it first. All I wanted was this acknowledged. I don't care who is butt hurt that I wanted this acknowledged, the users of this forum deserve to have this information acknowledged. That is all.

  • Awmusic12635Awmusic12635 Member, Host Rep

    I am not even sure what to say about this thread

    Thanked by 1awson
  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    @Fliphost said:
    I am not even sure what to say about this thread

    Do you understand what it was about?

  • Awmusic12635Awmusic12635 Member, Host Rep

    @jarland Yes i understand what it was about. Whether a new usergroup was created to filter signatures. I just don't see why it needed to be "acknowledged". It could clearly be read that it no longer said member beside the name.

    Either way when you participate on a site you have to follow the wishes of those who run it.

    I am not here to argue. Just my 2c on the issue.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    If you understand what happened then all I can say is I appreciate your input but this is already over and it has served it's purpose. I have my own convictions and I follow them in the way that let's me walk away knowing I've done what I think I should have.

  • ryanarpryanarp Member, Patron Provider
    edited October 2013

    I was going to edit my signature, however I was put back in that group and was not able to edit my signature. @jbiloh I thought I had the option to keep VPSBoard.com in my signature..Cluster Error Still?

  • Can't we all just....Get along?

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    @fapvps said:
    Can't we all just....Get along?

    Sure, after I said the following, I am finished with this topic. Happy to keep talking to anyone that wants, but I got what I came for.

    @jarland said:
    So in summary biloh had a user group made to activate a filter on certain users to remove vpsboard links. Users that he did NOT reach out to about it first. All I wanted was this acknowledged. I don't care who is butt hurt that I wanted this acknowledged, the users of this forum deserve to have this information acknowledged. That is all.

  • @ryanarp said:
    I was going to edit my signature, however I was put back in that group and was not able to edit my signature. jbiloh I thought I had the option to keep VPSBoard.com in my signature..Cluster Error Still?

    I don't see you in the group.

    Oh, wait, cluster error.

    Thanked by 1ihatetonyy
  • ryanarpryanarp Member, Patron Provider

    @awson said:
    Oh, wait, cluster error.

    Guess so...

  • How does this thread how almost 17 thousand views when all the announcements have far less? Seems odd.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    @WebSearchingPro said:
    How does this thread how almost 17 thousand views when all the announcements have far less? Seems odd.

    Cluster error?

    Thanked by 1ihatetonyy
  • @WebSearchingPro said:
    How does this thread how almost 17 thousand views when all the announcements have far less? Seems odd.

    spoilers: Cluster error

    Thanked by 1ihatetonyy
  • perennateperennate Member, Host Rep

    Cool story bros.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran
    edited October 2013

    @Dylan said:
    I like how your response to anybody who doesn't appreciate your posts is to personally attack them.

    I can be called as a witness for this. @jarland even requested that nobody buys from prometeus as long as I work for him because he didnt like my opinions. If anyone is going crazy here about censorship is not jon. However, there is some evidence he does hate vpsboard.
    I would say let these people advertise it as they wish, nobody pays attention to that anyway. However, removing the ads as long as no rule is broken is abuse, please stop it.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    @Maounique are you not personally attacking me there? Sounds like you are. Stick to the issue, which is over by the way. Biloh admitted what I asked him to.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    @jarland said:
    Maounique are you not personally attacking me there? Sounds like you are. Stick to the issue, which is over by the way. Biloh admitted what I asked him to.

    Nope. I never called anyone names nor did I put in my signature requests that people do not buy from catalyst because you worked there and your touch is unholy. All I said there is true and if you no longer admit it, I can post proof.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    Can we not let our past discussions be past discussions unless relevant to the topic at hand? The topic here is forced censorship without request. I know what I posted in the past and it isn't important right now.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    @jarland said:
    Can we not let our past discussions be past discussions unless relevant to the topic at hand? The topic here is forced censorship without request. I know what I posted in the past and it isn't important right now.

    It is, because it shows how passion can cloud your judgement.
    In the problem at hand, I agree it was some heavy handling and this is a good start to stop people interfere and leave the issue die once and for all. When ppl will skip all topics started by Mun, Manndude and others trying to advertise their board, the problem will be gone by itself. I have no problem with either of the boards, there is place for both under the sun and while jon did try to censor some advertising here, I agree it gets too much at times.

  • CVPS_ChrisCVPS_Chris Member, Patron Provider

    "Can we not let our past discussions be past discussions unless relevant to the topic at hand?"

    Since when did you ever abide by that? You still bring up issues from months even years ago.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    I respectfully and politely request, @Maounique, that this thread not be about our past conflicts. If you would be so kind as to grant me this, I would prefer that this thread be about Jon Biloh creating a user group to filter content for people he did not even bother to ask nicely to remove it first, repeatedly deflected by calling only a "cluster error," and then ignored every request to admit that he made a user group to do that until I posted a private message he sent to Ryan telling him that he was removed from the group.

    That is the topic at hand. It is over, it has been acknowledged, members are now aware.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    I respectfully and politely request, @CVPS_Chris, that this thread not be about our past conflicts. If you would be so kind as to grant me this, I would prefer that this thread be about Jon Biloh creating a user group to filter content for people he did not even bother to ask nicely to remove it first, repeatedly deflected by calling only a "cluster error," and then ignored every request to admit that he made a user group to do that until I posted a private message he sent to Ryan telling him that he was removed from the group.

    That is the topic at hand. It is over, it has been acknowledged, members are now aware.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran
    edited October 2013

    @jarland said:
    That is the topic at hand. It is over, it has been acknowledged, members are now aware.

    It is not over, conclusions must be drawn so this does not get stirred again. A bit of censorship will not work as a bit of repression will not work either. People will find ways to go ahead and expose the censorship as well as the repression, you either censor everything and kill anyone raising against the regime or you dont censor anything and leave people freely express their discontent. Some will agree, some not and we have 2 situations:
    1. Most agree and then you have a problem as a "ruler" and have to revise it carefully;
    2. Only a small minority agrees and you can try to accommodate it if it has some merit or does not disturb the majority or say the majority does not agree with the changes requested and ignore future attempts to push for the issue letting it die by itself.

    Thanked by 1jar
  • CVPS_ChrisCVPS_Chris Member, Patron Provider

    I think at this point no one really cares, and your both dragging out a thread that is irrelevant.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    Didn't you just bump the thread?

  • RadiRadi Host Rep, Veteran

    Ok I spent 10 minutes reading this. From what I understood:
    1. Biloh created signature-removed group.
    2. Biloh put Ryan in it.
    3. Biloh then removed him and requested link removal from signature.
    4. Ryan didn't do(Biloh said in request he can keep the link if he wants to).
    5. Biloh put him in group again.

    Did I understand it right? @jarland

This discussion has been closed.