Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

looked to find the wasteland disclaimer posted in skyzerr's sticky thread.

just wondering if there is a set of guidelines which moderators follow. Reason being, I just wondered if the WA mods could, upon locking a thread, post why they have chosen to do so. this would make it easier for people to understand why threads are closed and what constitutes irreprehensible off-topic banter.

was gonna pm this to mods, but I thought that if there is a general "moderation/forum rules" thread (I cant find it) it would be of use to others.

:headspin:

Yes and No...

but as rule of thumb, when I (dotn know if this goes with other mods) I try to give a resonable comments to the person who ever wrote it.

with the what constitures as irreprehensible is hard line also most of time its catch 22... I guess every thread is depends on the TITLE TOPIC and the conversation as well as proper information is given to the person. hard to say... but we do have rules of SAU.

Thank you for the comments... we mods will look into it

cheers

Joe

zanda,

YUP. that's what I'm talking about :|

tomj,

Even tho explicitly stated in the T&C of SAU it says all views expressed are only opinions of members and do not reflect those of SAU.

Moral bit:

Whatever happened to free speech? I'd like to walk down the street one day bitching about a topic to a mate and have some random boogieman come stickytape my mouth shut!

zanda,

YUP. that's what I'm talking about :|

tomj,

Even tho explicitly stated in the T&C of SAU it says all views expressed are only opinions of members and do not reflect those of SAU.

Moral bit:

Whatever happened to free speech? I'd like to walk down the street one day bitching about a topic to a mate and have some random boogieman come stickytape my mouth shut!

free speach? comes too easy in Australia... but then again there is singapore. :thumbdwn:

anyway... thanks all for the comments, we will look into it. BTW as TJ mention we are not allow to bag bussiness and people...etc..etc. due to leagal reason.

cheers

JOe

Well lets see, there a basic guildline but one has never been offically written up and given to us to follow.

As to the disclaimer that was for the original wasteland forum and the link has been removed due to the site upgrade.

Threads in the WA section that have turned up closed have gone off topic, bring disrepute on SAU or have been requested to be closed by the orginator or another party.

On to moderating. I'm damned if i do and i'm damned if i don't i get bitched at either way. This stems from everybody having different views in things. Some people think an action is ok others don't.

On the free speech thing are u going to deal with the concequences of your words??? Or will you let prank take the fall for you. Some things just have to be censored.

Now to behaviour on the WA boards of late. Quite afew threads have gone off-topic and stayed there so they were closed. Those who are responsible should know better, considering the two main culprits of late are part of the fledgling WA committee.

A large number of the current regulars take great joy in picking on one particular member. this member is young and excited about his new car. No reason to treat him the way he gets treated. Abit of a joke and giggle thats ok but not for how long this has lasted, especially when the guy gets bagged out on a cruise he doesn't even attend. Again committee members are instigators in this behaviour.

To whoring well thats been done to death. What ever we do it keeps happenning. I'm the first to admit i'm one of the original whores and helped start off afew of the others. But as most of the current regulars would know i hardly post anymore unless its relevant to the topic.

Troy - all of your comments are very valid - however if you need to repremand individual members, do you think this would be better done through a PM? Isnt there a warning system on SAU for this sort of thing?? Punish in private, praise in public?

Just my opinion.....

I didn't name names, did I. It was written that way so people could evaluate for themselves there actions.

Also no reprimands have been made as the person in question hasn't complained and no ones else seems to care how he is treated.

EDIT: one thing that I totally forgot the search function. thanks Liz, i think its better if i start anew thread about that.

Troy its pretty obvious of the things you are talking about .... if you want to deal with ****** personally go right ahead ..... as you hardly speak or know the guy then its hard to know his fustration ... we can deal with excited but even talk to some of our older members .... aka *** and he can tell you of our fustration with this person ... and the fact he is experiencing it too .... its not just the committee.

I was voted into the position from the people that wanted me there ... therefore they knew what i was liek beforehand and i make no apologies ...... i have not changed one ounce and they know me fair and right ..... but im sorry some people just test my patience .... such as this certain person .... it seems im not the only one therefore you shouldnt take it out on the committee members as we all seem to experience it as the same as non committeee members that have been around the forums a while ...... he isnt excited .... we know excited ... he's just friggin annoying ...... i guess if you say you havent been around the forums a while then i guess you wouldnt know our fustration.

You can talk to almost anyone and know im a fair and just person .... im getting a lot of private emails from new members of the forum because they find me just that .... but im sorry some people just test the patience ..... i have been as nice as i can be ..... but i would be a very false person if i tried any harder. I dont believe in being false.

Hmmm. I think names should be removed from here Niz..

Getting the thread back on topic :rofl: - Troy, would it make you job easier to just delete/edit offending posts with "comments not suitable" or something like that? I can imagine you can't please everyone and I don't think people are complaining about what you are doing at all - I think the thread was just started to bring some understanding to the mod process..

Keep up the good work mods.. :)

ive removed names ..... but to tell you the truth its only one person that has a problem ..... then cant please everyone is my attitude. Most people are more than happy wiht what im doing ..... im not going to change for anyone ..... and the people that voted in me know that. I dont believe in ass kissing ..... or sucking up in any form ..... if it doesnt make me popular with the mods then so be it ..... but this is how i am ... take it or leave it im sorry.

Niz - I don't think this thread is all about you.. Chill...

Paul - I think that's what Troy is trying to say.. am interested to see a mod's answer to my question above though.. Guys?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...