Replies to post #14 on Members of Pre-Bob iHub Weigh In

[Georgia Bard]

Evening Bob, I agree with you but I do have some issues with the stock threads. I realize both sides of the story need to be out there but this is not SI and this thread will probably heat up. But anarchy will not come to this thread.

This thread is where you can see feedback on where the old guard that came here feels about what has happened and changed.

I am not going to allow anyone to attack anyone. Issues will be very specific. If you make certain rules then I will most likely have to resign as chair of stock threads because the rules changed. Where as before you came I could as IR do exactly what I was doing here and I am getting legal opinion on this newest revision that is forth coming. But as an IR it is my job to keep the facts straight and NOT allow hype or bash of ridiculous false information. This I am going to cover also as a specific post here.

This is not a bash Bob site and I will not be a part of that but this is to discuss admin practices.

This started being a site that was moderated and basically not just some free wheeling public forum fraught with anarchy. So the old guard (People post bob coined by BOP) are very worried and justifiably so.

:=) Gary Swancey

[marty_lewis]

bob at this point in time I feel that our PM's need to be taken public. This thread I feel is an appropiate thread for our discussion. You keep making posts to me about "I owe you a post", and I keep telling you I don't. I can see where this is leading, this is the same kind of 'stuff" you pulled at si, and for which people were reinstated when they spoke with ethan caldwell (legal councel) about the situation concerning your terminations of them.
Here is the response I was going to make privately, but at this point in time feel necessary to make public. You IMO are on a vendetta, and are looking for any excuse to justify what is your real motive, and that is to find a way to either terminate or suspend me. If I keep this private, I am of the opinion that you will eventually get around to doing what you want to do, and you're going to then be in the position of being able to give the same one sided reasons that you always do, without the other person being able to make a sound, because they be gone. The old si bob just can't get rid of his spots. can you? :


bob,Your stock posting requirements are specific to that thread, (badbob) I do not see that requirement anywhere else on this site. I already posted to you that I have no more interest in posting on your badbob thread, which at this point is nothing more than a bob rah rah/off topic/nonsensical thread. I HAVE made posts on stock threads, get off your lazy butt and look in my profile before you make accusations that are unfounded.I am not going to report to you like a 10 year old, everytime I make a stock post
If you change requirements about being a member of IHUB, make it public, and make it for everyone..
And if you are adamant about this being a stock only site get rid of the extraneous threads, or make the posting requirements for each of those threads, also. I have a feeling that you're going to create some ill will about all of this though, because I have a feeling people don't really want to be answerable to you as to the quantity of (stock) posts they make, and have the burden of running back to you like a little puppy dog, begging for your approval.

I will be gone for a while, so if you respond, don't expect any reply until I have the time.

[Overboard]

This thread makes no bones about it. Only people who dislike me are welcome. Only negative commentary will be allowed. Only "real" iHub members welcome (whatever the heck that means).

Well I'm curious. You've stated before that you try to be as fair as possible and apply the rules equally to everyone.

If you're going to allow a board that is specifically aimed at bashing/critizing you, are you going to allow other boards that bash/criticize other people on IHUB?