Techman said:
I love the description of Athana's ban. It took what? Two mods and the board owner to make a decision not to ban the Elf who contributes nothing really. Other than the numerous handles he uses. Even his 'reviews' are probably a figment of his imagination and he's probably one of the main reasons they have no advertisers. Instead they ban one of the few advertisers and identifiable posters they do have left. Good move, guys.
I'm confused... I thought that there was a general acceptance by all of the proposition that it is best for us, the consumers, that advertisers don't dictate the boards' operations...
...and yet we seem to have criticism of one board's operation because it refused to follow an advertiser's dictate that 2 members be permnamently banned or the board would lose her cash... she sought the banishment of Tony as a result of an unpleasant comment and the banishment of GG who, for Gawds sake, was no way involved in the spat.
A board banning an innocent member (GG) to keep advertising funds. Isn't that exactly what Benson is complaining about?
Keen observers, and prescient readers of sheep's entrails, will know that I am no fan of GG, but even I wouldn't have sought his banishment in the circumstances.
Shouldn't the man who lost money, and knew he would, because of his position, be praised, rather then damned?