SANParks.org Forums

RP I hope you know that the parents vs children statement was just a quip. As for publishing or not publishing the names of banned forumites I, unfortunately, do not have an opinion. I thought that the poll was set up to establish this question but judging from the comments of those who posted it would seem that the matter cannot be settled that easily. I am sitting this one out. Unfortunately I cannot help you on what you say you don't understand because I don't know which part you don't understand. I thought I was being clear and simple - I certainly stayed away from my signature five line sentences. That is uncalled for. This is the kind of language that gets people hot under the collar and does not assist in constructive debate.

I am not sure where this is coming from, unless there is something I am missing in previous posts. However, I will answer. We have constant discussions with the Mods and are aware of what they do all the time. When they make a decision that requires intervention, we do so. That for me is enough performance evaluation. It is not like they have to now fill in a balanced scorecard sheet, they are volunteers afterall. They don't even get remunerated for the work they do and the long hours they put in. What is your gripe really?

Exactly at what stage was anyone threatened? As far as I can see DuQues said that the choice of naming people could have the aftermath of them having trouble with certain job interviews.

But then again... Maybe I am just not "passionate" enough to read it as a threat

BushHappy I must say this and be very emphatic about it. Being passionate is not a license to be rude and overbearing - not that I am saying your person is because I do not even know who you refer to. Neither does being knowledgeable about a subject give you liberties beyond "mere mortals". Everyone, no matter how important they think they are, must be sanctioned when they behave in a manner that is anti-social. This is not a forum about expertise but a platform to discuss conservation issues and SANParks, no matter how little information people have. Noone, and I repeat, noone will be intimidated by anyone in this forum no matter the contribution of that person. Nobody put a gun to that participant's head and forced them to participate. They did it voluntarily and you shall not hold us at ransom for their departure. I would like to assume that everyone in this forum is an adult or a near adult and so fully understands and appreciates the consequences of their actions. We are not here to teach people how to behave and neither are we here to take abuse from people who cannot hold their tempers. If they are used to doing that with their friends, family and acquaintances, unfortunately we are not kind of crowd. Here everyone will respect others and will conduct themselves with dignity and restraint. Above all you will not make unproven allegations against any member of this forum. Please stop verbally abusing other forumites and I say that with absolute restraint.

And one more thing Bushhappy, SANParks is not considering "naming and shaming" anyone. Get your facts straight before you make statements. It was explained in earlier posts that the reason the Mods chose to have this poll is because there have been calls from others to do so. Now, in your mind which part in this says SANParks is considering naming and shaming banned people? This is a public forum. Be carefull of what you say and who you accuse. If you are so unhappy being here really why are you stressing yourself so much? In fact why are you stressing others with your unhappiness?

Wanda, just to clarify:



Only if it does not put SANPARKS in a bad light. Right?



I have been issued a warning privately but as I am being publicly cautioned as well, and as I have not received an answer from the Mods yet, what is the difference between what I said and what SANPARKS wrote:



They look kind of similar to me??

As I said to the Mods who asked a simialr question to yours
:


It is because I am unhappy with the direction SANPARKS is taking, and if I don't voice opposition to it, who will??

I am unhappy because I don't like being censored! There is an article on News24 today, discussing the hotel, yet we are not allowed to. Conservation bodies are opposed to it, yet we can't say a thing! I will not be complicit in this, and by my very silence, I will be.

As an example of what Duco was saying.

An undergraduate applied for an internship here recently. Before the interview we did a quick internet search and in half an hour came up with 8 pages of information on her, her activities and dislikes and likes. We are IT professionals yes, but not trained investigators or HR professionals. We did nothing illegal or went to anywhere any member of the public couldn't go to. So people are checked on, its not a threat, its just something to be aware of.

Perhaps this will answer your question Wanda

Bush "Happy", I think you've made your point.

And people have had their say on here about the hotels. The thread was open for 2 years, had 54743 views and 3999 replies. Everyone had their chance to comment.

And a few were banned for their stance, yes?

Bush Happy, I am Proudly British and have no idea what the Afrikaans means.

Also, I know of only one person who has been banned and that was a number of years ago. I do not know why the person was banned and I found out about the ban because I was carrying out voluntary tasks on behalf of the forum for which banned members were excluded, for obvious reasons.

But I have enough confidence in the Mods through my interaction with them in the 6.5 years I have been a member to know that they followed stipulated procedures and that any bans, if issued, were as a result of members not abiding by the rules they agree to by signing up to be a member.

No. No one has been banned for their stance on the hotels. This has been explained over and over on the forums by the moderators.

Have a read through the rules of the forums ... it is very clear there why and how members get banned.

I believe that the handling of the hotel issue by SANParks and on the forum (mods and mites alike) has caused frustration and has been a catalyst for bad behavior that has lead to bannings. L

BUT

Said bad behavior was a choice and the actions of the banned were their own choices and their own responsibility.

On the hotel issue as a catalyst, many new developments have come up that deserve comment as the issue isn't a static one. We certainly wouldn't lock the poaching thread for the same reason, although not much new has been said there in years.

This is in fact an excellent example of why members have suggested to the forum admin to consider naming banned members and the reasons for the bans.

The forum admin do not disclose or reveal why a member was banned. However nothing stops the banned member telling a very one sided story. And as a result misinformation is posted on the forums.

Please quote your source Bush Happy
Its a rule on this forum