Terrible news

[bernmc]

Just heard my best mate has been struck off for sleeping with his patients.

Devastated

[bradc]

Hope all isn't lost for him.

[Kieran]

That's bad news Bern. Chin up.

[Brunty]

He's not an anaethetist too is he? 'cos that's cheatin'.

[Nutter_John]

I can not see anything wrong with him sleeping with his patients as long as it,s consentual , unless hes a Vet !!!!

[Nick VR4]

Agree with John here

I remember a Teacher sleeping with a 6 form Student and nothing was done about it consulting adults and all that

[WildCards]

I'm not biting, i'm sure theres a joke in here somewhere.

[NevGroom]

I can not see anything wrong with him sleeping with his patients as long as it,s consentual , unless hes a Vet !!!!

Or an undertaker:inquisiti !!

[SGHOM]

I'm just waiting for the punchline. :speechles

[Little Miss Road Rage]

I can not see anything wrong with him sleeping with his patients as long as it,s consentual , unless hes a Vet !!!!


I agree there

[bernmc]

He's not an anaethetist too is he? 'cos that's cheatin'.

No, but he's a bloody good vet.

[pitslayer]

Or an undertaker:inquisiti !!
that actually happened somewhere in wales close to newport.
some woman had a bit of an infection in her lovlies, went to the dr. he ran some tests, and his reply was
"the only way you could get this infection, was if you were having sex with dead people".....her husband worked in a mortuary

wonder if i could find the article on it

[bradc]

I asked about him being a vet first, but K edited my post!

I still have the best sense of humour here :)

[Ryan]

I asked about him being a vet first, but K edited my post!

I still have the best sense of humour here :)

Jeez Brad you're up early as well.

[bradc]

stupid cats :)

[Ryan]

Ahh, I know what you mean - the yowling and carrying on... wish I still had my Beretta sometimes, that'd shut them up :D

[bernmc]

I asked about him being a vet first, but K edited my post!

I still have the best sense of humour here :)

/lol

Sorry K - I've abused your trust (again :o)

[Kieran]

:undecided

[WildCards]

I still have the best sense of humour here :)

For a nerdy New Zealander perhaps.

[Roadrunner]

I asked about him being a vet first, but K edited my post!
Unilateral censorship??! Wots that about?!! :thinking:

[bernmc]

Unilateral censorship??! Wots that about?!! :thinking:

Well, I think that if I hadn't been messing around, a vet comment might have upset me a bit. Should really have been in the jokes section, but that would have made it a bit too obvious..

bradc had obviously heard the joke before though.

[Kieran]

Well, I think that if I hadn't been messing around, a vet comment might have upset me a bit.

Quite.


Thankyou Bern.

[Paul Beazer]

Cue tumbleweed smiley...

[Roadrunner]

Quite.


Thankyou Bern.
No, not quite. There's no place for censorship in a land that promotes free speech, especially when the censor is not in full knowledge of the facts.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

[bradc]

now I'm confused, is this a joke or real?

[Kieran]

There's no place for censorship in a land that promotes free speech, especially when the censor is not in full knowledge of the facts.

Brian - Just think what would happen if we didn't moderate (or 'Censor' if you must) threads on here:

Someone posts up that they've had bad news, in a way that looks so out of context with their usual style that it seems pretty genuine. Some people express condolence, someone (could be anyone) thinks it's a wind-up and posts up a smart comment (admittedly quite innocently). Sometimes it'll blow over, sometimes it'll come out that it was a joke. But there will be occasions where, because of the way a forum strips out tone, intonation, eye contact and body language, someone gets upset - And then the mudslinging starts, breeding ill feeling and people can end up falling out over a few words of text when they've never even met. It's a horrible feeling and one I never wish to repeat.

Also, consider what happens the next time we get a lunatic like LancerMivec of VR4ever on site? Should we not delete or edit their posts either?

Editing people's posts is a heavy handed way of working. Fortunately, it's very rarely needed. And every time I have edited a post it's because I genuinely believed that the affront is worth it to avoid the risk of people ending up at each others throats over a silly remark.

[Paul Beazer]

I think thats fair enough K, but i must admit im not a fan of censors. I had a feeling it was a joke as Bern didnt babble on for ages without making a point, as per his usual style. Still better safe than sorry.

Oh by the way you're a $###**&%!:iloveyou:

[Nick Mann]

Freedom of speech is a right, and rightly so. It is also sometimes a very dangerous thing! Luckily, we have terms & conditions here which basically mean we can make you say whatever we want, or prevent you from uttering a word! (Mwahahahaaaaa!) :P

Either way round, CVR4 have to keep this forum working the way most of us want, so unfortunately occaisonal censorship is required.

And for anyone else who is as slow as Paul Bozo, this thread was intended as a joke! (It nearly made it, too!!) /pan

[Roadrunner]

I have absolutely no problem with committee members moderating this site. Indeed, for some of the reasons you mention, Kieran and Nick, it is imperative that they do.

Blocking posts so no-one else can contribute is acceptable.

Deleting entire posts that are potentially defamatory, or could jeopardise the good name of the club by breaking the law in terms of race, gender, disability, religion, belief, sex, age or whatever ... is acceptable.

Editing posts to remove some of the words and, by so doing, change the meaning, sentiment or import of the post can never be acceptable. The correct process would be to contact the person who made the post and ask them to change it OR, if deemed to be objectionable for any of the reasons I mentioned above, DELETE IT and tell the originator of the post why this action was taken.

[Nick Mann]

Hmmm..... But maybe if just one phrase or paragraph is the dodgy culprit, then removing that could be okay? I think it is important to make it obvious that the post has been edited, as well as contacting the person to let them know why.

[VR-04-TT]

With freedom of speech comes responsibility...A thing a lot of free speech "campaigners" forget about.

[Roadrunner]

Hmmm..... But maybe if just one phrase or paragraph is the dodgy culprit, then removing that could be okay? I think it is important to make it obvious that the post has been edited, as well as contacting the person to let them know why.
No, I don't think you can remove one phrase or paragraph without necessarily altering the meaning or sentiment of the post. No viewer of an edited post can know what the original sentiment was - editing by a moderator must make the resultant post the view of that moderator and I don't think that's acceptable. If a moderator objects to a post, or any part of its content, the entire post should be deleted and the originator contacted to repost without the offensive content.

[WildCards]

I think we should picket line CVR4 HQ, bring down the nanny state, get me some whisky, i'll ave the bastids

[Nick Mann]

Brian - you speak a lot of sense. I'm not sure how much I agree with you yet - I will mull it over. However I will bring it up at the next committee meeting.

Steve - a wee dram is more than you need or deserve!! :P

[bernmc]

Flippin' heck! I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.... :p

For those of you who are too slow to keep up, and cheeky buggers whose names rhyme with Geezer...

It's an old joke, but had me howling when my daughter was telling me about her day at work... (Are you seated comfortably Beazer :inquisiti:)

She works in a shop that sells beauty products. An old codger and his wife had come in. Codger got chatting to my daughter (who is very attractive) while his wife tottered around the shop. Somehow they got onto the fact that we had recently moved to Lichfield because I'm a doctor and had started work in Sutton Coldfield.

At which point he says 'I've got a secret to tell you' (dirty old bugger thought my daughter) 'My brother got struck off for sleeping with his patients'

'Oh that's terrible' says my daughter (mortified for thinking unkind thoughts).

'Yeah - and he was a bloody good Vet' says the old codger.

Whereupon my daughter falls on the floor laughing.

Right?

Clear now?

Perhaps the Fascist Kelloggs Boy should make further abuse of his rampant powers and move everything to the jokes forum in case any more Kiwis get confused (easily done - just go 'baaaaaaa')...?

:evilgrin:

[Kieran]

If a moderator objects to a post, or any part of its content, the entire post should be deleted and the originator contacted to repost without the offensive content.

I don't see how the above is any different from quickly editing a post when the situation calls for it. In fact, I would find deleting a post and then being told what I should say instead even more objectionable!

I also vehemently disagree that editing a post is to turn it into the moderator's views. That is certainly NOT why I, or anyone else edits posts. It is simply a quick and easy way to avoid unnecessary trouble - that's all. It's no different to completely removing a post. And as already said, neither method is something we're keen on.

Your point that no viewer of an edited post can know what the original sentiment was equally applies to unedited posts. who knows what the author's original intent is? All we can do is is judge each post on it's merit and in context... Sure we'll get it wrong occasionaly, we're only human. Fortunatley this is a very civil and respectful forum in the main, so these kind of judgements are mercufully rare.

[bernmc]

It is unlike me to agree with The SK, but in this case, I am forced to!. In terms of moderating, this forum is very moderate (/lol). On the skyline forums, try posting anything slightly off colour/damaging to a mod/owners ego or similar such trivial thing, and you'll find your post just disappears in it's entirety - no explanation, no warnig... just *poof* - off into the ether.. It's a ****ing jungle out there.

Keep up the good work my young Jedi's (even you Cereal Boy). This is still my favorite place to chat even though I have a real gearbox ;)

[Roadrunner]

I don't see how the above is any different from quickly editing a post when the situation calls for it. In fact, I would find deleting a post and then being told what I should say instead even more objectionable!

I also vehemently disagree that editing a post is to turn it into the moderator's views. That is certainly NOT why I, or anyone else edits posts. It is simply a quick and easy way to avoid unnecessary trouble - that's all. It's no different to completely removing a post. And as already said, neither method is something we're keen on.

Your point that no viewer of an edited post can know what the original sentiment was equally applies to unedited posts. who knows what the author's original intent is? All we can do is is judge each post on it's merit and in context... Sure we'll get it wrong occasionaly, we're only human. Fortunatley this is a very civil and respectful forum in the main, so these kind of judgements are mercufully rare.
Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses :scholar: :happy:

[Kieran]

"If you had kept quiet, you would have remained a philosopher"

:huh2:

[psbarham]

I'm a moderator on another local car forum and luckily as yet we haven't had to many reasons to delete posts , but if someone did type something that could possibly be misconstrued by another party then i would have no problem editing or removing the post.

its one of those things that you have to make a snap decision before it all goes Pete tong especially on a busy site like this. the site should also fully support any decision any of its moderators make.

[Paul Beazer]

Nick Mann and Bern, why you picking on me? Huh. Bunch of futhamuckas.

[bernmc]

Nick Mann and Bern, why you picking on me? Huh. Bunch of futhamuckas.

We discipline those we love... (Big Boy ;))