Consistent with 95% of koi forums in the world, we have very strict rules on personal attacks against members. This is the reason why we have the policy on our information page, and I quote from this page.


"We reserve the right to edit or delete any post that may offend any member or guest, would in our absolute discretion and/or with due consideration of the feeling of other members, not be in the interest of the hobby, undermine the good standing of this forum or its members, discriminate against any person due to his race or religion, comes down to name calling or might in general be in bad taste or be against public interest."

The personal attack issue was addressed by various members, and I was requested by various members to be very strict.

Unfortunately, one of our esteemed members persisted in attacking members personally and causing animosity despite my friendly requests to him not to do so. I had to delete or edit several posts, only to be challenged by this member.

This is a fun forum in the interest of the hobby, a place to make friends and not enemies.

Under these circumstances I regret to advise that I had no alternative other than to ban this member in accordance with the policy followed by the majority of forums.

Thanks for keeping forum clean. I love this place and cant wait to log in every day. It is fun and everyone learn something new every day. Keep up the good work since I am sure the hobby is growing day by day. Hope to be part of this forum for a long time to come

I second this, we as hobbyist/keepers need to be tolerent of other views

Bobby wrote:

I second this, we as hobbyist/keepers need to be tolerent of other views

As long as the member’s views does not damage the Koi, Koi industry, Breeders, Dealers & SAKKS or Koi as a whole. I would like to bring to the attention of Admin that a certain member on this forum is treading on thin cracked ice. But I will PM Admin.

Quote :

Collin wrote: I would like to bring to the attention of Admin that a certain member on this forum is treading on thin cracked ice. But I will PM Admin.

Hi Collin, I have just noticed that my Inbox was full and two PM's was send yesterday evening but I did not receive it. If you did send one, please send it again.

I would really like to be consistent and all viewpoints will be appreciated.

An allegation was made by this member on his forum that I am not consistent. I do not agree with the facts given on that forum, and the quotes posted are not correct, but it is not in the interest of the hobby to make an issue about it.

I agree Collin we should all be mindfull not to damage the spirit of Koi keeping as a hobby or business. We are here to learn and gain experience in a fun and sincere way. We all have a responsibility to create an environment for koi lovers to enjoy without the fear off being attacked.
Posters should not underestimate the intelligence of keepers and their ability to evaluate different views and implement what is best for their own needs and budget constraints. The history of our post and positive feedback wiil always play a role how we are viewed by others.

Therefore we can get our point across without being personal and name calling.

LG

why not name these people?

Think the slight shame part would help in those parties "rehabilitation" and "realization"

But mainly because I would like to know if my thought's on who these people are, are correct

Quote :

why not name these people?

Think the slight shame part would help in those parties "rehabilitation" and "realization"

But mainly because I would like to know if my thought's on who these people are, are correct

Nevermind!!!!

Bobby wrote:

Therefore we can get our point across without being personal and name calling.

Collin wrote:

As long as the member’s views does not damage the Koi, Koi industry, Breeders, Dealers & SAKKS or Koi as a whole.

I agree and disagree with the above statements. it is not upto the forum to be the policeman of the koi industry. The forum admin is only the policeman regarding the conduct of its members on this forum.

I dont care what a person has done anywhere else on another forum or public board or organisation. The only actions that count is his conduct on this forum. a Person might be a ex murder/rapist or a dealer that is selling KHV koi to the public but as long as he is behaving himself on this forum he should be welcome.

I would hate to see it that we loose the ability to report on the forum about bad koi, products and service because it could maybe be viewed as hurting the koi industry.

If i have received a bad product from a company and the service was crap then i should be able to say it BUT only after i have contacted them i tried to resolve the issue directly with them and only if i did not get it resolved.

I complained about previouse formula of shogun koi food that was breaking apart and sinking for example...and guess what we got a better product whether it was due to complaints or change of manufacturer...who cares.

But that is not the same as saying that Chris Neaves from shogun is a @##$ cause his food his breaking apart.

The company that is being accused regarding the bad product or service might not like it....but thats how the world works. They might come and defend their product or service but they will know if there is something wrong or not. And the more people complain the quicker a solution will be found.

Sorry for using you as a example Chris. I am very happy with your new product and hope you recover soon.

This is my opinion and has no connection to any organisation i might belong to.

I believe in "freedom of speech". However, this forum is not intended to promote freedom of speech at the cost of losing members, upsetting the group as a whole, or causing problems.

Thus, I have a responsibility to ensure that posts which the group (personal views aside) would find upsetting, grossly off-topic or designed to stir or cause trouble (flaming, for example), slander and defamation of character are deleted and members who continually violate this will be banned.

An Administrator must sometimes be ruthless and even sometimes delete posts that he himself approve, or the group is in danger.

On the other hand, "Freedom of thought" should always be allowed on a forum of this nature. Freedom of thought is the right to hold (and post) unpopular thoughts.

I agree with Wayne.

These types of forums should not be policed in a way to protect vested interests at all costs.

It is my opinion that MERCHANTS should only be allowed to punt their products openly if they contribute financially to the forum. The other day I saw a merchant chipping in with his product in a thread that was completely dedicated to a rival product. That type of gorilla marketing should not be tolerated.

Hi Wayne,

Please note - Shogun, in the old formulation and produced at the old factory, NEVER broke apart - even in the development days of 1995. This has created a false impression of Shogun. Some pellets may have sunk from time to time and some people prefered it that way.

The nutritional values have been consistently high with both formulations. Admittedly higher in the new one but that's development.

Kind regards,
Chris

Welcome back Chris! Missed you a lot and wish you a speedy recovery.

Ok, I'm with Wayne here.

Paul - I know you as I know most of the dealers that do post on this forum. I agree 100% that uncalled for personal attacks are a big NO - we have that issue with forums and we need to deal with and we have to keep the development of the hobby at heart.

I however do have to question your ability to stay neutral and objective in industry related matters as the moderator on this forum. This was your baby and you have raised it well - it has grown and currently a very popular site with SA keeprs. However - I've seen your responses to when people sometimes question the quality of the koi you sell or some service related matters and we are all human - for every action there is a reaction - my point being as the sole moderator - will you be able to stay objective on industry related discussions? Please - just a question - not an attack.

Hi Ernst, I do not see it as an attack at all.

I believe that the majority of koi forums in the world are being managed by someone who is in some way related to the koi industry or who has some sort of interest in the industry.

All the major forums in the world are run by dealers who do not allow any advertisement, except for participating dealers, and will delete any form of advertising.

On this forum however, I allow anyone, even my direct competition, to advertise and to respond to anything, including products that we sell.

Show me an Administrator of any koi forum that will be 100% objective.

I have never deleted or edited anything that were said about any koi supplied by me or products that were supplied by me.

As a matter of fact, I have not deleted or edited any posts except for posts by the banned member under discusion together with responses to his posts based on personal attacks on other members and a few other occasions when people requested to delete or edit their own posts.

This puts me in exactly the same position as you are. You are also a dealer for all practical purposes, you are entitled to post your fish on the forum, and you are entitled to respond to reactions. I would not edit or delete or manipulate the responses to your fish or your responses to any of my fish.

I am trying my best to be as objective as possible and not to be biased.

Surely I am also entitled to give my opinion on fish the same as you are.

You referred to

Quote :

I've seen your responses to when people sometimes question the quality of the koi you sell or some service related matters

Kindly point me to such response, as I can not recall such incident.

However, I can show you quite a few incidents where koi of mine was criticised, and I agreed and did not get angry about it.


To be quite honest, I believe the subject of discussion here is rather, when should a member be banned, and was it fair to ban this member because he attacked a fellow member saying that he is a disgrace to SAKKS purely because he believes in a certain filtration system.

I also formally disagreed with this member on the forum, but I respected his viewpoints and it does not require a lot of objectivity to know that he should be protected.

Quote :

This has created a false impression of Shogun.

Sorry that was not the intention. The point that i was trying to make was that we as keepers should be able to raise awareness if we are not happy with a product or service of a company (after speaking to them directly and not getting a resolve) without having to fear that we are going to be banned from the forum.

Getting back to personal attacks. These personal attacks are what makes the novice member scared of posting his koi or question / advice.

I myself in hind sight have been a bit hard on some people regarding their koi...but then again if you ask your koi to be critiqued dont be offended if you get peoples honest opinions.

Admin wrote:

Hi Ernst, I do not see it as an attack at all.

I believe that the majority of koi forums in the world are being managed by someone who is in some way related to the koi industry or who has some sort of interest in the industry.

All the major forums in the world are run by dealers who do not allow any advertisement, except for participating dealers, and will delete any form of advertising.

On this forum however, I allow anyone, even my direct competition, to advertise and to respond to anything, including products that we sell.

Show me an Administrator of any koi forum that will be 100% objective.

I have never deleted or edited anything that were said about any koi supplied by me or products that were supplied by me.

As a matter of fact, I have not deleted any posts except for posts by the banned member under discusion together with responses to his posts and a few other occasions when people requested to delete or edit their own posts.

This puts me in exactly the same position as you are. You are also a dealer for all practical purposes, you are entitled to post you fish on the forum, and you are entitled to respond to reactions. I would not edit or delete your fish.

I am trying my best to be as objective as possible and not to be biased.

Surely I am also entitled to give my opinion on fish the same as you are.

You referred to

Quote :

I've seen your responses to when people sometimes question the quality of the koi you sell or some service related matters

Kindly point me to such response, as I can not recall such incident.

However, I can show you quite a few incidents where koi of mine was critised, and I agreed and did not get angry about it.

Thanks for being open minded about this. Point is we will never know what has been deleted or edited. Lets say this guy you took to court for not paying you for the fish he took from you. It's a horrible story and we all supported you - but lets say that guy deceided to post his side of that story to perhaps give us perspective on what 'really' transpired (I'm just using an fictitious example here) - you have the power to delete that post without any of us ever seeing his side or knowing that it went up in the first place - I'm speculating here and not sure if it's possible to happen.

I'm not going to go search all posts but there was a threat where comments were made about the size and age of koi that was dragged out quite a bit - I could read the under tones going and at least it never got ugly - but emotions were starting to run high.

Most forums has a footnote to indicate when a post was edited or deleted - does this forum engine support such a feature? I'm not sure - maybe it has. Wil be great for tranparency if it has.

It's a big bonus htat you allow people to advertise on this forum - it's very rare and people do benefit a great deal from it. I commend you for that oppertunity for all keepers involved.

Quote :

If i have received a bad product from a company and the service was crap then i should be able to say it BUT only after i have contacted them i tried to resolve the issue directly with them and only if i did not get it resolved.

Hi All

I agree with Wayne on this

But Only after you have contacted them and tried to resolve the issue directly with them and only if you did not get it resolved.

Hi Guys

I know the banned member very well.

He did not hesitate to come to my assistance when needed he drove to my house, A complete stranger at the time, and have since been a few times to assist. In fact we have become rather good friends.

I think he over reacted, yes, but then a very good friend of his suffered huge financial losses due to untrue rumors that was spread.

I understand the person; he is sometimes rather outspoken and very straight and uses words that might not always be acceptable to all. But that is his personality, we cannot change that. I must say he will protect his friends behind their backs, all the time in a very strong way and against any odds.

In my humble opinion he was provoked by some of the postings and replies in that specific topic and other agreed with him of course except the poster. I think the forum has lost a very valuable poster his knowledge of the subject is vast, he is indeed a walking encyclopedia and I think most will miss his input.

I also believe that in our adult world of intelligence the banning of a one year period is extremely harsh and should be reconsidered.

The deleting of posts I don’t have a problem with as said above by others most of us often say things we won’t say again tomorrow.

Many thanks for allowing me

Well Spoken Neville

I agree with your statement.

I'm not sure what went down here, but do know of a case overseas where things were said about a person, and the moderator was asked to remove it as it was defamatory, and chose not to.
This person took legal action against the forum and the whole forum was closed down, so sometimes its necessary to delete defamatory remarks. JMO.

Let me post here ... although it is against my better judgement but then again it might be of value.

With a long career in forum management that spans the time of bulletin boards this scenario that is now playing out is a well known one and I have seen it many times on many forums and I currently administer three forums of which one gains more new members per day than what this forum collects in posts per month.

I administer forums because of my skills and experience and not because I have any vested interest in the forums.

Impartiality is rated extremely high by forum communities and contrary to modern political trends, forums that really grow and thrive do not have an inkling of democracy in their management structures.

I am not informed of the real facts that plays in this scenario but from the content of this thread it would appear that Paul banned a member because of bad conduct and now that member is on another forum smearing Paul. At the same time the banned member do have friends and foes here.

This is a well known scenario in forum management circles. Usually rival Administrators will have an understanding amongst them not to allow these cross border attacks because it can ignite fires on your own turf.

There are a few simple things that management must try and stay true to in order to retain forum credibility;

1. Be very careful with deletes, actually, avoid them at all costs. (On all the forums I administer we remove the right to delete posts from all members. On some forums the right to EDIT is also managed and it expires after a certain period of time.)

2. If you have to delete ... rather lock it so that all can still see what happened but if you must delete, rather move it to a secured section and don't delete.

3. Do not enter into any debate on bannings. It leads nowhere and usually ignites another storm.

4. Do not follow an angry poster around the web and try and make your point ... it never works in your favour because you are then seen as the stalker. Let your reputation speak for you.

5. 98% of all banned members will sneak back and re-register from a different account or ISP environment because it just kills him that he can no longer participate.

6. Point 5 is why you must not do point 3 because it thrills the banned member to see he is important enough to be the topic of a debate.

PS ... Paul feel free to delete this if you want ... I will have zero hard feelings about it.

Quote :

Ernst wrote: you have the power to delete that post without any of us ever seeing his side or knowing that it went up in the first place - I'm speculating here and not sure if it's possible to happen.

Technically I have the power, but as I already said, I have not done so except for the few mentioned. There are a few members who download the site to their harddrive to enable them to browse offline. Therefore I would definately not say I have not while I actually did.

In respect of your reference to the guy who did not pay, I thought and still believe its was in the interest of the members to know the facts because he offered fish to members while he allege that his fish has KHV, and other member/s sold fish to him on credit. I informed this guy that I am posting the incident, and he was and still is welcome to respond on the forum.

This goes for the banned member also. He is welcome to respond to allegations via E-mail which I will post, provided it complies with the rules laid down on the information page.

Being an attorney, I would not post anything that I can not proof in a court of law.

I agree with Neville. We have lost a valuable and knowlegable member. We actually got along very well, it is not a personal issue.

However, I can not bend the rules applicable to all for one specific member purely because he is valuable.

Hi Collin and Ernst


I share your views and some made to me “offline”.

I followed the particular posting and from the inset decided not to take part, (which I later did, one just gets drawn into these things) as the provocation in this and the other similar posting was very clear and I got the feeling that the regular poster was challenged here, and man you don’t do that to my friend. Especially taking history in consideration. He will react.
The unfortunate part is that the moderator never saw, or then chose to ignore this. His early intervention (with a caution posting maybe) may have avoided this whole issue.

I have unfortunately run out of time for now and will be back