Shaun thanks,
My apologies for making that assumption. I can appreciate that it may not be politic to discuss the precise details of what went on in Holly's case. In retrospect, I should probably have made this point in entirely general terms. It would have been far more appropriate.
I also apologise if my previous post came across as accusatory. That wasn't my intention when I sat down to write it. I am, and remain, rather confused about how this site is policed, especially the whole public confrontation thing which seem to go against the site guidelines. I'm now possibly more confused, since if the mods are dealing with infringements, then what purpose does public confrontation by members serve?
Anyway, perhaps I could simplify my question and state it in general terms and hopefully open it up for discussion: Is it a good thing that members publicly confront/accuse others of infringements (not critting sufficiently, not being a good enough poet, bumping old threads) or would that be better left to the mods?
Personally I think that leaving this to the mods would lead to a more harmonious site, and that this would be a good thing for participation (which is why I raised it in this thread). I also think mods are far better placed to resolve member infractions effectively than a public confrontation from other members is. I think people's egos are better able to cope with the former than the latter. I accept of course, that there may be something that I'm missing here. I'm genuinely interested in some constructive discussion.
All the best,
Matt
|