Team Change

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Goodbye coffee flop and Melksham crew.

Posted by Conner. His resignation from an active roll with us here on the Coffeeshop is sad - we'll miss him as a moderator, but the team remains strong and I know that people need to move on to till new ground, and I wish him well for the future.

[Conner]

What a liar, I have not resigned.

He has sacked me because I have gone against his mangement structure which quite frankly is awful.

We no longer have a nice atmosphere here, that was the reason I became a moderator but do you know what, Behind the Counter life is dissilusioned. It is built on unmade promises and although I would have stayed as a moderator it would be to fight for the normal members.

[Conner]

Goodbye all, if you have any sense you will leave with me.

http://www.southwesternlines.co.uk/forums/

A great place, the alternative you may say.

That is where I posted what Graham quoted.


Cheerio.

[TerminalJunkie]

Conner,

I've read your petulant and offensive post on that other forum. You really, really, need to grow up.

[grahame]

I have no problem, at all, with "The Coffeshop" remaining as a friendly place where passengers of FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and staff can discuss issues, and help those who know less that the others with answers.   That's what it was set up for, after all.

There has been some "creep" towards enthusiast banter which is fine, but when it starts to intimidate - whether it's intended to or not - then perhaps it's time for those who want a forum where they can call others a liar or send emails like "you're for it ..." (not conner, but another member from the same grouping) then we should each go the best way for us.

[swlines]

I've already been asked by 2 members for my comments on the situation by email - but I'll put a slightly toned down version here ...

Conner is a good member and his thoughts are simply reflective of the views of quite a few well known other members - being a moderator he was looked up to and given information that a normal member would not normally have been aware of.

I think a fair amount of the comment that was made owing to the downtime issue that this forum has suffered from for at least the past few weeks (if not, two to three months). Nothing more than a small play on words - the latter part of the comment is in reference to the fact that Melksham is mentioned in almost every other post by a certain member (which I, and a few others, have noticed) and it is actually getting quite frustrating especially as continuous campaigning about the same line will not do anything to wards getting a more 'appropriate' service to the line. Melksham is a line completely out of the way from the mainline, there is no easy way to have stock that can be used on other services as well as Melksham. It's also in reference to the heavy campaigning that is made for it (when there could be more worthy causes that would help the entire region, such as just more units full stop) - judging by what is mentioned on there a certain member walked through a train in order to get more people signing up to the pledge - I think the point really is that I'm trying to make here is that if people have a vested interest in increasing the Melksham service they would have already signed the pledge.

[Lee]

Goodbye all, if you have any sense you will leave with me.

http://www.southwesternlines.co.uk/forums/

A great place, the alternative you may say.

That is where I posted what Graham quoted.


Cheerio.

As some of you will know, Tom and I get on very well, and I have a lot of respect for him and what he does. As such, I wish his relaunched forum every success.

Therefore, I find it very sad that Conner has chosen to try and make this a "them vs us" situation, in order to further a personal vendetta against Graham, with whom I also get on very well, and have a lot of respect for him and what he does.

In my view, the two forums/sites have complimented eachother in the past, can do so again in the future, and CANBER^▸ (Campaign Against the New Beeching Report) will endorse both on that basis (link below.)
http://canber.co.uk/?q=node/5

By the way, If you think that the phrase "personal vendetta" is harsh, then it is worth noting that Conner also made the following comment (link below) :
http://www.southwesternlines.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=4

Maybe we should get on to Mookie, another person we can turn against Graham, although he usually does it himself.

Whilst this comment led on from the issues mentioned by Tom regarding Graham's style of campaigning (which people are entitled to their views on), I have to say that I would be annoyed/upset if one of my Global Moderators had said that about me.

We no longer have a nice atmosphere here, that was the reason I became a moderator but do you know what, Behind the Counter life is dissilusioned. It is built on unmade promises and although I would have stayed as a moderator it would be to fight for the normal members.

I dont agree with Conner on this. I'm not disillusioned, and I wouldnt continue with my Global Moderator role if I didnt enjoy it.

[grahame]

I look forward to having a happy atmosphere return in the future.  And actually I feel I have been very measured in my responses.   Everyone posts on their own specific area and how it relates to the rest; I think some 4% of public posts on "The Coffeeshop" are mine and - yes - the will look at the TransWilts case and compare it where it's relevant.

Can we move on, please, folks?
 

[FarWestJohn]

All sounds good to me and the right way forward. Good on you.