Hey Chris T...use the search feature...
Jan 16, 2018 08:09:51 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
As long as there are responces, to whatever thread ChrisT initiates, he will not be subdued.
As of this morning, he is doing fine.
As of this morning, he is doing fine.
Chris is doing fine, but the UHH community is not. Don't you get the sense that many valuable contributors are ready to bail?
Jan 16, 2018 08:10:16 #
DavidPine
Loc: Fredericksburg, TX
Absolutely!
Gene51 wrote:
The point is, he is the problem and it should be d... (show quote)
Jan 16, 2018 08:14:30 #
DavidPine wrote:
I stayed away for 30 days, at least, hoping he would vanish. Admin is allowing him to ruin a wonderful site.
Well said, Sir, and you are one of the most valuable contributors.
Jan 16, 2018 08:20:06 #
Peterff wrote:
Chris is doing fine, but the UHH community is not. Don't you get the sense that many valuable contributors are ready to bail?
Yes. Yes. Yes.
Neither Chris T or those who chose to respond to his threads should be censored. We are still adults living un the US.
But, If he is ignored by the community, meaning no responses, he will fade way. If the communities continues to respond, which is a choice, he will be fine.
Atrophy.
Jan 16, 2018 08:24:45 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
Yes. Yes. Yes.
Neither ChristT or those who chose to respond to his threads should be censored. We are still adults living un the US.
But, If he is ignored by the community, meaning no responces, he will fade way. If the communities continues to respond, which is a choice, he will be fine.
Atrophy.
Neither ChristT or those who chose to respond to his threads should be censored. We are still adults living un the US.
But, If he is ignored by the community, meaning no responces, he will fade way. If the communities continues to respond, which is a choice, he will be fine.
Atrophy.
OK, but silence equates to approval. Look at the people that are saying that they're ready to walk. Some of the best among us. Can we afford to let that happen?
How many do we count in that number?
Jan 16, 2018 08:30:19 #
Peterff wrote:
OK, but silence equates to approval. Look at the people that are saying that they're ready to walk. Some of the best among us. Can we afford to let that happen?
No. That would be a disservice to a lot of good people.
But, to censor a person because one doesn't agree, like, or value his opinion; or that the person is obnoxious, is never good.
Who can judge? The Administrator should take control.
Jan 16, 2018 08:40:08 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
No. That would be a disservice to a lot of good people.
But, to censor a person because one doesn't agree, like, or value his opinion; or that the person is obnoxious, is never good.
Who can judge? The Administrator should take control.
But, to censor a person because one doesn't agree, like, or value his opinion; or that the person is obnoxious, is never good.
Who can judge? The Administrator should take control.
Yes, I agree. My personal opinion is that some boundaries should be set, and so long as Chris and anyone else stays within them it should be fine. Chris is clearly pushing the limits to an excessive degree.
I've had my knuckles rapped by admin a couple of times, and justly so, but I have paid attention.
Jan 16, 2018 08:42:08 #
Jan 16, 2018 08:50:15 #
Cdouthitt wrote:
Right now, I'd be happy if (he) just would use the search function.
True, and a good point, but that's about as likely as mirrorless cameras dominating the market in the next five years!
Jan 16, 2018 08:56:19 #
Cdouthitt wrote:
Right now, I'd be happy if just would use the search function.
Chris seeks attention more than he seeks information.
The search button is not his cup of tea.
Jan 16, 2018 08:59:23 #
Peterff wrote:
True, and a good point, but that's about as likely as mirrorless cameras dominating the market in the next five years!
Pipe down you archaic DLSR user...don't you know that they're a dying breed
Jan 16, 2018 09:00:02 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
No. That would be a disservice to a lot of good people.
But, to censor a person because one doesn't agree, like, or value his opinion; or that the person is obnoxious, is never good.
Who can judge? The Administrator should take control.
But, to censor a person because one doesn't agree, like, or value his opinion; or that the person is obnoxious, is never good.
Who can judge? The Administrator should take control.
I don't think we should ban or silence Chris T. The UHH should just not allow him to silence others in his threads so that new comers to the UHH would see arguments on both sides.
Jan 16, 2018 09:14:34 #
DTran wrote:
I don't think we should ban or silence Chris T. The UHH should just not allow him to silence others in his threads so that new comers to the UHH would see arguments on both sides.
Discussing or arguing with him is a waste of "bandwidth". Say the same thing a dozen times, and he will act as though you never said anything if it doesn't fit what he was already thinking.
Jan 16, 2018 09:24:37 #
If we're forced to see his crap, then he should be forced to live without the Ignore button...just sayin'
Jan 16, 2018 09:34:51 #
DTran wrote:
I don't think we should ban or silence Chris T. The UHH should just not allow him to silence others in his threads so that new comers to the UHH would see arguments on both sides.
Why not change the way ignore works by allowing ignored members to post to his threads and just not show them to him? Done.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.