Is anyone in charge ???

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Thu 21 Nov, 2013 10:00 pm

tilly wrote: Hi phill I for one know how much work you have done over the years and the posts you have put on Secret Leeds.I dont think anyone could accuse you of doing anything to upset the site keep up the good work. Keep your powder dry. Thanks mate, this is what makes S.L the good site it is.Cheers

edlong · Post by **edlong** » Fri 22 Nov, 2013 2:49 pm

Phill, I've obviously upset / offended you and given the impression that my post was specifically criticising you. Neither was intended, and I apologise that my post came over that way, especially in light of other edits to the thread. It was intended as a more general observation than it came over as.I'd also like to extend my apology to anyone else similarly narked by what I posted.ed

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Fri 22 Nov, 2013 5:12 pm

edlong wrote: Phill, I've obviously upset / offended you and given the impression that my post was specifically criticising you. Neither was intended, and I apologise that my post came over that way, especially in light of other edits to the thread. It was intended as a more general observation than it came over as.I'd also like to extend my apology to anyone else similarly narked by what I posted.ed Thanks very much Ed, It's much appreciated and I respect your ability to aplogise, it's a rare trait to see these days on the internet indeed. Thank you. It was just the fact I really only made a light hearted joke about not being able to the scantily clad girl. How did I get to see her, and blaming my browser add on's (I won't mention the word) as the reason why. Then I offered what I thought was good practical advice afterwards. I just felt painted in a bad light, having an irresponsible manner and detrimental to the good of the site then. Anyway that's all sorted now, and thanks again, It's no probs at all

Post by **cnosni** » Fri 22 Nov, 2013 7:35 pm

Are we happy to close this thread?

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Fri 22 Nov, 2013 7:42 pm

cnosni wrote: Are we happy to close this thread? Fine by me, I'd even suggest deleting the whole thing if others agree?It's pretty much dead as far as the original spam has gone. just to keep the site de-cluttered?

tilly · Post by **tilly** » Fri 22 Nov, 2013 9:50 pm

Good idea.

Post by **tyke bhoy** » Sat 23 Nov, 2013 9:00 am

Maybe the thread should be closed for further comment but the original question was valid even without the original context and DSCO provided a comprehensive answer including repeating the complaint protocol. So why should it be removed?

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Sat 23 Nov, 2013 11:40 am

tyke bhoy wrote: Maybe the thread should be closed for further comment but the original question was valid even without the original context and DSCO provided a comprehensive answer including repeating the complaint protocol. So why should it be removed? Because it wastes bandwith and clutters the site.???All you need are a few basic guidelines laid out, no need to clutter threads up with it?

Post by **dsco** » Sat 23 Nov, 2013 12:05 pm

Right folks I am going to close this thread because I don't feel it's contributing much if anything to the site. Thanks for the words of support from everyone.