Most of Gurkins posts were left untouched. His posts that were deemed inappropriate/ harmful to the forum atmosphere were deleted. Where as the previous person to get banned (Gekko) had all of his posts deleted. So he was pointing out that difference. Inappropriate posts are going to be deleted, I wouldn't consider Mark statement to be a lie. When a customer comes in making tons of short tempered demands most people would have no problem with said customers being thrown out because said customers aren't respectful. In fact they tend to prefer it, that way things aren't being slowed down unnecessarily and the community that likes the service can continue it's natural flow.
you can do as you please on neu forum. As I have shown there are many more inaccuracies than that.
"Most of Gurkins posts were left untouched." Is a VERY different statement to "His posts remain however"
"His posts that were deemed inappropriate/ harmful to the forum atmosphere were deleted" There was only 1 post deleted, shortly before ban. (unless you know better, dont imply there were multiple, as this would suggest a repeatedly troublesome sort of user. there is no suggestion that is the case) (Same deletion/ban for NomadBR but this has not been mentioned on neu forum)
" (Gekko) had all of his posts deleted" You KNOW this is not true. there is one post left as you correctly informed neu forum
"So he (Mark) was pointing out that difference." So gurkin had 1 post deleted, Gekko had all BUT 1 deleted and the way to express this is to say "His posts remain however" I dont buy that.
"Inappropriate posts are going to be deleted" How is this 1 post* so inappropriate? (except it is a reply to captain Dan "Dank" Kaufman. Could he not defend himself against such minor dissent?) (*re posted below for clarity)
"I wouldn't consider Mark statement to be a lie." Well I certainly dont consider it to be true and Feel Mark KNEW it to be so, (explained post May 27)
I do feel it is "deceitful" at best. (my personal opinion only)
*here is the deleted post again, is it really material for banishment? A little bit uppity maybe
-----------------------------------------
gurkin
< 1m
dank
hi @dank welcome to the forum.
it is not fair to dump all that on @NomadBR. he is only one person who would have liked a simple explanation weeks ago.
others have used the word shady. this question, and others about the team, have been kicking around for ages. 11 days ago @Sandrine said you would come back on this.(thats probably the forum average anyway!)
@NomadBR quotes are in the main from the fyc/government.web site, i think, so were relevant to his question, and informative as to why the case was brought.
we have recently discussed asking and answering difficult questions here. they are allowed
---------------------------------------
Why pretend this never existed. Probably because other neu forum users would also be stunned by the heavy handedness, had they been told. catch 22.
I have JUST REALIZED gurkin has "@" Dank, NomadBR and Sandrine. They WILL have been sent an EMAIL of this DELETED post! So others did know, as I suspected. hmmm.. the plot thickens?