Teachers pet900Fantrider wrote:Nice move Dave! Twice in a week really takes the piss! Thanks for getting rid even if it looks like Im sticking my nose up your arse :sick: :sick: :sick:Treadtrader wrote:I agree with the many complaints recieved.
Not needed on this forum.
cheers Marc
I think under those circumstances, I would have done the same. Nothing wrong with not wanting to do business (touch) with the check in guy.Throttled wrote:I would be interested to know the justification for doing a runner from various campsites. I don't see how vandalising a room necessarily gets back at the person who went in to it. It would also affect others completely innocent to what took place.
I have done a runner, with a friend from a little hotel in Madrid. A young guy checked us in and took our details. That night I was woken up by someone banging on the hotel door (we were next to it) and I eventually got up and let the person in, another younger guy. In the morning we could not find any staff at all. After a shower and some breakfast I went to where we had been checked in and found the door slightly open. I pushed it open to find the guy who had checked us in on all fours on the floor being given one up the arse by the guy I had let in during the night. We ran away and never paid.hmy:
reading just the original post, true story or not, the maid was exactly my first thought.Sopwith Camel wrote:Ok my 2 pence worth....
So someone went into your room, set the alarm off and then left quickly!
So did it ever enter your tiny little brain that it could have been one of the follow...
.......The cleaner......
Generic response:-Jim Lovell wrote:I can still access his profile page, thought if you are banned thats not possible.
Does he need to be banned or just a warning. :unsure:
He wasn't here to discuss or impart knowledge. He was here to troll for his own amusement. Just look at his replies.Still Gotta Pulse wrote:Generic response:-Jim Lovell wrote:I can still access his profile page, thought if you are banned thats not possible.
Does he need to be banned or just a warning. :unsure:
This is one of the problems with forums unfortunately. A low count poster, or newcomer speaks their opinion/experience, the collective disagree and it turns into a kangaroo court.
Why does the label 'Troll' have to come up whenever somebody posts something that arguably appears objective to others?
The post in itself was harmless, it is the sequence of responses that creates the problem.
The OP then turns the table and gives the same back which in turn results in a ban.
The unfortunate thing with forums is that when people get to be familiar with one another, whether that be by online communications or ride outs it starts to form a clique and it just takes one unknown person to say the wrong thing and each clique in turn finds a convenient bench on the bandwagon to have their turn at throwing playground words.
In case some of you hadn't realised there is a real world taking place whereby people DO have alternative opinions, they DO say things to provoke a reaction and they DO have as much entitlement as anybody else to express their opinion/experiences. Some of those people will be people you have met for the very first time. Are they all trolls in the real world?
To provoke a reaction on a subject shouldn't strike fear into people, it should open a doorway to communications and debate.
The personal insults thrown by some in relation to the OPs unknown private life are far more deserving of a ban than the OP in this instance.
The forum is what you make it. This means that if YOU tag onto a thread that you disagree with and assist, yes assist, the degeneration of that thread , in some cases from the initial response onwards, then it is YOU (collectively) that gives the forum the impression it may or may not have to others.
I did look at his replies , did you look at the replies that he replied to?rlkat wrote:
He wasn't here to discuss or impart knowledge. He was here to troll for his own amusement. Just look at his replies.
Hence my comment.Still Gotta Pulse wrote:Generic response:-Jim Lovell wrote:I can still access his profile page, thought if you are banned thats not possible.
Does he need to be banned or just a warning. :unsure:
This is one of the problems with forums unfortunately. A low count poster, or newcomer speaks their opinion/experience, the collective disagree and it turns into a kangaroo court.
Why does the label 'Troll' have to come up whenever somebody posts something that arguably appears objective to others?
The post in itself was harmless, it is the sequence of responses that creates the problem.
The OP then turns the table and gives the same back which in turn results in a ban.
The unfortunate thing with forums is that when people get to be familiar with one another, whether that be by online communications or ride outs it starts to form a clique and it just takes one unknown person to say the wrong thing and each clique in turn finds a convenient bench on the bandwagon to have their turn at throwing playground words.
In case some of you hadn't realised there is a real world taking place whereby people DO have alternative opinions, they DO say things to provoke a reaction and they DO have as much entitlement as anybody else to express their opinion/experiences. Some of those people will be people you have met for the very first time. Are they all trolls in the real world?
To provoke a reaction on a subject shouldn't strike fear into people, it should open a doorway to communications and debate.
The personal insults thrown by some in relation to the OPs unknown private life are far more deserving of a ban than the OP in this instance.
The forum is what you make it. This means that if YOU tag onto a thread that you disagree with and assist, yes assist, the degeneration of that thread , in some cases from the initial response onwards, then it is YOU (collectively) that gives the forum the impression it may or may not have to others.
