So guessing open discussion is taboo?

Simply put.

Macca et al have had their questions answered. They continued to ask the same questions after they had been given the answer. Does anyone else wonder why they keep asking the same question, after they have been given the answer?

There is, as you say, an official route to making changes to the class rules. These changes would then be voted on by CLASS MEMBERS and if approved, would become part of the F16 class rules.

I believe there is already an

Open Forum

at the top of this page. If you are not a F16 class member and want

Open Debate

, I suggest you go there.

This is the

F16 forum

, and if it were up to many of us F16 owners, it would be for

F16 Class memebers only

.

Are the real trouble makers just some Taipan 4.9 owners who are mad there is now a F16 class? I don't get it. Maybe you need a

Taipan 4.9 forum

? Ask Mary, I'm sure she will add one for you.

Many questions have been asked and answered, so many times over, it is all getting a bit old, considering these guys are not even F16 owners, I think the F16 class members have been more than accomodating here.

Timbo, you really don't want this discussion moving to the open forum. And deleting a thread because you don't like its direction or the author, NEVER a good idea. If you can't handle conducting fleet business in an open forum or with non-class members then move it to an email distribution list. But, with your current moderation practices it looks like you're saying 'If you can't think like us(moderators) then piss off'.

Hmmmm.... wonder if this will get deleted...

Ding, I agree, I'm not a moderator and I had nothing to do with removing the thread, I was only trying to point out that the subject has been beaten to death. Personally, I prefered to ignor it rather than delete it. And yes, we should have a private, Member's Only forum somewhere but this one is free and easy so... <img src=

alt=

/>

I'm sure if I went onto the F18 forum, with no F18, and started asking stupid quesions and argueing with the respondants, for like, 200 posts, I would also be invited to leave, and rightfully so.

Free speach doesn't justify stupid speach or arguements just for the sake of argueing. If anyone has a valid question or concern, fine, that's what this forum is for. But if it's instead a hidden agenda masked as a repeating questions, well, that's another matter alltogether.

Timbo, I agree with you my friend and I'm the first to go for a boot in the nuts, but if you are a leader and in this case the moderators are playing that role you have to take the high road. It's been done and been done nicely even on these forums. Mr. Williams and Tracie Van Houten come to mind. Even our good friend Mr. Karr has done it with some nice results.

You remember Mr. Evans?

And if you went to the F18 forum and started asking silly questions and trashing the class... You're an F16 sailor and we know you just don't know no better. No goofy icon's, you figure it out if I'm joking or not.

That's exactly why I was in favor of leaving the thread alone and just ignoring it, that way all can see who the Jackasses are.

You can tell I'm not joking...

David,

Nothing is happening to you or your posts right, despite your critique ?

There is a pretty high threshold in place for the moderators to step in. The currently moderated posters had to

work it

hard for over 3 months to get their repeatitive posts locked and deleted. If any of them post a message with a totally unrelated topic to the ones they were disciplined on or in a totally different manner then those posts won't be locked or deleted.

Seems to me that therefor the open discussion is still pretty much supported on this forum.

Wouter

A thread only has life if let it feed. Threads without merit die and the die without being executed. The moment you use bully tactics is when the movement gains credibility.

Because a subject has been beat to death isn't a reason to delete or lock it. We beat dead horses a lot around here. Do you really think we've had our last debate about Global Warming and Handicap vs. F/1D racing.

And yes, it bugs the [censored] out of me when Mary does it too.

Does what? <img src=

alt=

/>

ding ding ding.... One more round...

Nah!... not right now... BUT

I do agree with you completly on this one!

And, hey, maybe Rick and I will start to bug the class again to allow roller-furling Hooters. But there would be no point if they are going to delete the thread.

Personally, I will miss the weight debate, because I thought the whole discussion was very interesting.

Ok, So i will post here to ensure the thread gets locked or deleted <img src=

alt=

/>

What its still here??

Quick Moderators delete this post <img src=

alt=

/>

Hurry up!!

Your guess is as good as mine. <img src=

alt=

/>

What we have asked are F16 questions in an F16 Forum. This can be taken to the open forum if you like.

Myself and Macca are not Taipan owners.

If the questions we answered satisfatualy, then it would be end of debate.

You have recieved the answers this forum have to offer. If you are not satisfied with those answers you should talk with the GC and especially Phill Brander or Hans Klok as they design, build and race these boats.

Once we start then censoring where does it stop and what happens to the class when we start excluding people just because we don't like their politics? <img src=

alt=

/> The weight issue was all but resolved and the F16 platform was easily defended on it's own merit. There really was really no need to pull the thread other then maybe to save face for Macca. <img src=

alt=

/>

Post deleted by Mary

Here we go again... I'm getting the popcorn and forget the beer. I am going straight to rum shooters.

Cheers,
Neville

I'm sorry, I didn't know it would show my post as being deleted. Bad thread for that to happen in. I was just trying not to interrupt the thread with my silly aside about Buccaneer's signature line. I said that mine would be,

It doesn't matter where you are going as long as you get there.

(I guess I have a cruising mentality.)

Anyway, that is what was deleted, just so you don't think it was something provocative or scandalous. <img src=

alt=

/> It just had nothing to do with the topic of the thread. And now I have made the tangent a lot bigger by having to explain my deletion. Oh, well.

(And Corksfloat was not actually responding to me, he was responding to Buccaneer, I think.)

[quote)(And Corksfloat was not actually responding to me, he was responding to Buccaneer, I think.)

Roger that!

What are you doing over here? Get back into your cage.

Seriously though, deleting stuff is like, well, frustrating...cause I came all the way down here to see what all the fuss was about and now it's gone. I can only cover so much ground.

But seriously, the topic of deleting threads - wouldn't it be better to cut off privileges (temporarily at first) of offending members before wiping out the historical record?

I can't remember stuff well enough to have to deal with deleted stuff. This would be like the time the guy on our local catamaran usergroup started a bunch of fuzz about jet skis and catmarans...see - I don't even remember now....I booted him out of the forum but I never deleted his posts...that way everyone knows WHY he got booted and I can go back to remember that which I have forgotten if I felt so inclined. <img src=

alt=

/>

I know for a fact you do not have rum shooters where you are right now.

I think Jake, and JW for that matter, need to be censored for being too level headed. no fun
<img src=

alt=

/>

Uh yes it does actually.

Noam Chomsky states that:

If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.

Source: In Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, 1992

If we don't believe in free expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.

Source: Interview by John Pilger on BBC's The Late Show, November 25, 1992

restore it from backup. You DO have a backup?

I found what was written by Macca a little distasteful at times and just plain argumentative and wrong at others, and the abusive private mail I received from

SUE

(I still think that name

Sue

should have been

Steve” from Hobie Australia) was actually quite funny, BUT I would defend their rights to post

to the death" (with the possible exceptions of postings of obscene and/or paedophile content)
To delete a whole thread is JUST PLAIN WRONG – an abuse of the “power” entrusted to you as a moderator (moderator means moderation, not dictatorship) with overtones of NAZI logic. Always remember, “A little power corrupts, total power corrupts totally”. Just my two cents worth

Damn it Squirrel, a perfect disguise exposed again!

My contibution to the thread (which was with good intentions) began with me questioning the F16 min weight particularly with reagrds to new boats hitting the water missing their target weight.

There were some very uneducated replies to what I had asked, but some well thought out and structured repies also (most through pm's). After becoming satisfied with the weight issue, my next concern was the potential overuse of exotics in the class.

Once again some very uneducated responses, threads deleted then locked...... no well thought out, structured replies until a recent pm by an experienced industry person. Some points I did not agree on and he was a little grey on himself, but it was enough for me to feel comfortable with where the rules are for now. Shame in a way that the thread was lost as moving through these issues in the right manner can be a real possitive.

Hope to be on an F16 soon...... Just got to sell my current boat.

That's great Stephen. I'm sure you'll be a very welcome addition to the class.