Would you for example refer to Keith Chegwin by his full name at all times? Or is it possible that maybe once or twice you've referred to him as cheggers?
I don't recall ever referring to him as anything to be honest - can't stand the man. But he calls himself Cheggers all the time and even had a TV show with that name in the title. If it was called 'The Moylesy Show', I might let you have that one.
this whole thread now looks unfriendly due to the tone of peoples responses to something which like you've said, in the grand scheme of life particularly important.
Do you mean it is important, or it isn't? What I said is that while such things are unimportant when you consider the bigger picture, they are important in the context of this forum - they are what it exists for.
If you were new to this forum would you looking forward to posting your views when people reply in the manner they have?
When I first joined here I got the same treatment. I got accused of plugging a rival radio show (I have no recollection of what or who) and of being offended on behalf of others because of some complaint I made about Mills. But I quickly learned what is expected on this forum, cos I'm not an idiot, and thus I am still here.
If it annoys you so much couldn't you as a moderator choose to avoid this little 'storm in a teacup' by changing his post and politely sending him a pm asking him to use his proper name?
I wouldn't do that cos snazy isn't doing anything that contravenes the rules. It isn't my policy to edit people's posts, apart from fixing broken links, quotes or pics, unless they specifically ask me to. But as Chris (Harris) recently pointed out in the Dave & Jayne thread, we are largely self-moderating here - when people do something that others don't like, they will quickly get told about it, and that's what you are seeing.
didn't really want to weigh in again since the whole point of the thread has been sorted..
Go Toph.
chrismoyles.net
