Parker feud, hope this is OK ?

[Robin Garr]

I assure you that I didn't remove my own post. Since you don't know me I'm sure this assurance doesn't help you much.

I have no way to know for sure, M, so I can only rely on intuition. I'm pretty sure Jenise or I didn't remove it, though, so there ya go. It is what it is.

I assure you that I didn't remove my own post. Since you don't know me I'm sure this assurance doesn't help you much.

I have no way to know for sure, M, so I can only rely on intuition. I'm pretty sure Jenise or I didn't remove it, though, so there ya go. It is what it is.

Robin, FWIW here’s another indirect data point for you. The following link to eBob displays a post of mine where I quote David Bueker’s post on your board (Re: Zork closure; Tues Jul 04, 2006 3:05 pm). You might also wish to consider why that post of David’s Tues Jul 04, 2006 3:05 pm appears to be gone from your board now. Go figure?

http://dat.erobertparker.com/bboard/sho ... ost2508129

Quote:
http://www.wine-lovers-page.com/for...175 2&start=72

Re: Zork closure

TimMc : “Firstly, there are no 100% flawless products to be found on this or any other planet and 1% is phenomal given the inherent falablity of man made products.”

by David M. Bueker on Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:05 pm
Quote:
You are so dead wrong I don't even know where to start. I have been in quality control for 16 years, and a 1% is a sure ticket to bankruptcy. Major end producers (e.g. airplane, car, cell phone, appliance...) REQUIRE 99.9+% quality and get rid of suppliers that can't meet it.

In that context, it's only sheepish behavior by consumers (hiding behind tradition is just being someone's fool) that has kept the cork manufacturers in business.

1% sucks.

As truth collides with propaganda
Just another victim on the run”

M. Smith: So David if you're into QC I presume that such practices apply to all closures AND wineries that wish to remain in business ? I'm also heartened to realize that consumers who haven't climbed aboard the anti-cork bandwagon are "sheepish" and "someone's fool." Thanks for the vote of confidence !

My post on eBob was on a thread initiated by David, titled Gosh I Hate Corks (Volume XIII):
http://dat.erobertparker.com/bboard/sho ... dead+wrong

All the best,

Mitch

The only people who have "finger on the button" status (in terms of power to delete or move posts) are Jenise and me.

For the record, there are two ways a post can disappear in this forum. (1) A moderator deletes it or moved it to a private section for review. (2) The individual who posted it removes it himself, for whatever reason.

Hi, Robin, just want to make sure I understood correctly. The first sentence says that only you and Jenise can remove posts while the second, unless I am misinterpreting, appears to say that moderators can also do it.

Robin, FWIW here’s another indirect data point for you. The following link to eBob displays a post of mine where I quote David Bueker’s post on your board (Re: Zork closure; Tues Jul 04, 2006 3:05 pm). You might also wish to consider why that post of David’s Tues Jul 04, 2006 3:05 pm appears to be gone from your board now. Go figure?

Go figure!

How about figgering this? You didn't give the correct URL.

That is why you couldn't find the post you are referring to. No mystery, no team of secret Winston Smith history re-writers.

You could have taken the few moments that it took me to find the missing post instead of immediately assuming that Robin had removed it.

For everyone -- the post is in this thread and on this page viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1898&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=72



Robin does a terrific job of running this forum and allowing us to debate freely. He just doesn't zap stuff.

When will this orgy of thread necromancy end???

(my God, I have now actually posted to this thread . . . . oh well)

Robin, FWIW here’s another indirect data point for you. The following link to eBob displays a post of mine where I quote David Bueker’s post on your board (Re: Zork closure; Tues Jul 04, 2006 3:05 pm). You might also wish to consider why that post of David’s Tues Jul 04, 2006 3:05 pm appears to be gone from your board now. Go figure?

Go figure!

How about figgering this? You didn't give the correct URL.

That is why you couldn't find the post you are referring to. No mystery, no team of secret Winston Smith history re-writers.

You could have taken the few moments that it took me to find the missing post instead of immediately assuming that Robin had removed it.

For everyone -- the post is in this thread and on this page viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1898&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=72



Robin does a terrific job of running this forum and allowing us to debate freely. He just doesn't zap stuff.

Peter, You might wish to chill. Had I modified what is on the eBob post in any fashion, I would be ridiculed for fudging the data. Just because what's on my eBob post no longer works isn't the issue now is it? Why do you think I gave the explicit name and time of the post from David. Is it there now? Lastly, I find it curious that you and David are both "moderators" according to Robin Garr's link:

There's a somewhat larger group of volunteer advisors who are listed on "The Team" page as moderators. But if you'll click "the team" on the main page (or use this link - memberlist.php?mode=leaders [http://www.wineloverspage.com/forum/village/memberlist.php?mode=leaders]- you can see the names of those folks, and you'll also see that only Jenise and I have the color-highlighted status that indicates Magick. (You'll also notice one "anonymous," which is actually a former member who has moved on.)

If I closed my eyes I might feel like I'm experiencing a pile-on elsewhere.

Cheers.

Monsieur Smith.......

I refer to you as monsieur because I have no idea what the "M"used as your initial stands for and "monsieur", after all, is a title of some respect. I do thus, with all due respect, ask you (quite rhetorically I promise) just what is the "big deal" in all of this.

It has been said that to everything there is a time. Perhaps this is the time for you to put aside past grievances, real or imaginary.

As said, rhetorical ......No response required.

Best
Rogov

[Robin Garr]

Well said, Rogov. I'm not piling on, but I'm not going to engage M further in his extensive discussion of what happens to his posts here and on other forums. I don't believe they contribute anything of substance to the forum or to this discussion.

Monsieur Smith.......

I refer to you as monsieur because I have no idea what the "M"used as your initial stands for and "monsieur", after all, is a title of some respect. I do thus, with all due respect, ask you (quite rhetorically I promise) just what is the "big deal" in all of this.

It has been said that to everything there is a time. Perhaps this is the time for you to put aside past grievances, real or imaginary.

As said, rhetorical ......No response required.

Best
Rogov

[Robin Garr]

Hi, Robin, just want to make sure I understood correctly. The first sentence says that only you and Jenise can remove posts while the second, unless I am misinterpreting, appears to say that moderators can also do it.

Confusing choice of terminology on my part, Oswaldo. Only Jenise and I have the power to remove posts. The system refers to the volunteer advisory panel members as "moderators" because of the way we set up the new forum, but all moderators do not have deletion powers.

It doesn't really matter, though: The overriding policy, as I already said, is that we rarely remove posts in this forum, and we explain ourselves when we do, really tells the tale.

[Robin Garr]

Tues Jul 04, 2006 3:05

You are seriously asking about a two-year-old post?

I join Rogov in his comments below, M. You appear to be trolling. Please stop.

No reply needed.

Confusing choice of terminology on my part, Oswaldo. Only Jenise and I have the power to remove posts. The system refers to the volunteer advisory panel members as "moderators" because of the way we set up the new forum, but all moderators do not have deletion powers.

I'm still a little confused, Robin. Does "...but ALL moderators do not have deletion powers" mean that SOME moderators have deletion powers? Or that none do?

Confusing choice of terminology on my part, Oswaldo. Only Jenise and I have the power to remove posts. The system refers to the volunteer advisory panel members as "moderators" because of the way we set up the new forum, but all moderators do not have deletion powers.

I'm still a little confused, Robin. Does "...but ALL moderators do not have deletion powers" mean that SOME moderators have deletion powers? Or that none do?

The only two individuals who have deletion powers are Jenise and Robin. That's it, whatever the rest of the crew is referred to.

The last time I personally moved the thread of a member was a joke you posted because we got complaints about it and Robin was out having surgery, which you'll remember, and you'll remember that I notified you at the time that I'd done so "pending further review by Robin upon his return". I didn't like having to do that but as the acting manager here I erred on the side of caution.

Which, I must admit, Jenise, still has me scratching my head.

Folks, for those of you who weren't there, I used the "polite conversation" words for male and female genitalia, words that would be used in a middle school sex-ed class. You know what they are, one starts with "p" and the other with a "v". Not terribly erotic.

Both before and since that incident I have noted many, many "four-letter" words are allowed to stand here. (Oh, and I have absolutely NO problem with that).

Just a little confused, that's all.

Confusing choice of terminology on my part, Oswaldo. Only Jenise and I have the power to remove posts. The system refers to the volunteer advisory panel members as "moderators" because of the way we set up the new forum, but all moderators do not have deletion powers.

I'm still a little confused, Robin. Does "...but ALL moderators do not have deletion powers" mean that SOME moderators have deletion powers? Or that none do?

The only two individuals who have deletion powers are Jenise and Robin. That's it, whatever the rest of the crew is referred to.

Hey, I just discovered you're a moderator!

]

Hey, I just discovered you're a moderator!

Yes, but I'm only moderately a moderator. Jenise is our immoderate moderator.

[Jenise]

]

Hey, I just discovered you're a moderator!

Yes, but I'm only moderately a moderator. Jenise is our immoderate moderator.

But I almost never use my powers. Therefore I'm a modestly immoderate moderator.

[David M. Bueker]

I'm just plain immoderate.

[Robin Garr]

I'm still a little confused, Robin. Does "...but ALL moderators do not have deletion powers" mean that SOME moderators have deletion powers? Or that none do?

GAK!!! I am just about OVER this digression. Look, folks. Jenise and I have deletion powers. We don't delete without a good reason, and in the very rare case when a "regular" participant is deleted, we explain it in public.

Other members of an advisory panel are shown as "moderator" on the forum software, but that just means they are volunteer helpers.

I am not repeating one word here that has not already been stated in this thread, and I'm befuddled that any of you who are regular participants here can be unaware that deletion of posts by the janitorial staff is a rare and "transparent" thing.

I am befuddled by these follow-up questions, which show me some lack of trust and make me worry that Mr. M's trolling has been more successful than I might have wished among you guys.

One thing that gives comfort to a winemaker: when this thread finally ends, y'all are gonna need a drink!

[Jenise]

Which, I must admit, Jenise, still has me scratching my head.

Folks, for those of you who weren't there, I used the "polite conversation" words for male and female genitalia, words that would be used in a middle school sex-ed class. You know what they are, one starts with "p" and the other with a "v". Not terribly erotic.

Those words weren't really the problem. Rather than involve others, though, and drag this thread out further, I'll explain it by PM.

One thing that gives comfort to a winemaker: when this thread finally ends, y'all are gonna need a drink!

LOL, well said!

One thing that gives comfort to a winemaker: when this thread finally ends, y'all are gonna need a drink!

I've been through 2 bottles of Heart of Gold following this thread already. You're correct I feel nothing and remember less.

One thing that gives comfort to a winemaker: when this thread finally ends, y'all are gonna need a drink!

I've been through 2 bottles of Heart of Gold following this thread already. You're correct I feel nothing and remember less.

You've actually been following the thread? I go through a few posts and then enter a fugue state for a couple of hours- after which I've forgotten what I was doing.

That being said I was at Beaux Freres and talked with Mike Etzel the other day. he told me I just missed Parker by a few hours. So, he tastes at least one Oregon wine, even if he doesn't write about it.

BLOGGERS FACE NEW FTC SCRUTINY
Ξ MAY 21ST, 2009 | → | ∇ A DAY AT A TIME, TECHNOLOGY, WINE NEWS |

http://reignofterroir.com/2009/05/21/bl ... -scrutiny/

Simply FYI everybody. Cheers!