How many people have now got that animated 'Vertigo' poster in their Sig? (1 Viewer)

[Paul_D]

I'm seeing it everywhere - and I swear its in more than 3 or 4 people's sigs. Don't get me wrong, I love it, but can anyone say overkill?

 

[Patrick Sun]

It's just a show of support for Al Brown, who had been banned from the forum for some poorly choiced words at the worst possible time. It's sort of like when a team wears a number patch of a former teammate/employee who's passed away. I think it's sort of neat, but after a while, it might just convince a lot of people to turn off the "display image in signature" option in their profiles.

 

[MickeS]

As much as I appreciate that some people support him, I think campaigns like these don't belong in this forum.

/Mike

 

[TheoGB]

I always thought animated GIFs were banned, anyhow. I know I didn't read that right when I first joined and stuck one in but it didn't show. It wasn't until I saw that bit and changed the image to a JPG that I got an image. Then I got bored of it anyhow!

 

[Paul_D]

A really bizarre thing just happened! I was searching for an old thread about A.I., because I remember some great Al Brown posts that I wanted to save, and the search results came up with nothing under his name! So I searched under A.I., and I found the threads, but the name on Al's posts had been replaced by 'Rich Malloy'?!? Why would he, or anyone else have changed his name? Really bizarre. Even weirder, was the fact that the sig remained intact, with links to 'Al's DVDs' etc... Is it possible that he's still an active poster, just posting under a different name?
Weird huh?

 

[Max Leung]

It sounds like the admins changed his handle to his real name.

 

[Vince Maskeeper]

1) His real name is Rich Malloy, not Al Brown. At some point he agreed to go by his real name on the HTF, so the account was changed- and the script changed all old posts associated with the old name to the new name for the member.

2) Aside from the nonsense that went on with some members- the situation involving Rich was one that had to be sorted out between Rich and the moderator that handled the situation. That problem has now been sorted out, and I assume we'll see Mr. Malloy posting again whenever he is ready to do so. We on the staff are as happy to see him back as anyone else, despite what some here on the forum might think.

3) Hopefully the matter will be dropped- and I would ask in the future that members realize that problems involving mambers and rule violations will be handled by the staff at their discretion. Mounting an unnecessary campaign surrounding a situation that is private will have no influence on that situation, no matter how good your intentions.

-Vince

 

[Bruce Hedtke]

Thanks for the update, Vince. I can understand people wanting to rally behind Rich (I've always thought he was a great Videophile and worth having on the board) but the whole petition and adding his sig was an ill-guided idea. I am glad the whole situation was handled so professionally and that noone else had to lose their accounts over this situation.

Bruce

 

[brian a]

No sure how touchy this is at this point, but can't you say the same thing about studios with P&S or Lucas? They could say we own the product and will deal with it as we see fit, so please don't bother putting together these petitions and e-mail campaigns about it.

We're all consumers of the HTF, and should have some say in how it's managed. At least a voice to ask.

brianca...

 

[Vince Maskeeper]

No sure how touchy this is at this point, but can't you say the same thing about studios with P&S or Lucas? They could say we own the product and will deal with it as we see fit, so please don't bother putting together these petitions and e-mail campaigns about it.

I certainly don't want to sound like I speak for the HTF or the ownership on this issue- but your examples are dealing with raw products. The HTF doesn't necessarily need to bow to all the desires of the members, especially on its right to refuse/suspend membership based upon rule violations- granted some might not like it... In your example companies have to worry about giving customers specifically what they want-- and the HTF ownership is more worried about running the forum they wish to have-- and if that alienates a certain group of posters, so be it.

Again- that's my intrepretation of the situation-- I won't claim to speak for Ron or Parker.

Regardless of their take on things- the point was that this specific situation had a finite and specific solution-- and if 1 person or 10000 people complained- it wouldn't have changed the situation one iota. Until the parties involved resolved their issues- nothing would change. It wasn't an issue that need support rallied- rather the parties involved had to come to terms- and they did. Thankfully all has been resolved.

I guess to draw a better analogy of your arguement above:

Instead of giving P&S just because a large number of the customer demanded it, the HTF chose to present their product as they felt it was best suited.

Thankfully, all has been resolved and we can move on with our lives (or in my case, my lack there of)...

-Vince

 

[brian a]

I see your point. Makes sense to me.

I do think that the analogy is close than you admit, although not exactly the same. It's still saying this is how we're going to do it, if you don't like it you can leave (not buy the product).

By the way, I completely agree with this position, but I think I extend that thinking to more people who take stands that I disagree with than most do.

Glad to see the issue resolved.

brianca

 

[Graeme Clark]

Like we didn't see this coming. :rolleyes