Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

OCV octaviar limited

But wait, there's more, page-2

First 2 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
2CentsWorth

39 Posts.

1

01/02/15

14:05

Post #: 14677435
Share

Originally posted by simgrund ↑

[ Simgrund, point taken, and I happily stand corrected. ] 2 CentsWorth

Hello 2CW,
Thanks for your sensible re-examination of this forum’s tricky labyrinths.

Let’s then give a trial run to suggestion by seamisty as indicated:
“…… those that report PIF/OCV posts to be moderated should also be made
to post their reasons why on the related PIF thread before the post is moderated?”
--------------------------------------------
Version 1.
if required to provide reasons “before the post is moderated”

-- I am posting this explanation regarding my intent to REPORT to Moderators
on post by xxxx of xxxx date and xxxx number.
My reasons are xxxxxxxxx, and especially xxXXczxxY.
I hope the moderators will act on this report and it’s a relief for me to expurgate
this issue from my system.

Comment: moderators may not act on the REPORT and the “Honest Poster”
will wear her/his non-event to their detrimental worst.

Version 2
if “should be made to post” (a coersion?) subsequent to REPORTing
and the Target Post is removed

-- These are my reasons for reporting to moderators this post:
xxxxx; Xxxxx (and so on). I am pleased to see it removed from public view.

Comment:
the “Honest Poster” will wear her/his dob-in-event to their detrimental worst.

Version 3
-- Run the original idea past HC Administration to see if they are prepared to deal
with inflated traffic in posts and added burden of catch-up courses in Graces of Patience.

Version 4
-- If it ain't broken...; IOWs leave things as they are.
--------------------------------------------
Any refinements to above versions?
And let's keep awareness of HotCopper fine guidelines on Expletive Reticence?
After all, we are Australians!

Cheers,

-------------------------------------------------------
Worry not Where Worry is not Warranted.

Expand

Hi Simgrund,

I think your offering of Version 1, carries the crux of Seamisty's suggestion, and I would be
quite happy to go with that.
Not only does this method give the original "POSTER" a chance to offer rebuttal,
it also provides them with an opportunity, after having read and digested the complainant's
POST, to remove the Offending Post themselves, thus relieving a Moderator of the need for
any action at all. This may also turn out to be, a Face-Saving move all around.

Do any of the versions you've offered, curry favour with yourself as yet?

OCV Price at posting: 0.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply

Top Stories

SPR

Spartan sniffs 126g/t gold ahead of resource upgrades at WA's Dalgaranga

OCC

Orthocell shares jump on record revenues from sales of collagen bone repair devices globally

MSB

Mesoblast resubmits US FDA application for approval of Ryoncil in children with graft vs host disease; shares dip -4%

PL3

Patagonia looks to raise $2.15M for South American exploration and development

SRL

Scandium a priority metal for Sunrise as it plans feasibility update at Syerston