Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    Extreme vetting which did not vet one of your members already being a member of my Party - does not sound extreme at all.

    Well, apparently those checks have been incompetent against one of those members.

    In order to access vaguely sensitive information which one of my members has had access to.

    Perhaps all of you look at my post above.
    They do not, and I can personally confirm that.

    They do not have an account on the forums.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    In reference to my post, PetrosAC Paracosm have you given approval to Hazzer for having dual-membership?
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _gcx)
    They do not, and I can personally confirm that.

    They do not have an account on the forums.
    They are listed in the OP as being in your Party - that is what adam has specified as being classed as a member of your Party, and thus, they are in two parties - clearly against the rules.

    You yourself this afternoon in a post in that thread have said that they are a member of your party as well.

    Whether or not they have access to your forum, is irrelevant.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Total mess incoming.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    They are listed in the OP as being in your Party - that is what adam has specified as being classed as a member of your Party, and thus, they are in two parties - clearly against the rules.

    You yourself this afternoon in a post in that thread have said that they are a member of your party as well.

    Whether or not they have access to your forum, is irrelevant.
    At least someone is observant , seems your doing the speakers job!
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    adam9317 You've really cocked up here. This is an extremely serious issue - the Tories have now potentially had their subforum privacy breached as a result of your failure to properly assess the situation, which is totally unacceptable. It would have been even more serious if they had been in government. As Socialist CI, I am now not certain that I could trust you to deal with any issue related to our usergroup - for example, a duping scandal - and I would quite like to see you apologise to those involved and explain how you are going to change so that issues like this do not happen in future.

    That said, mobbsy91 should have just done what I did with ByronicHero (who turned out not to intend to actually join the Libers, but who was technically in breach of our dual membership policy anyway), and asked the member in question to leave the Tory UG.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    adam9317 You've really cocked up here. This is an extremely serious issue - the Tories have now potentially had their subforum privacy breached as a result of your failure to properly assess the situation, which is totally unacceptable. It would have been even more serious if they had been in government.

    That said, mobbsy91 should have just done what I did with ByronicHero (who turned out not to intend to actually join the Libers, but who was technically in breach of our dual membership policy anyway), and asked the member in question to leave the Tory UG.
    I had absolutely no idea until this afternoon when I had a proper look - I am also unable to remove them from the UG due to TSR problems, and was also never asked if they could be a dual member. The Speaker should have come to me to confirm before allowing this to happen. (Just like Labour with QQ - see the labour question time thread!)
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    They are listed in the OP as being in your Party - that is what adam has specified as being classed as a member of your Party, and thus, they are in two parties - clearly against the rules.

    You yourself this afternoon in a post in that thread have said that they are a member of your party as well.

    Whether or not they have access to your forum, is irrelevant.
    I am aware.

    Around a week ago, Adam sent all proposed members of the party a private message. This private message contained the two lines:

    Also, if you are currently in another TSR party, please let me know if you intend on leaving it, or being a dual member

    Finally, if you have any other TSR accounts, even non MHOC related, please declare these now!
    Implying that arrangements were to be made, upon the party's formation. I assumed that the speaker had done so, prior to accepting the party formally.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _gcx)
    I am aware.

    Around a week ago, Adam sent all proposed members of the party a private message. This private message contained the two lines:



    Implying that arrangements were to be made, upon the party's formation. I assumed that the speaker had done so, prior to accepting the party formally.
    Well, he clearly did not... (I'm not blaming you for it, it's not your problem to check). As Heri2rs clearly did not declare this, he is in the wrong, and he (not you or your Party) should be sanctioned for it.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    Well, he clearly did not... (I'm not blaming you for it, it's not your problem to check)
    Yes, that is evident now. Have we had a comment from the user in question?
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _gcx)
    Yes, that is evident now. Have we had a comment from the user in question?
    Nope, nor the Speaker who's disappeared upon this mess.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    I had absolutely no idea until this afternoon when I had a proper look - I am also unable to remove them from the UG due to TSR problems, and was also never asked if they could be a dual member. The Speaker should have come to me to confirm before allowing this to happen. (Just like Labour with QQ - see the labour question time thread!)
    Fair enough - I suppose that keeping track of all Tory members is a little harder than keeping track of all Socialist ones
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Fair enough - I suppose that keeping track of all Tory members is a little harder than keeping track of all Socialist ones
    Haha, just a little bit, especially given I can't actually access the list of the members (where I would've kicked him out by now) due to the problems...!
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _gcx)
    I am aware.

    Around a week ago, Adam sent all proposed members of the party a private message. This private message contained the two lines:



    Implying that arrangements were to be made, upon the party's formation. I assumed that the speaker had done so, prior to accepting the party formally.
    Well, that's just proof of Adam's incompetence, he should have been making the checks himself, or expected you to do it rather than the members themselves.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    Haha, just a little bit, especially given I can't actually access the list of the members (where I would've kicked him out by now) due to the problems...!
    TSR's never-ending bugs strike again:rolleyes:
    • Aston Villa FC Supporter
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    It is ridiculous that they can't get them a subforum - how hard really is it?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fallen Star)
    It is ridiculous that they can't get them a subforum - how hard really is it?
    Not very hard based on setting up our off site one
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I have a bad feeling about this, not sure the Speaker has done the right thing here.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    adam9317


    Also, it's worth noting that removing Hazzer (who claims not to be a member), and heri2rs (who should be sanctioned and banned for dual membership without permission), the Party only seems to have 4 members according to the OP of their thread.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by meenu89)
    I have a bad feeling about this, not sure the Speaker has done the right thing here.
    PRSOM

    Aside from ruining the integrity of our Party's subforum...?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.