r11co

LOL - any excuse to give those pics another outing. Show 'em the blowtorch shots.

First post and straight in with the questions! At least he didn't say 'who has the best Sub' (but then I reckon you would have had to have done at least a little research to think about asking that one]. To the OP some advice - 'full Swiss Grade one' is meaningless unless you purchase a genuine watch. Have a good look around. Read some posts and get a feel for what's real and what's marketing puff. Then peruse our 'collectors' (are we still using that euphemism?!)

Apart from not being able to get past the login page at all initially, I'm noticing a massive speed increase since the upgrade. Massive as in I now can actually use the forum again instead of getting every second page timing out....

Anyone who claims to know me will also know I've always been an Oris fan, but I draw the line at this.... linky Check the spec - 51mm case! This one's gotta be titanium as otherwise it'd drag your wrist behind you. S'pose a rep is on the cards as the movement/datewheel/hand work has already been done with the Carlos Coste (which this is the replacement for...)

And here's me back in the rep world after 2 year's sabbatical... I see nothing really changes..

I didn't say I was leaving, I just said I had nothing further to add to the discussion. There's no 'new' information at that link. I was just reminding Ken of something that must have slipped his mind....

Link! (OK, so I got the date wrong - it was November and not January. I hadn't realised Ken had been on my back for that long....)

OK - here's some of the holes that are missing from that Swiss cheese. About January of this year Ken took a unilateral decision to censor a post I made in reply to a certain member of RWG who shall remain nameless who was giving provably false information to a newbie. I published the proof, but Ken objected to what he perceived was unfair criticism of the member proffering the information, so made my post 'invisible' yet left the false info to stand. This sent alarm bells ringing with me and I started to wonder if there was some sort of arrangement between Ken and the member-who-shall-remain-nameless, so I brought it up in the 'other place'. After much heated discussion, Admin agreed openly in the 'other place' that a mistake had been made and I should not have been censored, and moreover if a single moderator feels they have to take action swiftly against disputing members then both posts should have been pulled until such a time the mod team got a chance to discuss it. So, to put it another way Ken got an indirect slap on the wrist. I received an apology from Admin for the incident. Since then Ken has had it in for me, and as anyone can see from his following me around like a guard dog, has taken every opportunity to turn contentious any and every post I make. Some people might call it goading. I argued my case strongly (as I do) and justice was done, yet this is what now seems to be getting objected to. It doesn't seem to matter if someone is right or wrong - more that they don't offend the sensibilities of the people who think they are exclusively in charge. These are my last words on the subject.

What an utter conceit! Do you realise how ridiculous the above statement sounds?! Spot on Andreww. Members who were around at the time would have noticed (and Reg has since alluded to) how TTK's account status jumped back-and-forth from green to red several times as events ensued. There is a history of moderators acting unilaterally in events without first seeking consensus from the mod team. One such occasion is how relations between us were destroyed Ken!! I even managed to get an apology from T for that incident.

Which is what should have happened at the very beginning of his ban The delay in doing so served to sully Neil's name in a way he had no control over.

Hear here! As I said, the man himself can't read what is being said here any more, so expressing gripes in this forum is simply shouting at the wind - a point that maybe you should be stressing Ken. I would like to know what benefits you think can be derived from permitting more impotent shouting from members about him behind his back?

Q. Why did you pay extra for 'UK routing'?! A. To avoid possible customs seizure?! Q. Was the watch seized?! A. No. Q. Ultimately, what would have been different about the end result from your point of view? A. None. That's the gamble with insurance! Maybe next time you should save on the insurance, go to one of the other 'trusted' dealers and buy their waterproofing service with the saving (notwithstanding the watch will be more expensive to begin with). As for losing your appetite for the watch - since when was that the fault of the person that sold you it?! This really is clutching at straws now. PS. If you really have an issue - talk to the man directly. No point in griping here as he can't see you......

Cheap (and distasteful) diversionary tactic, Ken You should perhaps follow the advice in your own signature.

At least I am transparent about where my loyalties lie.....

Anything and everything to do with Neil. One would almost think he's riled you somewhat.....

Methinks you doth protest too much!!

It's nice to see Jay being a leader in the market. Long term members here will know I've always been a proponent for decent Oris reps. Out of the three Jay currently has, the standard TT3 chrono is probably the most accurate as the case material is correct (the other two even say 'titanium' on the back ). The dial is a bit of a disaster though, with the smaller digits still way too large and the fake carbon-fibre weave.

We don't know if he did or not! All we have is supposition by association.

Are we rewriting history now? Should I call JTB and ask him who it was set up RWGII and what that person's involvement was in other forums before that? Discreditation is being used as a tactic here. I am stating facts. This thread begins with an allegation. It may be true, it may not. It may be that someone is simply interpreting something one way. What is true though is that we are not party to what it is we have been given the interpretation of, and shouting down someone for pointing that out stinks to high heavens.

When and where did I say that, Ken?!

What? That allegations were made and the person accused was banned before getting a chance to reply? That is exactly what happened. Any other conclusions are your own.

What I'll remind you all of here is that we have allegations of threats swiftly followed by a ban denying the accused the right of reply. Some peoples' silence can be bought. Others who have integrity and refuse to cowtow have to be gagged and their credibility destroyed.

Please let me take the spin off that story for those who are maybe late to the party and are not aware of the history and background of the "4 out of the 5" major rep fora. To be banned from RWGII (ie. here) and TRC does not count as two separate offences for they are owned and run by the same person (despite attempts to whitewash over that fact during the recent 'crippler' scam). As for RWG I, that was a rudderless ship abandoned and heavily criticised by almost all who are original signatories here (including Neil) because it was the subject of a massive scam of its members by its AWOL admin (which is the reason why Admin, already the admin of TRC, decided to establish this place), so to be banned from it hardly counts as a demerit. This bears keeping in mind. This does indeed go deeper than meets the eye, and believe me folks you are not being told the whole story. The decision to ban Neil will indeed make it difficult for him to resolve issues with members here, and for that RWG must take some responsibility. This action can and should be interpreted as a punitive and tactical one in order to make Neil appear in a worse light, and that is exactly what is going on here. There is a possibility that by making this post I too will suffer a similar fate ie. censorship, banning and besmirching.