quote:

ORIGINAL: Wrongun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puzzle

It makes no sense to sensor discussion of some labs but not others, that's why MT gets abuse, or used to. The only exception should be if a lab is believed to be particularly untrustworthy, in which case the a mod should say... this lab is not to be trusted. I remember when MT would simply delete UKB threads or posts as if the product was faeces, yet allowed the discussion of BD as it was ambrosia. I don't know if things have changed but back then the quality of information on here was poor.

Perfect example of why we should not allow any.

It really cracks me up when this accusation comes around. If we take the UKB discussion when you looked at the ''home board'' they had banners all over it advertising it and all was great. Any other brand was discussed it was deleted, member banned end of story.

The same people connected then used to flood this board having the same argument

Then its fogotton how other labs such as WC were allowed to post lab tests and discussion when the same boards that are so impartial banned them day 1.

But MT is the impartial one LOL

This is exactly why i would vote no UGL discussion whatsoever as this sort of accusation could not keep coming around

Not singling you out but the UKB debate really winds me up as you can search the database and find threads you can also see ones that are locked where the ''impartial ones'' who were behind the lab and owned boards that advertised it were offering their advice of how good it is.

Really do not want this thread to decline into one lab is better than another and really can not see how it has come up yet again

Wrongun!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puzzle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wrongun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puzzle

It makes no sense to sensor discussion of some labs but not others, that's why MT gets abuse, or used to. The only exception should be if a lab is believed to be particularly untrustworthy, in which case the a mod should say... this lab is not to be trusted. I remember when MT would simply delete UKB threads or posts as if the product was faeces, yet allowed the discussion of BD as it was ambrosia. I don't know if things have changed but back then the quality of information on here was poor.

Perfect example of why we should not allow any.

It really cracks me up when this accusation comes around. If we take the UKB discussion when you looked at the ''home board'' they had banners all over it advertising it and all was great. Any other brand was discussed it was deleted, member banned end of story.

The same people connected then used to flood this board having the same argument

Then its fogotton how other labs such as WC were allowed to post lab tests and discussion when the same boards that are so impartial banned them day 1.

But MT is the impartial one LOL

This is exactly why i would vote no UGL discussion whatsoever as this sort of accusation could not keep coming around

Not singling you out but the UKB debate really winds me up as you can search the database and find threads you can also see ones that are locked where the ''impartial ones'' who were behind the lab and owned boards that advertised it were offering their advice of how good it is.

Really do not want this thread to decline into one lab is better than another and really can not see how it has come up yet again

Wrongun!

There were ten times the number of BD sellers around than UKB sellers, that's for sure, so I'm not sure about that argument. And another board being partial is no reason for MT to be partial. I'm not sure that I brought this topic up, I think you did, to be fair. Yes, it was yonks ago, but we have here the same mods as we did then. And it wasn't an accusation in the manner you suggest, it's simply an expression of annoyance from someone who was seeking impartial opinion from somewhere that he expected would allow free expression but for whatever reason did not.

Should MT allow UG discussion... Does it help us know what's good and what's not? I'm not certain, but it's probably better than nothing. If you allow any discussion of UG brands, you necessarily have to expect some partial posting, which obviously dilutes the integrity of a thread, but deleting threads on mass simply dilutes it further.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mad_cereal_lover

Good post Wrongun!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puzzle

It makes no sense to sensor discussion of some labs but not others, that's why MT gets abuse, or used to. The only exception should be if a lab is believed to be particularly untrustworthy, in which case the a mod should say... this lab is not to be trusted. I remember when MT would simply delete UKB threads or posts as if the product was faeces, yet allowed the discussion of BD as it was ambrosia. I don't know if things have changed but back then the quality of information on here was poor.

I would say in response to this people are very quick to make accusations of favouritism and hidden agendas for why threads are locked/deleted, but then they do not consider that maybe, just maybe the mods aren't backing a certain lab for alterior motives, but they know for a fact that certain people who post are connected with said lab and/or they know for a fact the lab set-up is poor, ie. kitchen job. Will not name names of UG labs, but there are several which it was quite obvious who was behind/working for these labs and the set-up was no more than a kitchen - and that is not something anyone in their right mind (unless connected with said lab) would want to encourage or promote, is it?!

You don't see what goes behind the scenes and more often than not several mods know from IPs and usernames people use on other boards as well as through well connected people that certain people are associated and connected with certain labs, and as we want to be fair and impartial and not get into that minefield of UG lab wars, the best option in threads like that is delete and/or lock. However on very few occasions are the offenders instantly banned, unlike other smaller boards who do clearly have an agenda LOL!

Sometimes it just needs to be considered that things are known that regular members don't know and no its not a conspiracy that threads are locked, although many people would like that to be the case as its much more interesting than the boring truth that actually MT doesn't have connections with any lab.

mcl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Genics

might have been more BD sellers about but BD wasn't knocked up in Mr * kitchen (all this in the know will know who * is)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puzzle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wrongun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puzzle

It makes no sense to sensor discussion of some labs but not others, that's why MT gets abuse, or used to. The only exception should be if a lab is believed to be particularly untrustworthy, in which case the a mod should say... this lab is not to be trusted. I remember when MT would simply delete UKB threads or posts as if the product was faeces, yet allowed the discussion of BD as it was ambrosia. I don't know if things have changed but back then the quality of information on here was poor.

Perfect example of why we should not allow any.

It really cracks me up when this accusation comes around. If we take the UKB discussion when you looked at the ''home board'' they had banners all over it advertising it and all was great. Any other brand was discussed it was deleted, member banned end of story.

The same people connected then used to flood this board having the same argument

Then its fogotton how other labs such as WC were allowed to post lab tests and discussion when the same boards that are so impartial banned them day 1.

But MT is the impartial one LOL

This is exactly why i would vote no UGL discussion whatsoever as this sort of accusation could not keep coming around

Not singling you out but the UKB debate really winds me up as you can search the database and find threads you can also see ones that are locked where the ''impartial ones'' who were behind the lab and owned boards that advertised it were offering their advice of how good it is.

Really do not want this thread to decline into one lab is better than another and really can not see how it has come up yet again

Wrongun!

There were ten times the number of BD sellers around than UKB sellers, that's for sure, so I'm not sure about that argument. And another board being partial is no reason for MT to be partial. I'm not sure that I brought this topic up, I think you did, to be fair. Yes, it was yonks ago, but we have here the same mods as we did then. And it wasn't an accusation in the manner you suggest, it's simply an expression of annoyance from someone who was seeking impartial opinion from somewhere that he expected would allow free expression but for whatever reason did not.

Should MT allow UG discussion... Does it help us know what's good and what's not? I'm not certain, but it's probably better than nothing. If you allow any discussion of UG brands, you necessarily have to expect some partial posting, which obviously dilutes the integrity of a thread, but deleting threads on mass simply dilutes it further.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puzzle


That's exactly the sort of opinon that members need to be allowed to voice and to read. And that's why we should allow UG lab discussion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dazc

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puzzle


That's exactly the sort of opinon that members need to be allowed to voice and to read. And that's why we should allow UG lab discussion.

and your posts are the ones that the board owners and mods get sick of, and will lead to ug lab discussion being banned again. If you dont think MT are impartial then dont use the board, its a simple choice really.

MT is one of the few that has never been sponsored by or promoted particular brands, as most other sites have.

dont ruin this board for the rest of us by wasting peoples time again and again with the conspiracy theorys.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puzzle

"lets try and keep this to the original intent of the topic and not about individual labs!" I know, I will, I have no interest in discussing either for their own sake, I haven't used UKB for years.. two or three, I'm not sure which. I simply raised the names of the labs to illustrate a broader point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puzzle

The line "And another board being partial is no reason for MT to be partial" refers to the fact that you appeared to be comparing this board with other boards.. my point being that just because the information here may be better doesn't make it perfect. I would have been better has I said .... no reason for MT to appear to be impartial, but I'm sure the message was clear nevertheless. I said, did I not, that I wasn't making accusations, so please read what I've said and stop being so sensitive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Genics

might have been more BD sellers about but BD wasn't knocked up in Mr * kitchen (all this in the know will know who * is)