Did 'we' think GD required some reigning in as the rest of the forum appears to be quite sedate?
Feedback on today's announcement
- Thread starter Gilly
- Start date
Did 'we' think GD required some reigning in as the rest of the forum appears to be quite sedate?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
I think the point is that we would like the community to self-moderate more than rely on us to intervene all the time. If the community know what the expectations are and stick to that we'll all have a nicer time here.
But its not for you, its for the other users.
If I wander into a hot thread with a strong debate going on and a few deleted posts, it can only be beneficial for the community if when writing any reply, I know what has been considered acceptable or unacceptable so far in the conversation.
A bunch of 'inappropriate comment' lines tell me nothing.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,819
- Location
- Falling...
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,819
- Location
- Falling...
That's a fair comment. We will endeavour to be more descriptive. However, it can also be rather time consuming to explain every single deleted post - hence why we encourage people to contact the team.
That said, we do post warning posts in threads which largely go ignored.
To be blunt, it looks really good for a forum run by the Russian orthodox church under the supervision of the KGB, but not any forum in the free world. Don't get me wrong all of those rules seems great in principle, but if you applied them to this forum retrospectively then I think at least 99% of members would be banned.
It's a little OTT.
*EDIT*
To point out one specific example:
The is no real definition off what off topic means, it's subjective, some people will complain if a post is off topic just because it mentions something that was not specifically asked/mentioned by the OP but is still of relevance to their post or the thread in general. Some other posters understand that's still OT and even that any discussion will morph and evolve as it progresses.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,819
- Location
- Falling...
So how is it worse than the current rules? Can you be specific?
I don't see why 99% of members would be banned either? Can you give examples to help us understand your point of view?
I don't see why 99% of members would be banned either? Can you give examples to help us understand your point of view?
I can see your point to an extent, but it I still feel that more feedback on individual incidents would be useful.
If I see someone get banned but I have no idea what it is for then it is not going to help me avoid it in future. It could be a borderline issue, or something that is fairly innocent that could be repeated by anyone, or it could be something that needs to be challenged because it was over-moderated. If the feedback is vague at best then I have no idea what is going on. If that's what the moderators want then so be it, but don't complain about a lack of engagement with the non-staff members of the forum (isn't that what this thread is all about? Engaging with the members?)
Did you read the rest of my post? What's the point in highlighting it to me if I'm already following the rules? If it is aimed at the people who don't follow the rules and won't read the charter then why am I even being involved at this level? Just deal with the problem users and leave the rest of us out of it.
There are two possibilities here that I can see... either this is an attempt to make the forums more dry/clinical, or it is a pointless exercise, because the people that are already behaving themselves don't need reminding, and the troublemakers who won't pay attention to it anyway just need dealing with separately.
I get that, but it rather defeats tbe point of deleting inappropriate content if mods delete a post where Fred called Tom a ****, only to put "deleted because Fred called Tom a ****" in the comments.
Surely all each of us need to do is grasp the spirit and nature of the rules .... and abide by them. Anything "inappropriate" will presumably be covered by rules, so I can pretty savely assume it'll be swearing, insulting members, links to competitors and so on, and I can follow rules and avoid doing that without knowing precisely what was said?
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 1,795
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Jul 2015
- Posts
- 1,394
- Location
- Over There
As a specific example, the migrant thread is one that was left to spiral completely out of control. The tone was set early on in that thread by the apparent glee with which a certain bunch of posters were taking from the notion of machine-gunning down migrants and using military force in other ways. Thousands of posts later and it had just descended into a paranoid echo chamber where the same core members were perfectly happy in their anti-muslim circle jerk. Anyone who posted in there with a differing opinion was quickly hounded out and the echo chamber was back to full capacity.
Unfortunately, this forum cannot have a decent discussion about anything that even touches on religion as the people who were active in the migrant thread just completely trash it with their paranoid, xenophobic thinly-disguised-as-free-speech racism (free speech is great, when it's only YOUR free speech that can be heard, right boys?).
It spills over to many other completely unrelated threads too. Someone posts a thread about a jam sandwich that was pooped through someone's Spar bag on a Sunday two weeks after Al-Fitr and there will be one of the usuals pushing their borderline neo-nazi agenda in there somewhere.
I feel the charter and mission statement is a firm but subtle move towards improving corporate image of the Overclockers brand as seen through the lens of the forums. The above needs to be fixed, otherwise the image of this forum is never ever going to change.
Unfortunately, this forum cannot have a decent discussion about anything that even touches on religion as the people who were active in the migrant thread just completely trash it with their paranoid, xenophobic thinly-disguised-as-free-speech racism (free speech is great, when it's only YOUR free speech that can be heard, right boys?).
It spills over to many other completely unrelated threads too. Someone posts a thread about a jam sandwich that was pooped through someone's Spar bag on a Sunday two weeks after Al-Fitr and there will be one of the usuals pushing their borderline neo-nazi agenda in there somewhere.
I feel the charter and mission statement is a firm but subtle move towards improving corporate image of the Overclockers brand as seen through the lens of the forums. The above needs to be fixed, otherwise the image of this forum is never ever going to change.
Convenient? How do you mean?
Yeah I don't think anyone is expecting the mods to write war and peace each time they delete a post
.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,819
- Location
- Falling...
It's not about respect us, it's about respecting others on the forum.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 3,076
- Location
- a galaxy far far away
If what you have replied to in this is true then surely doesn't the fact your still a admin bring the whole mod team into disrepute?
In any other organisation there would be calls to step down.
Tbf the new mission statement means no thing to me as I wouldnt do anything to get me banned anyway. Although I do think others have pushed their luck in the past but that's just my opinion
Last edited:
That's a big if statement right there
I've never done what was leveled at me, I just didn't believe that there was any value in arguing the point. I have offered my admin resignation on more than one occasion in the intervening period. I get no gain from it, I do it for the benefit of this place.
Ill go through a couple more:
Great in principle, but it's not really something that's ever been practiced on this forum, it's virtually a given that if somebody is winning an argument they will goad the other person with smugness, sarcasm and quips, you see this in almost every other thread. I'm not talking about being intentionally rude/abusive, just being disrespectful, hell it's something half the mods fall foul off.
This is a rather dubious one as a lot of the posters on here are quite smart (not me ofc), and this is a regular occurrence as many people can post innocent seeming remarks designed specifically to ridicule/attack, especially when a "tin foil" type posts something, they and their beliefs get ridiculed beyond belief many times without them even realising it.
I.E (trying to avoid naming names) the is a user with a large post count who frequents the motors sub section who is probably the most disrespectful poster I have ever seen on this forum but he does it via sarcasm, cynicism and backhanded remarks so well that most of the people he mocks don't even realise he's ridiculing them or their car/lifestyle because it's being done with a friendly demeanour.
Trolling is actually quite rare on this forum, I would estimate 9/10 times when somebody is accused of trolling it just means that their accuser disagrees with them but either cannot think of a response or dislikes their opinion so much they don't want to bother addressing it so just calls them a troll to try and justify not refuting it.
Spamming is only really done by bots I think, I haven't seen any in a long time.
Deliberately harmful posts are quite rare I think but also subjective, to a devout christian any discussion on the plausibility of religion by atheists is harmful (we have even seen this come up on the forum), but if you crack down on "religion bashing" threads (where any discussion on religion will inevitable lead) then you also should crack down on pro religion threads. Likewise threads about Islam always seem to take a turn for the worst but only because it's common for people to start mentioning inconvenient things about that religion that it's followers take offense too.
It would probably be best to just ban discussions of religion but then how could you have threads on current topics like ISIS
Last edited: