Threads locked, again

Status
Not open for further replies.
dod

dod

TPer Emeritus
Messages
16,678
Name
Ebenezer McScrooge III
Edit My Images
Yes
We're fed up of dealing with rubbish.

Someone on here accused me not that long ago of being a day a year mod. They had some justification because I've been really busy in real life lately.

However, one of the other reasons for that is that I got really sick of the petty backstabbing, bitching, ganging up, conniving, whining, abusive PM's, trolling etc etc etc. Then I realised, "Why should I leave a forum I joined when it was just starting out?" It's the one's who are causing the hassle who should be leaving.

The latest report accuses us of favouritism and that was the final straw for me.So be warned. I'm not the only mod sick of this. You all play nice and you get to stay. You don't and you go.

THINK VERY CAREFULLY BEFORE YOU POST.
 
Do what you need to do.

Oh, and please lock the Cute Furry Things thread - it's all got very anti-llama in there :D
 
Good post, Dod. It amazes me there are some who cannot express disagreement without getting nasty about it.

I think a few need to remember the mods do not wait all day to sort out petty squabbles.

Dave
 
Last edited:
I sympathise with your feelings but find myself wondering how many times before have we heard similar expressions and found nothing done about the offenders ... it really is time for someone to take action if this forum is ever going to be able to live up to its profession of being the friendliest on the net!.
 
I think the problem is that the bar for a ban is set rather high, and some members know just what they can get away with - thus posting an endless stream of provocation whilst never quite doing enough to justify a ban in any particular post.

Perhaps we need a points system so 'persistant fouling' becomes a bookable offense, to use an analogy.


An alternative would be a blanket ban on the topics which gives rise to the more acrimonious debates - politics, religion, immigration, weddings, and birds on twigs ;)
 
neil_g said:
in all seriousness i hope not.. trying to remember what i said now to be honest.
Click to expand...
Best not repeat it - to misquote The Matrix, what was said to the Mod was said to him, and him alone. :D
 
Llamaman said:
I think the problem is that the bar for a ban is set rather high, and some members know just what they can get away with - thus posting an endless stream of provocation whilst never quite doing enough to justify a ban in any particular post.

Perhaps we need a points system so 'persistant fouling' becomes a bookable offense, to use an analogy.


An alternative would be a blanket ban on the topics which gives rise to the more acrimonious debates - politics, religion, immigration, weddings, and birds on twigs ;)
Click to expand...
Plenty of folks manage to discuss/debate without resorting to insults, so why should the topics be banned?
 
Could a 7 day ban just to the out of focus section be implemented with a single strike threshold?
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
Plenty of folks manage to discuss/debate without resorting to insults, so why should the topics be banned?
Click to expand...
Because there are a few who don't, and unless they get banned from those particular threads/sections/whole forum, I suspect we'll keep coming back here week after week to express our sorrow at another almighty row because a thread got out of hand.

I don't want a ban on topics - it feels like censorship - but the Mods can only put up with so much before they decide it's not worth the aggravation.
 
Llamaman said:
Because there are a few who don't, and unless they get banned from those particular threads/sections/whole forum, I suspect we'll keep coming back here week after week to express our sorrow at another almighty row because a thread got out of hand.

I don't want a ban on topics - it feels like censorship - but the Mods can only put up with so much before they decide it's not worth the aggravation.
Click to expand...
Ban the culprits then.
 
fabs said:
We have one
Click to expand...
Is it used much? We've seen several threads locked today, but I haven't seen a single post/poster be publically censured, let alone receive any kind of punishment. Are the points public?

Maybe the sentence should be added to the post by a mod edit, so 'justice' (if that's the right word) can be seen to be done. I'm sure a few people will get points they consider unfair (I'd probably have deservedly got a couple for losing my rag), but if it means people back off and calm down most reasonable people will accept it as a necessary evil. Those that don't are probably the ones causing the problems in the first place.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
Ban the culprits then.
Click to expand...
But as I posted above, often the most angry abusive posts are not by the "usual suspects". The pattern I've observed in my short time in OOF is a few posters (it's not just one, and they straddle both sides of most 'debates') consistently posting a stream of provocation which sails below the ban threshold. It's the big show-stopping toys-out-of-the-pram posts which attract bans, but they are typically a reaction to the drip-drip-drip of wind-up.
 
perhaps if people stopped the retaliation and vigilante antics whenever somebody posts something they don't agree with, that would help.

Everybody is entitled to an opinion, ganging up on them like school yard bullies does no favours.
 
fracster said:
perhaps if people stopped the retaliation and vigilante antics whenever somebody posts something they don't agree with, that would help.

Everybody is entitled to an opinion, ganging up on them like school yard bullies does no favours.
Click to expand...

Just more cocknobbery.
 
gramps said:
I sympathise with your feelings but find myself wondering how many times before have we heard similar expressions and found nothing done about the offenders ... it really is time for someone to take action if this forum is ever going to be able to live up to its profession of being the friendliest on the net!.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that the "ban threshold" may be set too high, and maybe bans can be too short to be effective too...

When I was an admin on a large photography forum our normal practice was to send offenders one private warning via email, and if that didn't work then we would ban them from that particular forum for not less than a month. And if that didn't work we just banned them from the site permanently.
 
neil_g said:
no offence, im willing to accept i get a bit of red mist but these comments are equally as bad.
Click to expand...

None taken, just stating what I think of the point Ade made or rather the attitude of those he refers to. Do you even know what it means? I doubt it because I made it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Llamaman said:
But as I posted above, often the most angry abusive posts are not by the "usual suspects". The pattern I've observed in my short time in OOF is a few posters (it's not just one, and they straddle both sides of most 'debates') consistently posting a stream of provocation which sails below the ban threshold. It's the big show-stopping toys-out-of-the-pram posts which attract bans, but they are typically a reaction to the drip-drip-drip of wind-up.
Click to expand...

well put , and saying ignore it and don't retaliate is a lot easier said than done

IMO removing the ban on religion and politics was a mistake, allbeit one made with the best of motives, as emotive subjects are always going to lead to strong feeling, and in my view the only ways to deal with that on a forum are either i) no hold barred , which doesn't work well if people are easily offended, or ii) just don't discuss it at all - trying for the middle road is asking for trouble even if it doesn't descend into name calling and personal abuse.

The other issue with attack the post not the poster, is that some people can't tell the difference either giving or receiving , especially when discussing things that come from strongly held beliefs.

The third point is that the internet breeds ill feeling because you can't see tells and body language - I'd be willing to bet that if all the protagonists in say the hunting or immigration threads met for a beer or six we'd be able to have those discussions/arguments without anyone taking it into the carpark to settle it with fisticuffs
 
Last edited:
@dod

iirc, it was I that made the once a year mod comment. It was uncalled for and not necessary. Apologies.
 
big soft moose said:
..........................................I'd be willing to bet that if all the protagonists in say the hunting or immigration threads met for a beer we'd be able to have those discussions/arguments without anyone taking it into the carpark to settle it with fisticuffs
Click to expand...

Perhaps!!
 
fracster said:
@dod

iirc, it was I that made the once a year mod comment. It was uncalled for and not necessary. Apologies.
Click to expand...
Never apologise, it's a sign of weakness;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top