[Archived] Suggested Message Board Reorganisation

[thenodrog]

  On 12/06/2015 at 13:40, Biddy said:

Do you not think that the reason for the ban should be private between mods and the person who is banned? There can be discussion behind the scenes between the two parties so that things can be resolved. Mod bashing in public helps no one.

There should be more transparency not less imo Biddy. Too many power crazed mods with itchy trigger fingers often promotes bullying tendencies.

[T J Hooker]

👎

[thenodrog]

  On 12/06/2015 at 13:51, Biddy said:

Technically, they can. Again, why should it be public? The ban or warning is between the member and the mod/admin.

All one way though isn't it?

  On 12/06/2015 at 19:40, T J Batty Man said:

There are a lot of new names/members posting with a familiarity more akin to that of site regulars, are you sure LV isnt one of those?

Nope. I haven't seen him since then but despite requests to admin I haven't had a reply of any sort.

  On 12/06/2015 at 19:53, Rover_Shaun said:

You are right. TJ Batty Man sounds like I must be Batty and he sounds like TJ Newton........hmmm

That Alf Hookem was rather pompous

He's in good health but in suspended animation I'm led to believe..... through a friend of a friend.

[Biddy]

  On 12/06/2015 at 20:24, thenodrog said:

Nope. I haven't seen him since then but despite requests to admin I haven't had a reply of any sort.

Hopefully he will check his email.

[thenodrog]

  On 12/06/2015 at 20:31, Biddy said:

Hopefully he will check his email.

Who Biddy?

[Biddy]

  On 12/06/2015 at 20:36, thenodrog said:

Who Biddy?

Leonard Venkhater

[Leonard Venkhater]

  On 12/06/2015 at 20:31, Biddy said:

Hopefully he will check his email.

Thanks. Just did!

[thenodrog]

At last! Thank you Biddy. And welcome back Leonard.

Now can you tell me why everybody else has ignored me until I was presented with the opportunity to go public? tbqh it shouldn't have been necessary should it?

[T J Hooker]

bloooooody hell, does it REALLY matter that much.

[thenodrog]

Obviously not to you.

[Tom]

  On 13/06/2015 at 00:40, thenodrog said:

At last! Thank you Biddy. And welcome back Leonard.

Now can you tell me why everybody else has ignored me until I was presented with the opportunity to go public? tbqh it shouldn't have been necessary should it?

In fairness I did reply, it just so happened that there wasn't anything I could do without admin rights

Edit - it appears I didn't - I thought I had, sorry about that

[joey_big_nose]

  On 12/06/2015 at 13:50, Amarillo said:

For reasons of transparency, that's why. Admins or mods can't arbitrarily ban members without having to justify their decisions publicly.

I agree with this. A clear list would be to everyones benefit.

[Mike E]

  On 13/06/2015 at 05:10, joey_big_nose said:

I agree with this. A clear list would be to everyones benefit.

With reasons and evidence for that reason, hopefully too.

[T J Hooker]

Why? All that would do is promote more point scoring, petty vendettas, acusations of double standards, vindictiveness....

A list just showing the usernames of those currently banned would be handy, just to make people aware of why a certain posters not currently posting, but that's all.

[Mike E]

  On 13/06/2015 at 13:07, T J Batty Man said:

Why? All that would do is promote more point scoring, petty vendettas, acusations of double standards, vindictiveness....

A list just showing the usernames of those currently banned would be handy, just to make people aware of why a certain posters not currently posting, but that's all.

With due respect to the admin/mods, not giving a reason and evidence (just a quote of the offending post(s) would do) would allow abuse of the system.

Just like in life, there must be a way of policing the police.

With that being said, the only ban people have disagreed with in recent years was that of ABBEY.

[T J Hooker]

  On 13/06/2015 at 13:26, Mike Ellison said:

With that being said, the only ban people have disagreed with in recent years was that of ABBEY.

😯😯😯

😃

[thenodrog]

There has to be some moderation imo but I don't agree that any one person should be able to hand out bans. Moderation attracts all sorts, some excellent, many good and some not quite so good, and unfortunately a %age of little big men. btw I've been around here 15 years and I'm still unsure of the selection process.

Last year I suggested a 'rolling jury' system for moderation. 7 members each with over 1000 posts chosen at random every month to adjudicate any appeals made by any member against a banning order made by mods / admin. Said banned member could put forward a case in writing (500 words max) why the ban should not apply and the 'jury' then read the appeal and any relevant background material and then give their decision.

Needless to say it appears my suggestion was not even worthy of a reply! Poor show to a genuine offer of improvement tbqh.

As it stands the board admin policy appears to be to stick together behind whoever gave out a ban whatever the situation and whatever the background. PM's and emails are usually ignored as indeed mine were in Leonard Venkhaters recent case. (poor show again). The written word can frequently be open to many interpretations but imo little latitude is ever given.

tbh I don't know if I'm on my own here but I feel Glenn and SteB's tenure has probably run it's course. They rarely post and (apologies if I have come to the wrong conclusion) appear disinterested or perhaps it'd be fairer to say 'less interested' than of old . Maybe following Wen Y Hu's rather unfortunate tenure they felt that they had to 'picked up the baton' more out of duty than out of desire although only they can confirm or deny this.

  On 13/06/2015 at 13:07, T J Batty Man said:

Why? All that would do is promote more point scoring, petty vendettas, acusations of double standards, vindictiveness....

A list just showing the usernames of those currently banned would be handy, just to make people aware of why a certain posters not currently posting, but that's all.

I take both of your points on board but I've said for years that a list of banned members, length of ban and reason for ban should be available simply to help put a line in the sand for other members on what is and what isn't allowed. It would also surely help the moderators themselves.

[Mike E]

I quite like the Jury idea. Helps put a democratic idea just below our benevolent dictators

[thenodrog]

Crikey..... A reply within 3 minutes!!!! Mike Ellison for Admin I say!

[Stuart]

Banning by committee? Whatever next? I think people are taking themselves and this mb too seriously.

It's a messageboard that's all. If people don't like what people are posting then ignore or leave! It's that simple.

What we should be looking at is not how we deal with offenders but how we react to offending.

[Leonard Venkhater]

  On 13/06/2015 at 15:14, Stuart said:

Banning by committee? Whatever next? I think people are taking themselves and this mb too seriously.

It's a messageboard that's all. If people don't like what people are posting then ignore or leave! It's that simple.

What we should be looking at is not how we deal with offenders but how we react to offending.

Long live Jerome Miller. Start by emptying the institutions LOL!

[Audax]

  Quote

What we should be looking at is not how we deal with offenders but how we react to offending.

Exactly, message boards are a bit the way people get angry when they drive. I've done it and most have. Sometimes we have to allow we are going to be offended.

[thenodrog]

  On 13/06/2015 at 15:14, Stuart said:

Banning by committee? Whatever next? I think people are taking themselves and this mb too seriously.

It's a messageboard that's all. If people don't like what people are posting then ignore or leave! It's that simple.

What we should be looking at is not how we deal with offenders but how we react to offending.

So how would you have dealt with majiball's brainstorm then stuart? How about Ewood Pork?

[BlooBoy]

  On 13/06/2015 at 17:30, thenodrog said:

So how would you have dealt with majiball's brainstorm then stuart? How about Ewood Pork?

Good grief.

No ..Fck me sideways ...

We ve grown men questioning how to act on a paltry messageboard .

Meanwhile ..their wives ..partners (if anyone on here does haveee) are no doubt tucked up in bed ...thinking thank fck for that ..tap tap tap tap ..

Get a life boys ..yeah we all love Rovers but really ...cmonnnnnnnn..........

[Stuart]

  On 13/06/2015 at 17:30, thenodrog said:

So how would you have dealt with majiball's brainstorm then stuart? How about Ewood Pork?

It should never have got to that point.

I'll go back to the segregation suggestion. I'd guess that BlueboyZZZZ - the cause of many a problem on this mb - would not be in the same circles as Maj in real life. Stop feeding trolls and they will go away.