View Full Version : To be addressed
beatnik
29 Nov 2006, 17:02
as I have said time and time again, discuss the post and not the poster and there will be no issues.
I have not commented because I do not follow the youngsters until they become seniors, simply do not have the time but very much enjoy reading the posts on here by people that have knowledge from watching local grass roots footy and to them I say thank you for sharing your thoughts and insights.
right on cue - here's beatnik
LL,
i have seven questions for you on this topic (I would hope that you answered these questions honestly and did not delete this post under a technicality :thumbsu: )
I truly believe that the tension on this board has come about by the loopholes and legalistic nature of some of the rule interpretations on this board.
my belief is that certain posters are exploiting these loopholes and (deliberate or not) they are impacting the experience of the majority on this board
this tension has traversed many issues - Aker, Bowers and now Mal...it is not going to go away
i feel that we are going to have ongoing problems on issue after issue if we dont resolve the issues I outlined below:
1) The Loophole
i have spoken to moderators of other boards about the way this board is moderated and the whole 'discuss the post and not the poster' edict
the feedback was that it was a unique and specific interpretation of a general BF rule - several agreed that this would create a loophole for a disingenuous poster to troll this board without fear of being made accountable
when you combine this with your other peculiar rule on not mentioning issues being debated on the main board (btw what is with that?? :confused:) it makes for a very frustrating time for those trying to support the very club this board was named after
my question is:
* if a poster's behaviour is the central issue, how can you discuss that behaviour without mentioning the poster??
2) First among equals
you yourself have called me and others a sheep for wanting to see evidence of incompetence before agreeing with your (obviously very personal) objections to the club's administration
at no stage did you delete any of your posts for 'attacking the poster' :eek:
my question is:
* how can you doggedly (even fanatically) protect Campbell with that interpretation and yet you ignore it when you attack posters on this board yourself?
3) Moderators
When you were made a mod, it was to keep with the policy of having 2 mods per board...
Furthering the new policy of having two mods per team board, I'm pleased to announce that Lady Lawrence has been appointed co-moderator of the Brisbane board.
more (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?p=921431#post921431)
Danni seems to help out where she can (much appreciated) but is not listed as a dedicated mod to this board so we actually only have one
I found a poll from 2004 which addressed the issue of moderation on this board...
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=119198&page=4&highlight=moderator
that thread was concerned with the fact that there needed to be a balance between Lions and Bears - i've never noticed any bias in THAT regard so I think it was right to say no then but maybe it is time to revisit
i have no problem with your position on Bowers because you have publicy stated where you stand on Bowers and the Lions but i believe we need a second moderator to ease the perception that you are protecting/siding with one poster over the rest
perhaps we need to add someone who is a bit more neutral when it comes to the administration - someone who doesn't have a history with the current CEO
my question is:
* how can you be objective in moderating a debate about an administration and a CEO that you are on record as despising???
4) Recourse
i have outlined my concerns in PMs several times to you and received the response that the admins would be in touch shortly (that was months ago)
i sent a couple of follow-ups asking whether you had followed up the issue and have received no response
i seriously question whether you forwarded my concerns - you are a sole moderator and you prevent me from reporting you to your superior
i'd call that a classic beuracratic circular trap - you know, when the teller at line 1 tells you to join line 2 and vice-versa
my question is:
* can you please state publicly the process for posters making their concerns known about the moderation of the board?
5) Aliases/trolling/multiple accounts
in that poll i mentioned: (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=119198&page=4&highlight=moderator)
...one of the concerns raised by Noel Mugavin was the occurence of aliases on this board...
A little bird from another board tells me another little bird from this board with multiple aliases (with the same Ip address) is voting like crazy against Stocka being a moderator here.
Paranoia must be creeping in. This is very sad.
...then Homer (who is now suspended) replied:
Well I know that there are 4-5 names at this IP address.
Me
My Younger Bro (whom supports Freo)
Mum
Dad
One alias
It can happen, but maybe its just everyone jumping at shadows.
so Homer admitted to having an alias and that there were multiple accounts from that one household's IP address
Homer nows posts as Homer Jr (can HoJu or anyone else confirm this?) and 'mum' always posted as Campbell but I am not sure who the alias was...perhaps one of the suspended accounts on that thread?
my questions are:
* if an IP address has already been linked with alaiases and trolling, why is it inappropriate for me to suggest the moderator to investigate posters to make sure this isn't still happening?
* given my perception of your afforementioned support for Campbell (and the fact that the same poster campaigned strongly against having a second mod), is it really such a big leap for me to question whether you actually investigated it seriously?
* and if you did, would it really take a cynic to believe you would not report publicly the results of that search?
in summary, i would encourage anyone who has shared my frustration this season to join with me in asking for a discussion over the way we do things on this board and how we might find an outcome that makes everyone on this board happy
peace
Beatnik
btw, i am categorically not interested in moderating before anyone throws any self-interest accusation my way
Beatniks post needs to be addressed. If his questions do not belong on this thread could the mods please start a new one.
Lady Lawrence
30 Nov 2006, 10:00
requires more time than I have right at this moment now but will get to as soon as I can.
Have moved to a seperate thread to allow the other thread to stay on track.
Grimreepah
30 Nov 2006, 10:29
This (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6312396&postcount=37) post should have been moved as well.
I will address it here instead.
Lady Lawrence
30 Nov 2006, 21:39
1. This is the last time these issues will be debated. My response to this post and question is the last. The instructions set out below WILL be adhered to.
2. Campbell this is to you for all to see. If posting a comment, take more time on your response. State your case, state why you come to that decision or belief and be prepared to back it up with facts. If it is just personal opinion state this and state why you think this. If you cannot do this do not post. If posting something that can be cosntrued as contentious and you know you will not be around long enough to respond, leave it until later.
3. Debate the post and not the poster. For example.
Bad Post - I think Mal Michael is a lying scumsucking douche bag.
Good Post - as above sentence but followed by. In an interview on xyz day he said this, in an interview on abc day he said this. 2 complete contradictions.
Post 1
Bad response - you are a scumsucking douche bag for thinking that you tool
Correct response - really and what makes you come to that belief. I happen to agree with you for the following reasons or I disagree because..........
It's not rocket science.
4. Some of you have behaved in a way that is tantamount to bullying and it will not be tolerated. Continual baiting and goading. No more. It is your intepretation and perceptions of thing to lead you to believe that Campbell is a protected species. Again you attack the poster and not the post and actions will be taken.
5. Tension on this board is caused by those that simply cannot ignore a negative post or a post that they disagree with and is contrary to how they see things. Some people are simply more passionate in expressing themselves in the things they see are wrong with our club. We all want to see our club the most successful in the comp both on and off the field. If you are not interested in the off field stuff then perhaps you should be as this directly affects what happens on the field. Don't dismiss things off hand because it distorts your rosy view of the club. Stop and take a moment to learn from others. Do your own research and then form an opinion.
6. Any attacks, I have made have been in response to that poster attacking others. Yes sheeps on this side etc. Some people have their rose coloured glasses on and simply accept all that they read or is fed to them. Those people are obviously a lot happier and a lot more stress free than others. Some people see everything that happens as "my god the sky is falling in". There doesn't appear to be much middle ground as neither side wants to meet in thre middle. Not all is well at our club, neither is it all doom and gloom. This year has been one of the worst in memory for all the off field issues.
7. A moderator does not have to be unbiased. Is allowed to have an opinion and as scuh will do so. If not we may as well get moderators that know nothing about football and not care. I believe that any "issues" I have had with the club or my understanding of things Aker has said or Mal has done etc have been clearly and concisely outlined. No-one with a differing opinion is censored or moderated. No-one with the same opinion is protected.
8. As for not bringing the main board discussions on here it's quite simple really. This board is for Brisbane Lions supporters and as such are "protected" to certain extent in that posters from other clubs cannot come on here and tell us we are crap etc. If we wish to do that between ourselves we have every right to do so. Opinions from opposition supporters are always welcome provided they are addressed in a respectful manner. If Lions supporters decide to wander into the main areana and rip each other to shreds then that is their decision and nothing to do with this board. Bringing it on here is pointless. Some posters come to this board only, not to have to wade through all the crap out there.
9. Multiple aliases are not allowed on big footy and posters found using them are immediately banned. Admins cary out IP checks. If someone suspects someone of being an alias report it to me and it will be passed to admin.
10. If someone posts something that you consider to be contravening to all of the above report the post. This reporting feature alerts all moderators and administrators and actions are taken if felt warranted. You as the reporter of such a post may not necessarily receive a response but know that action has been taken or the no action option has been taken. If a response is however deemed necesary and you are unhappy with the response from the moderator you are then free to forward this to the administrators for their response.
1. This is the last time these issues will be debated. My response to this post and question is the last. The instructions set out below WILL be adhered to.
So are you saying that you will not respond to any questions we ask as to the rest of your post because you have laid out a set of instructions and they must be adhered to with no debate?
Grimreepah
30 Nov 2006, 22:39
3. Debate the post and not the poster.
My concern is that this seems to be a license to troll. If the zero tolerance policy was enforced then it would be OK. But people can bag the club with impunity to try and get under people's skin, knowing they are protected by this policy.
It also becomes a problem when people claim or imply inside knowledge. They are making the topic about themselves, and naturally when people do this people are going to refer to their track record.
Some of you have behaved in a way that is tantamount to bullying and it will not be tolerated.
I object to the notion of bullying. If many people have a problem with something that says more about the something than the many people.
You almost seem surprised that people react when their club is attacked. It seems that in order to survive on this board, the more passionate supporters must learn to not care. I think that's wrong. I think passion should be encouraged, and an attempt should be made to foster a positive mood on the Lions board. This doesn't mean you can't be critical, but being negative just for the sake of being negative just ruins it for everyone else.
We all want to see our club the most successful in the comp both on and off the field.
I honestly don't know if that's true or not.
Don't dismiss things off hand because it distorts your rosy view of the club.
I think what's happening is that things are being dismissed because of who says it rather than what is being said.
This board is for Brisbane Lions supporters and as such are "protected" to certain extent in that posters from other clubs cannot come on here and tell us we are crap etc.
But how do you know who a person supports? How do you define a supporter?
Mad Dog
30 Nov 2006, 22:51
FWIW Lady Lawrence - I fully support your approach here.
We are all here to debate and argue - that's what attracts us to a forum like this.
I am a Mod yes.....but I was a poster first and have very definite opinions and enjoy expressing and arguing them.
However there is no question that the target for debate and argument must be the content of the post or the opinion of the poster......not the poster. I will tend to allow very heated discussion go on the Adelaide Board for as long as it remains non-personal.
I have no problem with someone saying that "my post is the crappiest most stupid thing they've read" as long as they explain why.......but there is no value in saying that I am crappy and stupid.
it's the old "don't kill the messenger" mentality that needs to be considered
:thumbsu:
FWIW Lady Lawrence - I fully support your approach here.
We are all here to debate and argue - that's what attracts us to a forum like this.
I am a Mod yes.....but I was a poster first and have very definite opinions and enjoy expressing and arguing them.
However there is no question that the target for debate and argument must be the content of the post or the opinion of the poster......not the poster. I will tend to allow very heated discussion go on the Adelaide Board for as long as it remains non-personal.
I have no problem with someone saying that "my post is the crappiest most stupid thing they've read" as long as they explain why.......but there is no value in saying that I am crappy and stupid.
it's the old "don't kill the messenger" mentality that needs to be considered
:thumbsu:
So how do you react if a poster makes the same contentious statements over a period of time but refuses to answer clear concise questions put to them?
Some random thoughts.
If you are going to report a post, don't reply to it on the boards. It's much easier to remove one post than a heap of them. Getting involved in an abusive exchange then reporting it can lead to you getting a higher penalty than the starter. If you disagree with a mod's decision, query it (privately) by all means but don't go on about it. Mods are here to decide things whether you agree with it or not. Once your query has been answered, that's the end of it.
It's an absurd notion to suggest that everything the club does is good and must be supported by all. None of the other clubs seem to have a problem with criticism from their supporters. If some posters come across as negative, that's their right, just as it is for those on the positive side. If someone goes on with the same negative stuff ad nauseum, report it by all means. If you want to comment on it, reply to the POV, not who made it.
As far as I'm concerned, most things on the boards are opinions. Nobody has to justify why they hold a particular view. They don't have to be realistic, logical or sensible - they're just opinions and should be taken as such.
TheBrownDog
1 Dec 2006, 07:40
If someone goes on with the same negative stuff ad nauseum....
I believe this is what is happening.
Constantly.
So how do you react if a poster makes the same contentious statements over a period of time but refuses to answer clear concise questions put to them?
Patterns of behaviour over a period of time like that are similar to trolling - our own posters have been pulled up in the past for continuing to be unreasonably negative with no susbstance to their argument.
It just creates a negative envionment for everyone which we can do without
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 08:51
As far as I'm concerned, most things on the boards are opinions. Nobody has to justify why they hold a particular view. They don't have to be realistic, logical or sensible - they're just opinions and should be taken as such.
When everything is just an automatic criticism of the club, I don't know what that person's real opinions are.
It's an absurd notion to suggest that everything the club does is good and must be supported by all.
I agree. But I don't think anyone is suggesting that.
If someone goes on with the same negative stuff ad nauseum, report it by all means.
If this is the policy, then I'm happy with this outcome.
Patterns of behaviour over a period of time like that are similar to trolling - our own posters have been pulled up in the past for continuing to be unreasonably negative with no susbstance to their argument.
It just creates a negative envionment for everyone which we can do without
To be short that has been the point of some of us on this board. The pattern of posting over a period of time has been similar to trolling. You have actually just supported a point put forward by serveral posters for months. That has been the bone of contention.
Homer Jnr
1 Dec 2006, 09:05
Trolling is not simply disagreeing with someone else, and maybe this board needs a masterclass on what is considered taboo and what isn't.
If we all know where we stand on certain issues and know which terms we can throw around with reckless abandon, then it'll be a better place to inhabit for everyone.
Personally, I get sick of seeing so many trying to assume the moral high ground, when it is bleeding obvious that no-one involved is blameless or not guilty of antagonising and being hypocritical.
It's an absurd notion to suggest that everything the club does is good and must be supported by all. None of the other clubs seem to have a problem with criticism from their supporters. If some posters come across as negative, that's their right, just as it is for those on the positive side. If someone goes on with the same negative stuff ad nauseum, report it by all means. If you want to comment on it, reply to the POV, not who made it.
No one is saying that everyone should support the Admin of the club. As to the team that is a different issue IMO. As to the attacking of the admin no problem but to attack it just about every other post is boring and creates a negative feel. After all this is a supporters board. What is the point of having a supporters board if we cannot support with out having negative posts time after time. On a personal level I see no point in reporting the poster when I have the ability to put logical questions to the poster and at least expect the courtesy of a reply. If you believe that if we on this board should be hitting the report button than you will be in for an avalanche if that is what you want.
As far as I'm concerned, most things on the boards are opinions. Nobody has to justify why they hold a particular view. They don't have to be realistic, logical or sensible - they're just opinions and should be taken as such.
That Fred is tantamount to allowing trolling. Astonishing.
As far as I'm concerned, most things on the boards are opinions. Nobody has to justify why they hold a particular view. They don't have to be realistic, logical or sensible - they're just opinions and should be taken as such.
Another point to what you have written is a contradiction to Mad Dogs post (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6322393&postcount=12) that agrees with one of the biggest bones of contention on this board. So who is the correct mod?
Trolling is not simply disagreeing with someone else, and maybe this board needs a masterclass on what is considered taboo and what isn't.
If we all know where we stand on certain issues and know which terms we can throw around with reckless abandon, then it'll be a better place to inhabit for everyone.
Personally, I get sick of seeing so many trying to assume the moral high ground, when it is bleeding obvious that no-one involved is blameless or not guilty of antagonising and being hypocritical.
Mate you know why this has become an issue. It is not a matter of high moral ground, it is a matter of the same poster making the same style of post time after time, refusing to answer logical questions. The same pattern is repeated and has been ever since I joined this forum. You know that from your own experience. You have tried valiantly to defend the posts but received no help from the posters hit and run comments. In your heart of hearts you know that.
campbell
1 Dec 2006, 10:21
Can someone please explain trolling for me.
I have been on these boards since 2001, and have never had a problem.I have always thought that just because you don't agree doesn't mean you are a troll.Some on here say I troll.I answer questions but I think if the answer is not what they like, they get cross.I do feel bullied at times by a certain fews attitude to anything I say.
I have gone back over my posts on this board for the last week, can the mods please explain where I have trolled and what exactly is trolling.A different point of view I thought was not trolling.Answering questions about children at footy , I thought was not trolling.I am confused.I have to go to work, and don't have time for this negative stuff which I feel is aimed at me all the time.
I am not a bad person or supporter because I ask questions.
Topic. posts
Leunberger 79 through 97
mal to bombers 6.10.30.32.37.54.58.86
bowers 11,39
AGM 8
Kids at footy 9
Kinnear 3
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 10:39
Answering questions about children at footy , I thought was not trolling
That is a diversion. You know perfectly well this isn't about answering questions about children at the footy.
I am not a bad person or supporter because I ask questions.
Depends how you define 'asking questions'. Most of your posts tend to be statements, not questions.
Patterns of behaviour over a period of time like that are similar to trolling - our own posters have been pulled up in the past for continuing to be unreasonably negative with no susbstance to their argument.
It just creates a negative envionment for everyone which we can do without
This just seems like the absolutely perfect approach on the club boards. If this is how you moderate the Adelaide Board, then I applaud you. I wish this is how our own board was moderated.
Is it unreasonably negative?
Is it unsubstantiated or untrue?
Every single post should be moderated against those two questions.
Everyone should be able to report any individual incident of a post that offends those two principles and each post would carry some sort of penalty for the poster. Whether based on the Yellow Card/Red Card system or some other system, repeated breaching of those two rules should result in warning/suspension/banning.
That seems to me to be a very simple, effective and socially acceptable method of maintaining the quality of posts on this board. LL, if you can guarantee that you will endeavour to moderate this board against those two rules (with appropriate sanction for offences), then I will happily agree to:
- commence reporting those posts; and
- no longer engage in debates over such posts.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 11:59
this is a bloody witch hunt over one poster. This poster has been asked to moderate their posts ie back up statements etc or see them removed. You have all been asked to abide by the rules. Attack the post not the poster. Use the report function, if unhappy with the response raise issue with admin.
One simple solution for those opposed to this poster's stye of post and their comments simply add to ignore list - won't have to read any of the posts ever again.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 12:01
So are you saying that you will not respond to any questions we ask as to the rest of your post because you have laid out a set of instructions and they must be adhered to with no debate?
rules is rules jacko! (sorry too much tv over last few nights)
Will clarify rules if unclear on any points.
rules is rules jacko! (sorry too much tv over last few nights)
Will clarify rules if unclear on any points.
Why jacko?
I presume that the answer is yes?
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 12:07
To be short that has been the point of some of us on this board. The pattern of posting over a period of time has been similar to trolling. You have actually just supported a point put forward by serveral posters for months. That has been the bone of contention.
and if you simply reported the posts as requested ad nauseum there wouldn't be the constant fighting.
It's quite simple really.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 12:08
Why jacko?
The XXXX ad on telly with the fishing comp and the chiller.
I presume that the answer is yes?
presume the answer is yes to what?
The XXXX ad on telly with the fishing comp and the chiller. What has that to do with me.
presume the answer is yes to what?
To the initial question.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 12:16
flippin eck do I speak dutch or summat?
In response to your question re debate rules are rules and not open to discussion, they are set down by big footy.
In response to my responding to your first question I said I am happy to provide clarification of a rule if still unsure.
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 12:22
this is a bloody witch hunt over one poster.
This isn't Big Brother. It's not a matter of trying to vote people off. If lots of people have a problem with a poster, then I think their concerns should be respected.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 12:25
No one is saying that everyone should support the Admin of the club. As to the team that is a different issue IMO.
this could be the crux of some of the issues here. To some posters the club is seen as a whole with no part exclusive to another. Supporting The Brisbane Lions, means, everyone from the person that washes their socks to the boot studder to the coach to the membership administrator to the CEO. Everything that happens on the filed is directly related to the administration. It's a bit like brain, lungs or heart, which one is more important to the life of a human being. Life cannot exist without one of them.
Those that just want to discuss the performance on the field, the rookie draft, the trading etc etc, and ignore the rest of the club, that is all good. But if it is not of importance to them then perhaps they should not participate in the threads.
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 12:25
In response to your question re debate rules are rules and not open to discussion, they are set down by big footy.
I don't think it's as clear cut as you're saying. Mad Dog and yourself have a very different perspective on negative posting. Fred has told us to report excessive negativity, but there is no such policy on the Lions board.
and if you simply reported the posts as requested ad nauseum there wouldn't be the constant fighting.
It's quite simple really.
You know that I have never reported a post to you ever. I have been ready to debate each post on it's merits and have expected the same back. This to me is what a site like this is all about. So I was mistaken. Someone can post constant negative posts against the Lions and get protection via a report icon that the Mods will maybe do something or maybe do nothing? That is the way it seems to me.
If you are going to report a post, don't reply to it on the boards. It's much easier to remove one post than a heap of them. Getting involved in an abusive exchange then reporting it can lead to you getting a higher penalty than the starter. If you disagree with a mod's decision, query it (privately) by all means but don't go on about it. Mods are here to decide things whether you agree with it or not. Once your query has been answered, that's the end of it.
OK correct me if I am wrong. If I have trouble with a post I report it to you. You reply and what you say is final. I suspect that by your previous posts on this forum that you will do nothing. So therefore I feel that I have to defend the club on the board itself as there is no other avenue of defence.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 12:27
This isn't Big Brother. It's not a matter of trying to vote people off. If lots of people have a problem with a poster, then I think their concerns should be respected.
and their concerns have been addressed over and over, publicly and via PM. Follow the rules, ie report the post, don't go into attack on the board and see what happens. You may be surprised.
It's not a hard ask and it's not rocket science.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 12:29
I don't think it's as clear cut as you're saying. Mad Dog and yourself have a very different perspective on negative posting. Fred has told us to report excessive negativity, but there is no such policy on the Lions board.
go read the bigfooty rules, it is the same for every board.
go read the bigfooty rules, it is the same for every board.
I believe that I have already pointed out a contradiction (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6322657&postcount=17) between 2 mods. Am I wrong? Happy to be proved wrong.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 12:35
OK correct me if I am wrong. If I have trouble with a post I report it to you. You reply and what you say is final. I suspect that by your previous posts on this forum that you will do nothing. So therefore I feel that I have to defend the club on the board itself as there is no other avenue of defence.
How many times do we have to say it. You report the post. The post in question is reported to all moderators via this function. The moderator for the bord will respond at the time if they are online. If it needs immediate attention whichever mod is around will do what is necessary, ie delete the post, edit the post, ban the poster, move the post to recycling for the relevant mod to deal with when on next etc etc. If the mod of the board or any other mod responds and you are not happy with the response you are then free to take it up with admin. if you still don't like the reponse, then life just ain't fair is it.
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 12:37
Follow the rules, ie report the post, don't go into attack on the board and see what happens. You may be surprised.
OK. Admittedly I have seen this as somewhat futile, which is probably because of the few posts I have reported, I never get a response. Please leave this thread open so, in case I'm not surprised, I can query the process.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 12:37
Patterns of behaviour over a period of time like that are similar to trolling - our own posters have been pulled up in the past for continuing to be unreasonably negative with no susbstance to their argument.
It just creates a negative envionment for everyone which we can do without
as have posters on this board, both publicly and via PM. And despite being told on many many ocassions to "report the post" they take it upon themselves to defend the club, attack the poster, or whatever via the boards.
How hard is it to follow a simple set of rules.
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 12:38
go read the bigfooty rules, it is the same for every board.
I have, but there seem to be very different interpretations of those rules.
How many times do we have to say it. You report the post. The post in question is reported to all moderators via this function. The moderator for the bord will respond at the time if they are online. If it needs immediate attention whichever mod is around will do what is necessary, ie delete the post, edit the post, ban the poster, move the post to recycling for the relevant mod to deal with when on next etc etc. If the mod of the board or any other mod responds and you are not happy with the response you are then free to take it up with admin. if you still don't like the reponse, then life just ain't fair is it.
Very sarcastic. Fair enough I guess. I can handle that type of thing.
This poster has been asked to moderate their posts ie back up statements etc or see them removed.
Will there be sanctions (suspension, bans) for repeated breaches of this rule?
One simple solution for those opposed to this poster's stye of post and their comments simply add to ignore list - won't have to read any of the posts ever again.
This is not a solution. I do not have to modify my use of the boards for a user whose style of post you have admitted is generally contrary to the rules. How can I report offending posts if I don't see them? If we all just ignored posters who breached the rules, then the inappropriate posting would continue. A system that relies (at least in part) on the users "dobbing in" the offenders should not advocate for users to ignore the offending poster.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 12:47
I have, but there seem to be very different interpretations of those rules.
again you have every opportunity to question these interpretations, report the post, if nothing is done about it or you feel the mod has not taken necessary steps report it to admin.
Remember you are not privy to all conversations that take place off the board either via the mods forum or the PM system.
Don't assume nothing has been done.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 12:48
If we all just ignored posters who breached the rules, then the inappropriate posting would continue.
which is the job of the mods and admins to deal with not yours or anyone elses.
Remember you are not privy to all conversations that take place off the board either via the mods forum or the PM system.
This is fair enough.
Don't assume nothing has been done.
That is very hard when the perception is that nothing changes.
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 12:53
Don't assume nothing has been done.
How do I know something has been done. What is the process?
which is the job of the mods and admins to deal with not yours or anyone elses.
Why bother having the reporting process then? There seems to be a reliance by mods on that process to help achieve an outcome but then you advocate for us to take an action which circumvents the reporting process.
And my quote should be put in context - I did say that the reporting function was in part relied upon to ensure rules weren't breached. If we were to rely entirely on the mods/admin to ensure compliance, then you guys would be overwhelmed. In reality, you guys need post reporting to better ensure that posting is within the rules.
(I should also add that every time that I have reported a post that action has been taken against the post/poster. This indicates to me that the reporting system can work well.)
as have posters on this board, both publicly and via PM. And despite being told on many many ocassions to "report the post" they take it upon themselves to defend the club, attack the poster, or whatever via the boards.
How hard is it to follow a simple set of rules.
Eeh? What does that mean LL. What the hell!! I will defend the club against what I believe to be unwarrented criticism until I die. All I have ever asked is that when a poster makes a post regarding the club that they back it up when questions are asked regarding their posts. I am astonished that this is not Lions board policy to be honest. Any club board policy. If a poster keeps making the same post week after week and fails to answer questions put to them that is trolling for me. It causes arguments. Have you not seen how the last few months have gone after the Akermanis debate reared it's ugly head? What do you or the other mods for that matter think this thread is about? It is about the concerns that our club is being attacked in a manner that is offensive and that the mods are allowing that. I repeat I have nothing against debate but it has to be backed with answers.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 13:09
it is all about how far some peole have taken it on here. In some cases relentless hounding.
If for example Poster a posts something that is negative about the club be it a player, administration etc then why not ask them why they think that, as them to state their reasons why. Also state why you think their belief is wrong and back that statement up with why you believe what you do. And if anyone says cos Andrew Hamilton said so they will face an immediate ban!! :D
If said original poster refuses to acknowledge your post and continues in the same vein ie restating their case and not offering anything further, report the post, state your reasons for reporting the post ie that you tried to engage in above debate and then allow the mods and admins to their job. As with certain posters here if you carry on the way you are going it will be tantamount to flogging a dead horse and you will acheive nothing but more angst.
Some of us will never agree on some issues. For example I cannot see anything happening that will change my opinion of our current CEO and believe he is causing untold damage to our club. That said I always give examples of why I believe that to be so. Others may not see things he has done in the same light as me and we will have to agree to disagree on some issues. Some people think Wayne Carey is the greatest footballer ever. I don't.
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 13:15
I'd like to report beatnik for starting this thread and then running away:p
Edit: oops. there you are.
LL
I asked 7 numbered, explicit questions so that you could respond to each in turn.
Let's start with 1) The Loophole
i have spoken to moderators of other boards about the way this board is moderated and the whole 'discuss the post and not the poster' edict
the feedback was that it was a unique and specific interpretation of a general BF rule - several agreed that this would create a loophole for a disingenuous poster to troll this board without fear of being made accountable
when you combine this with your other peculiar rule on not mentioning issues being debated on the main board (btw what is with that?? ) it makes for a very frustrating time for those trying to support the very club this board was named after
my question is:
* if a poster's behaviour is the central issue, how can you discuss that behaviour without mentioning the poster??
Mad Dog's response seemed an objective response and what I would expect from all moderators on BF :thumbsu:
Patterns of behaviour over a period of time like that are similar to trolling - our own posters have been pulled up in the past for continuing to be unreasonably negative with no susbstance to their argument.
It just creates a negative envionment for everyone which we can do without
MD's post touches on the exact frustration of MANY on this board
LL, a moderator is accountable for setting the tone of the board - therefore, if you want to set a balanced, respectful tone on your board, you must BE SEEN to be applying the set of rules equally to both sides of any argument/debate - the perception is that you apply the 'don't attack the poster' far more strictly than the 'anti-trolling' provisions and always in campbell's favour
my OPINION is that while cambell may not be exclusively a troll, many of her posts fit MD's description of the constant negativity
Another mod, Fred said:
If someone goes on with the same negative stuff ad nauseum, report it by all means.
good point Fred but the perception on this board is that any time this has been reported to LL, she has done nothing because she essentially agree with Campbell's statements - to me that is hardly the objective stance a moderator should aspire to :confused:
I have no problem with someone saying that "my post is the crappiest most stupid thing they've read" as long as they explain why.......but there is no value in saying that I am crappy and stupid.
another balanced approach for a moderator to take - doesn't happen here though...LL wont allow me to express MY opinions on campbell's opinions in fact even the vaguest of references to campbell has resulted in deletions - this is in spite of the fact that LL has admitted to having called me a 'sheep' on numerous occasions because I dont agree with her
I believe we need to make some progress on this issues so I am taking the liberty of summarising the debate so far and propose some solutions 'going forward' (I love corporate speak! :D )
problem A: constant negativity can be tantamount to trolling (a subtle form perhaps) and that this is indeed against BFs anti-trolling rules.
solution A: we should all report the posts and the let the mods/admins to judge and punish those posters trolliong in this subtle but destructive manner
*note - if these reports go only to LL then we are stuck in the loop endlessly - who recieves the 'report a post' complaints?
problem B: shooting the messenger with personal attacks contributes to the negative enviornment that many are complaining of (fwiw i had not thought about it like this before)
solution B: when responding to perceived 'snipes' we need to use the form "that post is utter crap because..." instead of "YOU are utter crap"
* note - I had no idea that this was the proper interpretation of this often-quoted 'rule' :eek: - i am sure we can follow that form in responding to campbell's and others' posts :thumbsu:
is that a fair summary of the first question I raised?
peace
beatnik
LL, there are still some questions of mine that you haven't answered. But the big 2 I would ask you to answer are:
1. Can repeated infringements of the "unsubstantiated or unreasonably negative post" rule result in suspension and ultimately banning?
2. If you have repeatedly warned posters (generally and personally) about particular behaviour, at what point will you take more punitive action?
I'd like to report beatnik for starting this thread and then running away:p
sorry my main man, i have been offline a bit this week
i am still trying to catch up with projects after watching 5 days of cricket last week (and yes, it was worth it ;))
i have tried to clarify and summarise the first of 7 questions for input and refining...only 6 to go! :rolleyes:
peace
Some of us will never agree on some issues. For example I cannot see anything happening that will change my opinion of our current CEO and believe he is causing untold damage to our club. That said I always give examples of why I believe that to be so.
Yes yes yes yes yes yes!!!! That is my point. You give a reasoned argument that can be respected. I have also yet to see you post stupid fricking posts like "I hope our club does not get investigated by the AFL" or that ilk over and over and over. No one hopes that so why even post that complete piffle over and over. That is the point of my argument. If one makes a statement they have to handle the heat that comes with it.
And they do have to handle the heat that comes with it - the heat from replies to that exact issue. Not heat about who they are as a person.
You can address for example that very issue by saying " I can't see why you would think we would be investigated I haven't seen any evidence of xxx or yyy or sss that would warrant an investigation"
Or the unfortunate more common reply that we are seeing on this board of "why the hell do you say that, you are such an idiot, mods can't you do something about this, blah blah blah blah".
You can repspond and respectfully and courteously ask questions, and expect an answer. What you dont' have is control over whether or not you get that answer. It is then your choice how you deal with it after that.
You ("you" in general here John, not singling you out) are being asked to deal with it inside the bigfooty rules. There are a number of options that include ignore the posters contributions on a post by post basis, placing them on ignore so you don't see their posts at all, continuing to ask knowing full well you may not get an answer or the answer you desire, or continue on with the conversation with other posters without becoming fixated on one persons contribution.
There is no option for browbeating the other person because you don't like their 'style' or their 'piffle' or the way they express their opinion.
There is no requirement for a person to give a reasoned arguement. Yes it is preferred, no it isn't mandatory. The outcome being that if it isn't presented then the issue isn't debated. It doesn't mean that you can debate the person instead of the issue.
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 13:36
1. Beatnik
If you read all the responses that I have posted in this thread I believe I have answered all of the questions in your post. If you feel I haven't please list them simply as in POBT's post. short and to the point.
2. POBT
A. yes they can, if the correct avenues are first taken. When each is as bad as the other I will not take sides. Campbell wrng for postng in that way, others for attacking her for doing so. Ask your question for substantiation, no response report it and let us deal with it. If someone steals your car and you then go and steal theirs you will both end up in jail. Get my point?
B. At the point where all correct steps are taken, refer above answer
3. John
Refer my above responses to POBT which should answer your question.
FWIW you may all be looking for a "Vanilla / off the shelf" solution to a more complex problem. There is no black and white in these cases. We all have varying tolerances to opinions....that in turn vary from topic to topic.
ie a Port Power poster may post something constructive - but the suspiscious vein in me looks for a double meaning to fire back at.
Sometimes we have preconceived ideas about topics and posters and no matter the substance or logic....we take a stance that is irrational.
If there is a problem with protracted negativity - I would suggest that examination of those posts will lead to an offense that can be acted on.....and they should. But ultimately there are too many differing opinions to reach an absolute consensus on how these things should be handled.
From an outsiders point of view - I don't think your Board has a problem.....:)
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 13:38
'piffle'
wins my vote for the best word in any post ever!!
wins my vote for the best word in any post ever!!
John deserves the credit for that - not me. But it's a bloody great word isn't it!
The Flying Belgian
1 Dec 2006, 13:42
I don't want to get too deep into this, but a couple of points...
Firstly, seeing as though we have a few mods obviously monitoring this debate, why is there only one mod in control of this board. This is not an indictment on how LL moderates the board, but if the BF policy is for 2 mods per board, why has this remained this way (i.e. 1 mod) for as long as I've been posting? Or is that not a BF policy anymore?
Secondly, I do think as much as I disagree with the poster in question's glass-half-empty mindset, lately other poster's have been over-reacting to some of her posts which IMO have generally improved. Of course, if she answered questions about her viewpoint to the really controversial stuff then I doubt we'd be having this debate. But I suggest, try to address her concerns and why she is making them and look past the way they are worded. If you can't... don't bite. I realise some (who I've personally spoken to) have a hard time in doing this, but I was once this way. However I've now pretty much reached a zen frame of mind and nothing is really fazing me now.
Thirdly, the level of moderation on these boards is very light. If any of you hav vistied the Whirlpool boards (forums for broadband internet users) you'll know what heavy moderation is. We enjoy the ability to bring the sauce dispensers or classic impressionist or abstract expressionist painters into football conversations. So, what level of moderation do you really want?
Which leads me to my last point. If BF mirrors our society, or for the purposes of analogy, your workplace, there will always be people who you don't quite gel with, whose opinions you can't relate to or who make you want shove their head in a shredder. However for the sake of a happy workplace, we all learn to adapt and accept these little frictions. So I ask my fellow posters to show some composure and tolerance, and I ask campbell to really go into the hall of mirrors and try and see why some of your comments really grate many of us. It'll make things so much better.
It has been a one mod board for a while as that is all that was necessary. That will be changing in the very near future (read as: as soon as chief gets into the admin control panel and hits a button or two).
Lady Lawrence
1 Dec 2006, 13:49
Danni has been moderating this board continously but not listed as such, that will change as soon as Chief gets around to updating the boards.
Thank you for the rest of comments TFB - well balanced and sane! Can I have some of your medication please :)
Yes we are pretty light with our moderation here, hell we can even say someone pisses us off!! tee hee hee. It is a lot more liberal with regards to opinions but very strict in regards to legal issues. Some places have every post that is not "on topic" deleted straight away. I am all for having the saucies and the donuts as part of discussions and another reason why The Den was set up so those that just wanna read football can do so on the front board.
I trust that after everyone has read this thread including Campbell can see the error of their ways, learn a little from this exercise and move forward.
2. POBT
A. yes they can, if the correct avenues are first taken. When each is as bad as the other I will not take sides. Campbell wrng for postng in that way, others for attacking her for doing so. Ask your question for substantiation, no response report it and let us deal with it. If someone steals your car and you then go and steal theirs you will both end up in jail. Get my point?
That is fine. As long as I know that:
a) reporting inappropriate posts actually achieves something; and
b) the "death of a thousand cuts" approach to inappropriate posting is frowned upon as much as the one off, extreme inappropriate rant.
I also agree that there has been inappropriate posting on the other side of the fence as well and I don't exclude myself from that. This approach will stop me, at least, from getting frustrated into breaking the rules.
B. At the point where all correct steps are taken, refer above answer
Fantastic.
LL - this is exactly what I suggest should happen on a full time basis, with no fear or favour for any poster. I appreciate the response. If this has been the case all along, it is a shame that some of us didn't realise that.
Another point to what you have written is a contradiction to Mad Dogs post (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6322393&postcount=12) that agrees with one of the biggest bones of contention on this board. So who is the correct mod?
Nothing contradictory there at all. I was talking about opinions - he was talking about constant negativity. Totally different things.
That Fred is tantamount to allowing trolling. Astonishing.
Perhaps you should have a look at what trolling is.
Nothing contradictory there at all. I was talking about opinions - he was talking about constant negativity. Totally different things.
Not sure I agree but I will take your word for it. Trust me though when I say that this debate for me is all about constant negativity.
Perhaps you should have a look at what trolling is.
I stand by my original post.
Not sure I agree but I will take your word for it. Trust me though when I say that this debate for me is all about constant negativity.
That's fine but don't call it trolling because it isn't.
That's fine but don't call it trolling because it isn't.
Constant negativity aimed at getting the other posters irate is not trolling? Hmm!. Have you a link I should refer to.
I think it's fair to say that the problems some were having have been acknowledged. It's time now to take a breath and see how things pan out.
Constant negativity aimed at getting the other posters irate is not trolling? Hmm!. Have you a link I should refer to.
No, you are assuming that the intent is to get other users irate - that is the problem. There is no evidence of that at all. The result may be it gets the same posters each time irate, that doesn't mean it was the intent. THIS is exactly why there is this so called 'issue'. The assumption of intent and the reaction to it regardless of the rules. You are asking the moderators to see that result as the intended one. That is not how it is seen. That isn't how it is going to be seen either. It is a person expressing their opinion, albeit a negative one. If you have any evidence of it being the intended result, forward it to a mod or admin - any link to a post where it has been said "let me go do it again, it really gets up their noses, I love seeing the result" and we'll be on the same page. But to date, different pages mate.
Constant negativity aimed at getting the other posters irate is not trolling? Hmm!. Have you a link I should refer to.
The highlighted part is where I think you're wrong. In my opinion, it wasn't deliberate, which is a prerequisite to being a troll.
Some people are naturally negative without there being an ulterior motive.
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 14:34
No, you are assuming that the intent is to get other users irate - that is the problem. There is no evidence of that at all. The result may be it gets the same posters each time irate, that doesn't mean it was the intent. THIS is exactly why there is this so called 'issue'. The assumption of intent and the reaction to it regardless of the rules. You are asking the moderators to see that result as the intended one. That is not how it is seen. That isn't how it is going to be seen either. It is a person expressing their opinion, albeit a negative one. If you have any evidence of it being the intended result, forward it to a mod or admin - any link to a post where it has been said "let me go do it again, it really gets up their noses, I love seeing the result" and we'll be on the same page. But to date, different pages mate.
I thought it was pretty obvious that there has been deliberate goading, but you are right, there is no way to prove what someone's intentions are.
I thought it was pretty obvious that there has been deliberate goading, but you are right, there is no way to prove what someone's intentions are.
It's only obvious if that is what you are looking for to justify the way you feel about it.
I find it frustrating on many issues the firm opinions that people hold that are completey contradictory to mine, and how they seem to be anxious to applaud without questioning, or others that only look for what could have been done better without applauding what has been done right. For me it's about balance. But that's me. We are all different.
It's about recognising those differences and reacting (or not reacting at all) accordingly.
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 14:50
It's only obvious if that is what you are looking for to justify the way you feel about it.
I find that somewhat patronising. If that is your opinion then so be it.
I find that somewhat patronising. If that is your opinion then so be it.
Again - assuming intent, and my intent wasn't to be patronising. If you are unsure of intent, please ask. I can say at least for me, I won't be backward in coming forward to tell you if you are reading it how I intended or not.
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 15:12
Again - assuming intent, and my intent wasn't to be patronising. If you are unsure of intent, please ask. I can say at least for me, I won't be backward in coming forward to tell you if you are reading it how I intended or not.
Just to clarify, I never said you intended to be patronising. I was just wanting dismiss your assertion that I have ulterior motives for believing campbell likes to stir.
I wasn't assertaining that at all. I was simply saying that anyone can use anything to justify how they feel about something - twist and turn and react emotionally.
The internet is a powerful tool, and it's biggest pro is increased communication, it's biggest con is increased communication. It allows more and more information to be available to more and more people at greater and greater speeds. It also disallows the fundamentals of effective communication in tone of voice, gesture, looks on faces, twinkles or glares in a persons eye as they say it. It leaves it up to the individual to react emotionally based on their perception of intent and style of imparting information. It's just as dangerous as it is a godsend. It's about recognising that we can't see or hear the person when they impart the information and for the most part take as what is said as said, not what they may or may not have intended.
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 15:32
I wasn't assertaining that at all. I was simply saying that anyone can use anything to justify how they feel about something - twist and turn and react emotionally.
God you're argumentative. You're almost as bad as me:p
First time poster, long time reader.
To perfectly honest with you, i don't mind if someone has a go about our team/organisation etc on this board. Obviously it gets frustrating when it happens over and over again, however there are enough smart posters around to argue both sides here. However, what gets up my goat is when someone has a go at the club on another board (main board, rival club board etc). We are meant to be supporters of the Brisbane Lions. As i've said before, constructive criticism is great, but when it is an out and out lie on another team's board it doesn't look good. Whenever you try and dismiss an argument, other mods seem to be more willing to delete your posts straight away.
Just my 2c.
P.S. Don't try and avoid the swear filter on Mad Dog's watch.
TheBrownDog
1 Dec 2006, 23:03
This thread needs more Borat.
This thread needs more Borat.
Coming up...
Btw, if you haven't seen it yet, go out and have a look. 90 mins of hilarity.
A little something for the gents, and to be fair, a little something for the lad..dies...
http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/3948/boratwl3.png (http://imageshack.us)
I'm so going to get banned one of these days.
Grimreepah
1 Dec 2006, 23:18
http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/3948/boratwl3.png (http://imageshack.us)
Warwick, I'll let this one slide.
First time poster, long time reader.
To perfectly honest with you, i don't mind if someone has a go about our team/organisation etc on this board. Obviously it gets frustrating when it happens over and over again, however there are enough smart posters around to argue both sides here. However, what gets up my goat is when someone has a go at the club on another board (main board, rival club board etc). We are meant to be supporters of the Brisbane Lions. As i've said before, constructive criticism is great, but when it is an out and out lie on another team's board it doesn't look good. Whenever you try and dismiss an argument, other mods seem to be more willing to delete your posts straight away.
Just my 2c.
P.S. Don't try and avoid the swear filter on Mad Dog's watch.
I have been arguing this point for ever. I have never seen supporters from Adelaide, Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Fremantle, Geelong, Hawthorn, Kangaroos, Melbourne, Port Adelaide, Richmond, St kilda, Sydney, West Coast and the Western Bulldogs do that. I have only ever seen seen that happen from the team I have left out of that list. I have argued from day one that I would rather debate on this board than the Western Bulldogs for example. Could you imagine a Collingwood supporter going onto the Carlton board and saying " I hope my team does not get investigated by the AFL." This rubbish riles me beyond belief. In fact I am convinced that this is why have been so hard edged on this issue. Does anyone on here remember just recently the Ashley Cole transfer from Arsenal to Chelsea. Trust me on this. The supporters from Arsenal would not in their wildest dreams gone onto a Chelsea website and even considered wishing him luck. I do not want us to be that hard edged but if one supports a team at least do not give comfort to an opposition team.
I know critical comments are unlikely to be received gladly, but I'm still going to say this.
I'll have to say that I'm disappointed in this. I would have hoped that mods can take a step back and look at what is happening, rather than just strictly applying letters of the law (with own interpretations to boot).
Current scenario:
Poster x posts negative stuff at Lions board. Other posters disagree and ask for debate. Poster x disappears.
Poster x posts negative stuff at Main board. Other posters disagree and ask for debate. Poster x disappears.
Poster x posts negative stuff at another club's board. Other posters disagree and ask for debate. Poster x disappears.
Etc.
You say debate the post and not the poster. Ok that's fine.
You say that people have their opinions and don't need to agree. Ok that's fine.
But when a person continually makes posts (note here I don't care about the intent) that are likely to draw debate, and then that person disappears - that's where the problem lies. The problem is not over being positive/negative in posting, or a difference in opinion. The problem is that certain posters are not accountable for their own posts, by dropping posts then not backing them up by hiding. It is so easy to hide in an Internet medium such as a forum, and not have to be responsible.
At the end of the day, we all post here at BF, and so should abide by the rules. I agree with the spirit of the rules, but currently I do not believe they are being applied in an impartial or objective manner. While we may justify our moderation decisions by writing stuff and quoting certain rules, it feels like 'rule-lawyering', and in my opinion, the spirit of good discussion is not being upheld. In my opinion, it is the responsibility of the moderator to ensure this as much as possible.
If we see the board as a business and the moderator as being a manager, I believe that current signs of lots of heated arguments/criticism and negativity are indications of poor management.
I was intending to stay out of this debate because I saw it as futile. Nothing will change and a lot of energy and angst will go unnoticed and wasted.
This is nothing new on this board. Nothing will change. History proves it.
However here's one last go at it'
Many posters have posted great responses on this thread. John, TFB, warwick, Big Cat, Rip, beatnick etc.... I appreciate the fact that moderators from other forums have taken the time to debate and clarify or confuse even further certain issues.
However the crux of the issue has not been addressed or the moderators appear to be reluctant to address or simply could not give a stuff about addressing.
* The issue about Campbell being the problem is a tactical deflection and diversion. If this forum was moderated even remotely adequately Campbell would not be the problem.
Warwick and Big Cat's last posts raised some pertinent and relevant points. Moderators please consider those points when responding on this thread.
I ask my self why the administrator or other moderators fail to see that the issue on this forum is "The Brisbane Lions Forum Moderator"
This is not a recent issue. Well before John become so passionate to develop a "Best Practice" approach on this site or Campbell become "The Issue" this forum was experiencing difficulties.
Why the reluctance by the decision-makers to question suitability, quality, or ability of the person appointed to oversee The Lions forum?
As I understand our current moderator has been in the role for a significant period. Well, as we all know almost everything in life has a "best before" date.
To use an old political slogan "It's Time".
armagedon ready
2 Dec 2006, 13:02
I know critical comments are unlikely to be received gladly, but I'm still going to say this.
I'll have to say that I'm disappointed in this. I would have hoped that mods can take a step back and look at what is happening, rather than just strictly applying letters of the law (with own interpretations to boot)
At the end of the day, we all post here at BF, and so should abide by the rules. I agree with the spirit of the rules, but currently I do not believe they are being applied in an impartial or objective manner. While we may justify our moderation decisions by writing stuff and quoting certain rules, it feels like 'rule-lawyering', and in my opinion, the spirit of good discussion is not being upheld. In my opinion, it is the responsibility of the moderator to ensure this as much as possible.
If we see the board as a business and the moderator as being a manager, I believe that current signs of lots of heated arguments/criticism and negativity are indications of poor management.
Excellent post.:thumbsu: :thumbsu:
I have tried to stay away from this debate because it upsets me to see so many eloquent, intelligent, informed posters being reduced to a frazzle because their point is not understood, indeed is condemmned out of hand.
Although I havent posted a great deal, i enjoy having this site read to me, and I have been surprised to see how this affair has progressed. I initially made one comment to LL about an apparent lack of objectiivity, but have let the matter drop since then.
Our moderator claims it is OK for her to be biased, and I agree. If she is posting that all of the players, and especially Steve Lawrence, are totally wonderful, but vulnerable people who need to be protected from the wickedly uncaring Administration of the Club, then she is entitled to that opinion and may indeed be correct. However what concerns me, is that it appears to be only the posters who do not share her views who are called sheep or bullies, and have their posts removed, while the posters who have created all the angst do not share the same treatmnet. In fact untill recently, it appeared as though there was total protection for one person.
I am sure that being a moderator is a very demanding role, and I believe LL takes it very seriously, and does her best to stick to all of the rules etc. However we all carry passions and beliefs that sometimes blind us a little, and I think if our Moderator could just reflect a little on her own part in this, and read the opinions of some clear thinkers on this board she may see a slightly different picture.
So wish I had the time to support much of what has been written here, could write a novel.
Can’t help but feel there has been a fairly stereotypically dismissive and defensive stance taken by the mods...Obviously they are just a pack of sheep. (easy mods, wee joke there)
So many quality posters; and all of them very dissatisfied with how this situation has been handled.
Surely the smoke-fire analogy is going to have to kick in here at some point.
lion_gooner
2 Dec 2006, 19:49
good example using ashley cole joining cheatski john thats a very good example quite similar to the brisbane mal micheal situation
and for those of you dont know the whole story lets just say the guy "loves" his mobile phone lol
Grimreepah
2 Dec 2006, 19:51
good example using ashley cole joining cheatski john thats a very good example quite similar to the brisbane mal micheal situation
and for those of you dont know the whole story lets just say the guy "loves" his mobile phone lol
:confused:
Are you in the right thread?
My 2c, as a lot has already been written. The thing that I find incredibly frustrating is that posters are allowed to make statements (as if they are informed) which to most of us are clearly unsubstantiated opinions. However there are other posters (usually other clubs') who take these wild statements as fact and then use them to denigrate the Lions further.
When other Lions supporters dispute the claims they are either ignored or called names. As everyone knows this escalated during Akergate. As a poster who has been quoted by this person I find myself having to read through everything I type to make sure that it cannot be misconstrued and used for another's agenda.
This has lead to my enjoyment of this site substantially diminishing and makes having serious discussions incredibly frustrating. I recognise that it has caused normally objective posters to become obsessive and at times irrational.
It is not about single posts anymore it has been building to the crescendo that is this thread. I acknowledge that it's not as bad as it was but who knows when the next thread will blow up.
Lady Lawrence
3 Dec 2006, 08:36
I have been arguing this point for ever. .....................I have argued from day one that I would rather debate on this board than the Western Bulldogs for example. Could you imagine a Collingwood supporter going onto the Carlton board and saying " I hope my team does not get investigated by the AFL." This rubbish riles me beyond belief. In fact I am convinced that this is why have been so hard edged on this issue.
And as has been said previously what goes on on the main board or other boards is out of the control of the moderation of this board. If it happens on this board, report it. Because I don't follow Campbell around the other boards I cannot comment on what has been discussed elsewhere, but believe that because many of you do what goes on elsewhere spills onto this board. Now don't take that to mean you purposely go looking for her posts. You go to see what the doggies think of Aker's latest outburst and yup there she is! I haven't read the doggies board or the bombers board re Mal, I simply don't care what others think, I only care what BL supporters think.
The zero tolerance rule has been applied for sometime now and if a poster from an opposition club posts such comments it is removed unless of course they are seriously raising an issue, outlines their thoughts on it and posts on a way that it opens up a discussion and is not merely trolling.
If she is posting that all of the players, and especially Steve Lawrence, are totally wonderful, but vulnerable people who need to be protected from the wickedly uncaring Administration of the Club, then she is entitled to that opinion and may indeed be correct. However what concerns me, is that it appears to be only the posters who do not share her views who are called sheep or bullies, and have their posts removed, while the posters who have created all the angst do not share the same treatmnet. In fact untill recently, it appeared as though there was total protection for one person.
This is untrue. I do not moderate opinions, simply the way they are attacked by opposing opinions. The sheeps comment was related to the fact that anyone who posted a negative comment about the club was launched upon by the same people over and over. I received complaints from posters stating they were reluctant to raise an opposing viewpoint or show support of Aker etc etc simply because some people were so defensive of the club and saw Aker as the reincarnation of evil and the club could do no wrong. Emotions were hight at that stage I agree and when a wound is open and raw the single grain of salt can hurt as much as the entire packet. However I stand by the fact that I never moderated anopinion and purely enforced the rule of atack the post not the poster. It may seem Campbell was protected but that was purely because the attacks were aimed at her not the posts. If you all followed the rules as has been asked time and time again things would not have escalated to the point they have.
For example using campbell's hope the AFL don't investigte us post. If the poster has been asked what do you mean by that and as has been the case, said poster hit and ran, hit the report post button, simply state the posters comment is in my opinion inflammatory, the poster has been asked to explain but has not offered anything further. Said post gets a temporary delete, poster is informed of the reasons why and can then choose to post a response or we all simply move on. Infraction points are issued now on BF with reards to reported posts etc and it won't take long for some posters to learn the error of their ways when they find themselves on suspensions etc and unable to post.
My 2c, as a lot has already been written. The thing that I find incredibly frustrating is that posters are allowed to make statements (as if they are informed) which to most of us are clearly unsubstantiated opinions. However there are other posters (usually other clubs') who take these wild statements as fact and then use them to denigrate the Lions further.
When other Lions supporters dispute the claims they are either ignored or called names. As everyone knows this escalated during Akergate. As a poster who has been quoted by this person I find myself having to read through everything I type to make sure that it cannot be misconstrued and used for another's agenda.
This has lead to my enjoyment of this site substantially diminishing and makes having serious discussions incredibly frustrating. I recognise that it has caused normally objective posters to become obsessive and at times irrational.
It is not about single posts anymore it has been building to the crescendo that is this thread. I acknowledge that it's not as bad as it was but who knows when the next thread will blow up.
A lot of what you say is true Kimp. But as said previously what goes on on the other boards is not the job of the mods here on this board. It is to mod THIS board not the BL posters elsewhere on the site. There is nothing to prevent posts on other boards being reported.
The crescendo you are talking about is directly affected by what is posted on other boards. You cannot hold me responsible for that.
And again if the report post function was used then not only myself but all other mods would be aware of the extent to which this issue has spread.
As to when the next thread blows up is purely down to your own choices. Hit and run comment is dropped, all jump on the thread and so it begins. Hit and run comment is dropped, correct procedure followed, all move on, matter dealt with.
A lot of what you say is true Kimp. But as said previously what goes on on the other boards is not the job of the mods here on this board. It is to mod THIS board not the BL posters elsewhere on the site. There is nothing to prevent posts on other boards being reported.
The crescendo you are talking about is directly affected by what is posted on other boards. You cannot hold me responsible for that.
And again if the report post function was used then not only myself but all other mods would be aware of the extent to which this issue has spread.
As to when the next thread blows up is purely down to your own choices. Hit and run comment is dropped, all jump on the thread and so it begins. Hit and run comment is dropped, correct procedure followed, all move on, matter dealt with.
I actually don't hold you responsible for what's happened. I think that a normal adult would curb their ways given the obvious runctions they are causing (and once again to be clear this is not aimed at the moderators), I just wanted to explain why I have become frustrated and emphasise that it's over a period of time.
ETA: Thinking about this further I understand why other posters are convinced that it's trolling. Given the reactions that they receive from their postings it could easily be interpreted as intentional goading. It reminds me of that poster on here who's name I can't remember Sally??? The one who was "related" to all the players and knew everyone so well.
Infraction points are issued now on BF with regards to reported posts etc and it won't take long for some posters to learn the error of their ways when they find themselves on suspensions etc and unable to post.
Now that I understand this, I feel much happier about the way forward. Another board I post at keeps a tally of the number of warnings a poster receives which is displayed below their name. That way you can easily make a judgement call when reading their posts. Perhaps TPTB might be able to inlcude something similar (if that sort of thing is even possible on this site).
Grimreepah
3 Dec 2006, 09:54
Perhaps part of the problem is our cultural upbringing. It is unaustralian to 'dob', it is ingrained in our mindset to sort things out for yourself.
Just a question LL. Do you only act on posts that have been reported, or is there scope for you to take your own initiative and deal with troublesome posts on your own accord?
Grim, it's not dobbing, it's making our environment a better one. We have to believe that the new initiatives will work. If things don't change afteer a few months of using these mechanisms as suggested then it's time to ask for changes.
Think of LL and Danni as Lethal and Gubby and this site as our team and BELIEVE!
I received complaints from posters stating they were reluctant to raise an opposing viewpoint or show support of Aker etc etc simply because some people were so defensive of the club and saw Aker as the reincarnation of evil and the club could do no wrong.
This is disapointing. Why be relectant to post if you are sure of your opinion. When people post on sites like this we are all anonymous. It is not like we are face to face and it will end in violence.
I will also add that I am more than capable of having my mind changed with a clear and concise counter point of view placed before me. You should know that from the thread on the departure of the players advocate. You and others had no problem breaking down my posts and changing my opinion.
Grim, it's not dobbing, it's making our environment a better one. We have to believe that the new initiatives will work. If things don't change afteer a few months of using these mechanisms as suggested then it's time to ask for changes.
Think of LL and Danni as Lethal and Gubby and this site as our team and BELIEVE!
Nice post Kimp:thumbsu:. I am having a chuckle to myself:thumbsu:.
I suspect that I am a bit with Grim. Hitting that report icon goes against the grain somewhat.
Lady Lawrence
3 Dec 2006, 10:20
Just a question LL. Do you only act on posts that have been reported, or is there scope for you to take your own initiative and deal with troublesome posts on your own accord?
is this intended to be sarcastic?
to give you the benefit of the doubt...of course we have scope and take initiative. As an example, during the course of the whole akergate I received no more than a half dozen reported posts but a litany of complaints from posters that had their posts deleted or edited.
does this answer your question or is there a more subtle inference here that I am missing?
is this intended to be sarcastic?
to give you the benefit of the doubt...of course we have scope and take initiative. As an example, during the course of the whole akergate I received no more than a half dozen reported posts but a litany of complaints from posters that had their posts deleted or edited.
does this answer your question or is there a more subtle inference here that I am missing?
I thought that was a fair question myself. Why the angst?
Lady Lawrence
3 Dec 2006, 10:29
This is disapointing. Why be relectant to post if you are sure of your opinion. When people post on sites like this we are all anonymous. It is not like we are face to face and it will end in violence.
I will also add that I am more than capable of having my mind changed with a clear and concise counter point of view placed before me. You should know that from the thread on the departure of the players advocate. You and others had no problem breaking down my posts and changing my opinion.
You also have to remember that there are a lot of "younger" posters here and some are not as bullet proof as others. Some are nt as literate or able to express their opinions so concisely. Nature of the beast with an online forum.
The intent is not to change others opinions. I personally get no satisfaction from anyone agreeing with me. In fact the more that do the sadder I get. For example Bowers. I am happy being in the minority on this one. I too can change my opinion on things and often do, most opinions are formed from one of two perspectives on here. Having a depth of knowledge or only what we have read.
The greatest thing about forums is that many can share their knowledge and more accurate information is relayed. From this better opinions are formed. Or rather more informed opinions are made.
As a non controversial example I do not follow the rookies, the suncoast lions, the draft etc. But from reading things on here my excitement is heightened when I see a new elevation to the seniors and I get to see what everyone has been talking about.
Grimreepah
3 Dec 2006, 10:37
Grim, it's not dobbing, it's making our environment a better one.
Well I see it as both.
We have to believe that the new initiatives will work. If things don't change afteer a few months of using these mechanisms as suggested then it's time to ask for changes.
Think of LL and Danni as Lethal and Gubby and this site as our team and BELIEVE!
While not every issue has been addressed on this thread, the overwhelming message has been to REPORT THE POST, and because of the mod's insistence that this process will work I have resolved to try and have faith.
I don't appreciate LL's 'it's not rocket science' comment, because it's not a matter of not being able to work it out, it's a matter of believing whether or not anything will be achieved by it (what has it ever achieved in the past?). And surely the mods can see troublesome posting without people having to point it out.
I'm still not sure how I will know if anything gets achieved. If nothing changes and I don't get any feedback it probably won't take long for me to lose faith in the process again. Also there seems to be confusion among the mods as to what are and aren't worthy of infractions, so I can only think to report what I think is inappropriate, and to go from there.