cheesyhtfc
Steve Kindon Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 1,642
|
Post by cheesyhtfc on Aug 10, 2017 16:46:53 GMT 1
It is with much discussion and regret that we have banned Nick for two weeks, for repeated breach of the rules over the past two weeks since his last ban.
We do not ban people lightly, and we generally try and exhaust all avenues available to us before doing so. One example is the Examiner sub-board - Nick was posting hourly Examiner articles, and the intention was to give him a space where he could scream into the abyss with nobody to hear him, and he would eventually get bored. It worked for a time, but it is clear that it has run its course, and not had the desired effect long-term.
We have, therefore, been left with no option on this occasion but to issue a ban.
We also generally prefer to keep these decisions private, as we do not like to air our dirty laundry in public. However, on this occasion there are some points that we think it would be useful to make to the board as a whole.
Nick has been banned, mainly, for repeatedly doing three things: (1) starting new threads when what is posted could have been posted on an existing thread (i.e. one that is on page 1 of the board), (2) unnecessarily bumping threads that had run their life, for no discernible purpose, and (3) incomprehensible thread titles. He has been warned about this on a number of occasions, and has previously been banned for the same thing. We generally turn a blind eye when posters do the above, but when they do it multiple times we have no option but to intervene.
However, what he has not been banned for is generally posting links. As long as a link is posted on a topic not covered by a thread already on page 1 of the board, then there ought to be no issue. Most threads are started in one of two ways: (1) "these are my views, let's discuss" and/or (2) "these are someone else's views, let's discuss". External links fall into the second category, and are a perfectly legitimate way to start a thread, irrespective of who posts them.
If the link was posted by somebody other than Nick, it would either be discussed, or it would not. In any event, it would fall off page 1 when it had run its course. If it was not something people were interested in discussing, or it was something that had been discussed in the past, it would generally be ignored and fall off page 1 within the day.
With Nick, however, sarcastic comments lead to arguments, which lead to the board polarised on the basis of either being pro or anti Nick. It is petty, it is pointless, and it is counter-productive, because the one thing it prevents the thread from doing is dropping off page 1, which is presumably what those who are gunning for Nick would want.
In addition to that, an argument about Nick, whether you are pro-Nick or anti-Nick, is off-topic, and derails a thread. This is, in itself, against the forum rules. I repeat, whether you are rushing to Nick's defence or rushing to put the dagger in, it is a breach of the forum rules.
As Admin, we use our discretion to decide whether or not to pull people up for this. Because so many people pile into Nick's threads, we have been unable to take action that we may otherwise have taken, and if we were to warn or ban everyone involved (particularly the repeat "offenders") then we would never get chance to live our lives away from the computer (and the club's XXXL shirt sales would continue to rise).
Nick may or may not change his posting style when he returns from his holiday. If he heeds our advice then it will, and we can all live happily ever after. If he does not, however, then the appropriate way to deal with his posting, if you do not like it, is (1) report the post to us, and (2) ignore it. If his threads are ignored, then they will drop off page 1 and the problem is solved. If he bumps them unnecessarily, then he is committing the same offence that he has been banned for, and we will deal with it as we deem appropriate.
However, consider this as fair warning. If people decide to take matters into their own hands and start, or continue, arguments about Nick's (or any other person's) posting style, when the appropriate course is to report or ignore the thread, then we will also take whatever action we deem appropriate against those posters, for their respective breaches of the forum rules.
Any questions, please PM me.
|
|
Macjinx
Andy Booth Terrier
I've got a Gibson without a case but I cant get that even tanned look on my face.
Posts: 3,719
|
Post by Macjinx on Aug 10, 2017 16:51:37 GMT 1
Thanks for that sensible explanation Cheesy. Admins do a very good job on here imo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 17:22:45 GMT 1
Understand the decision, I have not been defending Nick as much as trying to get people to realize that by attacking him at every opportunity they are derailing the threads and making the forum pretty much useless. Instead they should be blocking him if they dislike him so much and ignoring his threads. I have been spending less and less time on here because the threads are no longer discussing topics but just arguing about Nick.
I will refrain from getting involved in any more discussion on any threads about this but would encourage admins to start taking action against these people when Nick comes back and inevitably comes under attack from every direction, particularly when there is no reason. I would also encourage more consistency on how people are treated. There have been several vague thread titles of late that were not started by Nick, and even a Jay Z thread.
I find vague thread titles more annoying than threads that I am not interested in but are titled appropriately. At least a properly titled thread allows me to make the decision on whether to look at it or not. I hope these people are being addressed too.
I am sure the board is busier than it used to be creating more work for the admins but it is very important that rules are applied consistently regardless of who breaches them.
|
|
|
Post by Grandfather Berty of Cleck on Aug 10, 2017 17:29:56 GMT 1
This is how the Nazis started.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 17:31:25 GMT 1
Nick is Nick, bit sad but mainly harmless. This is a htfc forum so personally think it's a bit crap to ban anyone unless you are being totally out of order. Sure the Nick haters will be happy now, well done.
|
|
|
Post by Grandfather Berty of Cleck on Aug 10, 2017 17:32:32 GMT 1
It's pathetic Fox.
|
|
|
Post by townandytown on Aug 10, 2017 17:35:32 GMT 1
This is how the Nazis started. As volunteer moderators on a football message board?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 17:41:53 GMT 1
What I can't get my head around are the folk defending someone who repeatedly and very deliberately posts constant rubbish, with the plainly obvious primary aim of antagonising others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 17:43:11 GMT 1
This is how the Nazis started. As volunteer moderators on a football message board? I'm pretty sure Adolf was on Wacco
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 17:44:53 GMT 1
What I can't get my head around are the folk defending someone who repeatedly and very deliberately posts constant rubbish, with the plainly obvious primary aim of antagonising others. The reason is YOU DON'T HAVE TO READ IT.
|
|
cheesyhtfc
Steve Kindon Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 1,642
|
Post by cheesyhtfc on Aug 10, 2017 17:45:48 GMT 1
Understand the decision, I have not been defending Nick as much as trying to get people to realize that by attacking him at every opportunity they are derailing the threads and making the forum pretty much useless. Instead they should be blocking him if they dislike him so much and ignoring his threads. I have been spending less and less time on here because the threads are no longer discussing topics but just arguing about Nick. I will refrain from getting involved in any more discussion on any threads about this but would encourage admins to start taking action against these people when Nick comes back and inevitably comes under attack from every direction, particularly when there is no reason. I would also encourage more consistency on how people are treated. There have been several vague thread titles of late that were not started by Nick, and even a Jay Z thread. I find vague thread titles more annoying than threads that I am not interested in but are titled appropriately. At least a properly titled thread allows me to make the decision on whether to look at it or not. I hope these people are being addressed too. I am sure the board is busier than it used to be creating more work for the admins but it is very important that rules are applied consistently regardless of who breaches them. Appreciate the point. As I have said above, this is something that we generally try to do. However, as we have said on other threads, we are not online all of the time and generally want to take collective decisions to ensure that any action taken has been thoroughly considered. The difficulty we have is that we are not all online all of the time, and we do not look at all threads all of the time. If a post is not reported (whether that's Nick's original post, or a post "attacking" him, or whatever, then we can't deal with it quickly, and by the time we are made aware of it (usually by someone reporting a post on the second page of the thread) then it's already got out of control. The main point is that this board is what the posters make it. The admin team are deliberately laissez-faire about people posting, because we do not want to force our particular preferences, or the preferences of a minority, on the rest of the board. That is why we tend to turn a blind eye to most things that are strictly a breach of the rules, because if nobody is bothered then why should we be? It isn't a question of consistency, in terms of breach of X rule requires punishment Y, because different circumstances merit a different response. If a post has a daft title, is ignored, and falls off the board, then why would we take any action against the poster? It hasn't affected anybody, or impacted on anyone's enjoyment of the board. If it is reported, then we will consider the circumstances and decide what, if any, action to take. If a person is being singled out for criticism or punishment, it is generally because they are taking the piss. They have been pulled up on something on the board, their post has (probably) been reported, they have been sent a PM (or multiple PMs) by us, and yet they have continued to post in a particular manner. At that stage, we have no option but to take further action, because otherwise the board will not run smoothly or effectively. If it gets to the stage where over 50% of the reports to Admin are about a single poster, with repeat breaches, then our hand is forced. As I said in my original post, the people hounding him are also breaching forum rules. They have now been given fair warning, and the admin team will take such action as is appropriate in the circumstances if that sort of conduct continues. They are, however, in a different position to Nick, who was given fair warning quite some time ago.
|
|
|
Post by Grandfather Berty of Cleck on Aug 10, 2017 17:45:48 GMT 1
This is how the Nazis started. As volunteer moderators on a football message board? By silencing people because they didn't act like sheep.
|
|
|
Post by Walton-on-the-Hill Terrier on Aug 10, 2017 17:45:53 GMT 1
Nick is a repeat offender. He has nobody to blame but himself. It really is that simple.
|
|
|
Post by ozterrier on Aug 10, 2017 17:45:55 GMT 1
As volunteer moderators on a football message board? I'm pretty sure Adolf was on Wacco I believe they were singing 'Marching on Together" as they crossed into Poland
|
|
|
Post by Headless Chicken on Aug 10, 2017 17:46:01 GMT 1
What I can't get my head around are the folk defending someone who repeatedly and very deliberately posts constant rubbish, with the plainly obvious primary aim of antagonising others. A distinct lack of perception!
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Aug 10, 2017 17:46:58 GMT 1
What I can't get my head around are the folk defending someone who repeatedly and very deliberately posts constant rubbish, with the plainly obvious primary aim of antagonising others. Although it probably sounds a little patronising my hunch is that a little time away from here would be really beneficial to Nick's health ... he actually has a lot to offer the board .. he has pretty good knowledge of football and is a generally amiable chap who appears to not have a bad bone in his body .. but this thread stuff has become a bit silly imo ... maybe if he has a rest he can come back emotionally energised and contribute for the good of all
|
|
|
Post by Spezial on Aug 10, 2017 17:47:20 GMT 1
Wahoooo
Proper Pumper
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Aug 10, 2017 17:47:42 GMT 1
I'm pretty sure Adolf was on Wacco I believe they were singing 'Marching on Together" as they crossed into Poland It was "heil awhile" actually
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 17:50:27 GMT 1
Nick is a repeat offender. He has nobody to blame but himself. It really is that simple. What is really simple is you don't have to click on his links or read his threads. Not difficult.
|
|
|
Post by Mastercracker on Aug 10, 2017 17:52:10 GMT 1
This is how the Nazis started.
|
|
|
Post by ozterrier on Aug 10, 2017 17:54:42 GMT 1
Nick is a decent character and I hope he settles down a bit when he comes back. He definitely winds people up a bit (15 reported posts since the beginning of the month speaks volumes) but there IS a block feature on this forum that some should take advantage of.
Whilst there is no doubt that Nick gets picked up for every little thing he does wrong that others probably wouldn't - he's lying in the bed that he made for himself.
That said, we should accept that the reaction he gets from others feeds into his behaviour - so there's some shared culpability. When he comes back we shall be encouraging him to curtail his behaviour, but if he winds you up just block him. Don't encourage his behaviour and he'll get bored soon enough - and we'll all be better off for it.
|
|
|
Post by bluedogs, Esq. on Aug 10, 2017 17:55:25 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Walton-on-the-Hill Terrier on Aug 10, 2017 18:02:32 GMT 1
Nick is a repeat offender. He has nobody to blame but himself. It really is that simple. What is really simple is you don't have to click on his links or read his threads. Not difficult. Yes, I know and I don't need you to tell me that. I certainly don't click on the majority of his links. However, if I'm on my iPhone (as now) how am I to know who the OP is, or do I assume it's Nick just by its title? Do you not agree that Nick brings it on himself? If you check, you'll see that I actually don't respond to Nick very often at all, because I'm ignoring him anyway!
|
|
|
Post by Big Ern on Aug 10, 2017 18:06:31 GMT 1
He's a pain in the arse but if threads didn't need moderating there wouldn't be moderators. He doesn't insult or belittle anyone which in my opinion DOES happen on here, is a far worse crime and often goes unpunished.
He only antagonises people who quite frankly should be adult enough to let it go and not take life so seriously. It's a message board and seeing some of the folk on here getting their knickers in a twist over forum posts is nothing short of pathetic.
If he needs to take a look at himself I think a fair few on here do also.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 18:13:05 GMT 1
He's a pain in the arse but if threads didn't need moderating there wouldn't be moderators. He doesn't insult or belittle anyone which in my opinion DOES happen on here, is a far worse crime and often goes unpunished. He only antagonises people who quite frankly should be adult enough to let it go and not take life so seriously. It's a message board and seeing some of the folk on here getting their knickers in a twist over forum posts is nothing short of pathetic. If he needs to take a look at himself I think a fair few on here do also. Bang on.
|
|
|
Post by Malvern Tom (WAHLS) on Aug 10, 2017 18:14:35 GMT 1
There will be a fair few smug bullies on here at the moment. Hurry back Nick. PS......can he still read the board when hes banned?
|
|
|
Post by Giggity on Aug 10, 2017 18:21:11 GMT 1
Banning him two days before the club's return to the top division. You have taken it away from him.
|
|
|
Post by Bassingham Terrier on Aug 10, 2017 18:22:42 GMT 1
Sorry, but I don't understand the reference/insinuation here. I'm probably being thick, but please do explain ...
|
|
|
Post by chrispwanton on Aug 10, 2017 18:23:58 GMT 1
This message board is a worse place without nick, I'm sure the majority think that. To all those who don't agree, stop taking yourselves so seriously. Everyone is different and we live in a democratic society not North Korea!
|
|
|
Post by DATM Travel Agent on Aug 10, 2017 18:25:33 GMT 1
Nick is a repeat offender. He has nobody to blame but himself. It really is that simple. What is really simple is you don't have to click on his links or read his threads. Not difficult. It's not always that straightforward for 2 reasons: 1) The block feature does not block his posts when they are quoted by other users 2) There are occasions when a perfectly reasonable thread is started by someone other than Nick, but he then infiltrates the thread taking it off on an irrelevant tangent. If there were some way to prevent him contributing to threads which he did not start it would make things easier. I think that however would be crossing the line.
|
|