[Closed] So here's the deal

[quote=tjagain ]" Fred stop posing nonsense and Bill stop calling him a liar please or you will both be banned"
And who checks it's nonsense?

Drac - Moderator

Jimjam that sounds a terrible idea. A forum is a conversation so it can and should be allowed to drift away. It’s not a official meeting where we need a chair to step in if someone moves away from the subject.

It works fine in practice and yields (generally) more informed and interesting debate, and less personal bickering and name calling on the kinds of problem threads being discussed in Cougars OP despite the same forum having no real rules regarding content or swearing. Regarding the conversation, and the drifting, there are numerous other threads for that - casual threads to discuss minor, boring or inconsequential things. But you would avoid doing that on say, the political or religious threads. It means people posting in those threads are there for serious debate, not bickering, point scoring or "winning" for their side.

njee20 - Member

Agreed. I belong to another forum which considers itself "really friendly and accommodating". I find it sterile and over-moderated,

And yet it's not. It's the least moderated forum I'm a member of and some of the content comes close to 4chan levels of depravity - but obviously only in the correct thread/sub forum.

So you'd be more likely to be banned or sent to the bin for starting a new thread on an existing subject, than say, posting porn. The honus is on the thread starters to start good, original or different threads. This doesn't detract from the quality of forum members posts. It's like an iq test - can you use the search function to find the right thread. Can you read the thread rules. If yes, post. If not - bin.

Can we have a referendum on the EU thread?

Also I was wondering if after serving a ban forum users had to do a forfeit to get back on the site- like truth or dare?

Hence my solution being to intervene earlier. " Fred stop posing nonsense and Bill stop calling him a liar please or you will both be banned"

Interesting choice of [s]naymes[/s] names 😉

Scotroutes
Opinion of the mod. some of the posts I refer to are so obviously nonsense as shown by those rebutting them with facts and links. Obviously only stuff that is obviously factually incorrect not those things that are opinion.

If I state. "Scotroutes cheats at hillwalking 'cos he has 3 feet instead of two". You reply with a photo showing only two feet. I say "photoshop" You post a pic of yourself from a neutral sources showing only two feet. I say " what would you expect from a propaganda rag like that" You ( well actually you probably wouldn't) get somewhat irritated and then launch into me with a rant bout how I can't count feet.

it really has reached that sort of level on that thread

[quote=Drac ]The issue Cougar was refering to more was to do with the EU thread where we were getting regular reports along the lines of.
“What he’s saying isn’t true, can you stop him from posting these?”

Well that's just silly. Surely such reports should take no time at all - you just issue a stock reply "that isn't the job of the mods".

Unless of course you're actually referring to the people posting alternative facts then reporting the posts which suggested they had a difficult relationship with the truth (as I understood was happening).

You really should try the shadow ban thing (if that's what it's called where only the poster can see his posts?) out, if only so we can see if the usual suspects continue when they're getting no engagement.

My money says it'd make no difference whatsoever.

[quote=tjagain ]If I state. "Scotroutes cheats at hillwalking 'cos he has 3 feet instead of two". You reply with a photo showing only two feet.

Well a mod would hardly need to bother refuting nonsense that way would he? duh!

Well that's just silly. Surely such reports should take no time at all - you just issue a stock reply "that isn't the job of the mods".

You’d think that would have worked wouldn’t you?

I loved to know where this well moderated but least moderated forum is.

[i]it really has reached that sort of level on that thread [/i]

Walk away from the thread.

Just walk away.

You won't win with clever arguments, you won't feel better for one more rebuttal of an obvious untruth. It's not going to end because you craft the perfect post.

Watch it pop up to the top and drop down the most recent threads list and don't open it.

Find threads that are fun, informative, life affirming. Give up on the shitty ones.

[quote=chakaping ]You really should try the shadow ban thing (if that's what it's called where only the poster can see his posts?) out, if only so we can see if the usual suspects continue when they're getting no engagement.

Except we wouldn't be able to see would we?

wwaswas - thats why I only dip in and out now and then. Sometimes however there is informative stuff on both sides in there

[quote=wwaswas ]Walk away from the thread.

[img] [/img]

Personally I've more or less given up on the EU thread, most of my recent contributions have just been piss takes of the trolls (apologies, I'm probably part of the problem). The Donnie thread is at least more worthwhile (and the troll baiting more fun!)

aracer - Member

tjagain » If I state. "Scotroutes cheats at hillwalking 'cos he has 3 feet instead of two". You reply with a photo showing only two feet.

Well a mod would hardly need to bother refuting nonsense that way would he? duh!

But the only report the mods get is from me saying "scotroutes is calling me a liar ban him" ON the face of that one reported post Scotroutes would merit a ban however once the context is seen I am actually the instigator. so intervene earlier and tell us both to play nicely so as to avoid banning anyone..

Jambalaya is often accused on that thread (rightly as far as I can see) of making sweeping assertions which are unsubstantiated and without any proof or evidence to back them up.

However, the one time that I noticed he did provide a link to an article to back up some of his statements, it was [u]completely[/u] ignored by all other posters. The article he linked to was long and technical, but it was from the man had been at the very heart of UK/EU relations and probably understood the issues better than anyone else.

As I say, that evidence was completely ignored by all other posters. So when Jambalaya is blamed for spoiling the thread by posting untruths, I think those posters also have themselves to blame for failing to engage when presented with the opportunity to discuss substantive issues. All of which makes me think those posters are not interested in such discussion, only shouting out their own pithy soundbites into the vacuum of that thread, so their contribution is not actually any better than Jambalaya's. In fact, in asking that he be stopped from posting untruths, they are seeking impose censorship on the thread, which is worse.

Drac - Moderator

I loved to know where this well moderated but least moderated forum is.

It's private. But in addition to self moderating threads it also has sub forums, and quote buttons and many other features that would just blow your mind.

[quote=slowster ]However, the one time that I noticed he did provide a link to an article to back up some of his statements, it was completely ignored by all other posters.

A stopped clock is right twice a day. Or maybe:

[img] [/img]

[quote=jimjam ]But in addition to self moderating threads it also has sub forums, and quote buttons and many other features that would just blow your mind.

<reported> just the sort of unsubstantiated rubbish which causes all the problems. Everybody knows such things don't really exist.

<Poe's law requirement: 😉 >

Except we wouldn't be able to see would we?

Cougar would tell us, I'm sure.

One of the tactics is to lock any thread which goes off topic, immediately. It's absolutely infuriating as it often curtails some interesting (if only vaguely relevant) discussion.

It's a good job that never happens then. We'll close a thread if it descends into nothing more than squabbling / personal abuse, but not for thread drift. Look at SaxonRider's religion thread, for example.

Surely such reports should take no time at all - you just issue a stock reply "that isn't the job of the mods".

It takes even less time than that. (-:

A stopped clock is right twice a day.

A pithy soundbite which adds nothing to the discussion. Rather like what I was describing above.

[i] Look at SaxonRider's religion thread[/i]

don't tempt me - I've been following my own maxim and avoiding it!

Cougar would tell us, I'm sure.

That would kinda defeat the point of a shadow ban.

One of the tactics is to lock any thread which goes off topic, immediately. It's absolutely infuriating as it often curtails some interesting (if only vaguely relevant) discussion.

All the good threads start off with some boring, dry subject and then drift off on a bizarre tangent with entertaining results.

That's the best bit.

as an example, one of my all time favourites started with just a question and a picture.....

New bike!! but what the hell is this bit for????

[img] [/img]

A few bizarre twists later and an internet legend was created.

That would kinda defeat the point of a shadow ban.

I don't want names, just to know if it works in general or not.

All the good threads start off with some boring, dry subject and then drift off on a bizarre tangent with entertaining results.

Exactly.

The way some people act in here I really wouldn’t want to meet them in person, I actively avoid threads which have certain people in them.

And vice versa. I've thought people on here have sounded ace, only for them to reveal themselves as total dilberts in real life. And no, I'm not naming names. People no doubt think the same about me.

[quote=slowster ]A pithy soundbite which adds nothing to the discussion. Rather like what I was describing above.

Except it's a pithy soundbite which adds to the discussion the information that it's hard to believe anything written by somebody who makes stuff up most of the time.

There’s a lot that can be said whilst hiding my behind a keyboard though eh..
But that’s an internet phenomenon the world over.

It’s easy to take out frustrations on posters simply for the reason everyone is anonymous.

“Misquoted” and “taken out of context” narrative is a world we live in, rarely do posters get the exact point across before frustration sets in and descending arguments occur.

It would be a sad day the EU thread gets shut down, as divisive and personal it is there are many opinions and applied attitudes that should be heard. Sadly, the bickering will occur and Moderating that thread must be horrendously time consuming.

If polite Mod warnings aren’t enough, then Mods have to be Mods and use the tools given to them. However, there is a balance to be struck... Cougars points are absolutely valid and should be taken as a man of warning.. a warning a bit late IMO but an effective way of communicating a “global” warning.

Is this thread really about TJ? Nope, but some have taken the opportunity to have a pop at him whilst on here.. which is telling of both poster and accused.

And vice versa. I've thought people on here have sounded ace, only for them to reveal themselves as total dilberts in real life.

I've met a lot of people over the years who I first knew online. The only conclusion I can draw is that you never can tell. I've met people who are absolute roasters online but lovely in person, some for whom the exact opposite is true, and some who are exactly the same in both contexts.

And vice versa. I've thought people on here have sounded ace, only for them to reveal themselves as total dilberts in real life.

That's me. I am grumpy, sullen and uncommunicative in real life. I restrict my conversations to a series of furious grunts interspersed with throwing the occasional rage filled massive benny

perchypanther - Member

And vice versa. I've thought people on here have sounded ace

I hate to break it to you...

throwing the occasional rage filled massive benny

Ye gods. Showing your age there PP, I've not heard "throwing a Benny" in years.

keepin' the classics alive 😉

Throwing a Benny - discriminatory to people with learning difficulties is it?
Reported!

it is only a forum, none of it is really that important.

I struggle to make this register on my giveashitometer

Jambalaya is often accused on that thread (rightly as far as I can see) of making sweeping assertions which are unsubstantiated and without any proof or evidence to back them up.

However, the one time that I noticed he did provide a link to an article to back up some of his statements, it was completely ignored by all other posters. The article he linked to was long and technical, but it was from the man had been at the very heart of UK/EU relations and probably understood the issues better than anyone else.

As I say, that evidence was completely ignored by all other posters. So when Jambalaya is blamed for spoiling the thread by posting untruths, I think those posters also have themselves to blame for failing to engage when presented with the opportunity to discuss substantive issues. All of which makes me think those posters are not interested in such discussion, only shouting out their own pithy soundbites into the vacuum of that thread, so their contribution is not actually any better than Jambalaya's. In fact, in asking that he be stopped from posting untruths, they are seeking impose censorship on the thread, which is worse.

Except it's a pithy soundbite which adds to the discussion the information that it's hard to believe anything written by somebody who makes stuff up most of the time.

All the more reason, that when he does do as others have repeatedly requested and challenged him to do, and posts a link to a very insightful article on the subject, that people make the effort to read the article and consider its content, and take the opportunity to discuss the insight it provides.

Poor signal to noise ratio, I think, means filtering the real info from the ‘jambafacts’ is very difficult to do.

I think it's like child behaviour: respond positively to and encourage good behaviour, and ignore/don't react to a lot of the rest. I'm just not so sure any more who on that thread are the children.

tjagain - Member

Throwing a Benny - discriminatory to people with learning difficulties is it?
Reported!

As someone who wears a green wool beanie hat, I'm also offended.

tjagain - Member

Throwing a Benny - discriminatory to people with learning difficulties is it?
Reported!

I'm having a massive epi over it I'm so outraged!

As someone who wears a green wool beanie hat, I'm also [s]offended[/s] offensive

FTFY Benny 😉

I avoid the politics threads on here as most of you are bellends, but why the need for moderation? There is a swear filter (**** knows why?) and you're all grown ups, who cares?

Which posts ever get modded? How does one get modded or banned?

Threatening behaviour?
Racism or the like?

Does that happen on here though?

perchypanther - Member

As someone who wears a green wool beanie hat, I'm also [s]offended[/s] offensive

FTFY Benny

To be fair, it is a cradle of filth beanie

nice to see the typical level of witty banter maintained on here you genius 😉

FTFY Benny

Stop it, you are such a Joey

giantalkali - Member

Which posts ever get modded? How does one get modded or banned?

I think most of my indiscretions involve hurling non-PC schoolyard terms of abuse at other users, which is fair enough.
I'm also that juvenile in person. 😆

giantalkali - Member
Which posts ever get modded? How does one get modded or banned?

Sbob
I think most of my indiscretions involve hurling non-PC schoolyard terms of abuse at other users, which is fair enough.
I'm also that juvenile in person.

You massive spackker

*furiously hits report button*

*furiously hits report button*

Tell tale tit.
Yer mammy canny knit.
Yer daddy canny go tae bed
withoot his dummy tit.

Lefties have an undeniable tendancy to live in echo chambers and it's highly amusing seeing them trigger on STW whenever they're challenged with facts over feelings, and long may this continue.

However, labelling people as 'racist' should be policed more thoroughly by STW as the accusations are baseless and without substance, something that's proved time and time again by STW not simply banning the very same posters... that is unless of course these same deluded lefties actually believe that STW tolerate racists?!? Makes you think eh.

One of the right wing racists got banned for his use of racist terms.

I’m struggling to recall the last time I reported a thread. I’m probably showing my age here, but I think it was one about the kids programme ‘Lazytown?’, which contained some (in my opinion) pretty dodgy comments about one of its young female actors (and by young I mean early teens). Don’t recall what, if any, actions were taken, but I did receive a number of emails from one of the contributors to the thread informing me that I was overweight, that my parents had not been married at the time of my birth, and that I should ‘get cancer’. I’ve had a few run ins over the years with the usual big hitters on religion threads, but have gradually come to realise there’s no real point in getting wound up by things I have no ability to change, so just tend to avoid the more obvious pitfalls. There have been times (actually one major occasion) when a forum member who had been banned many times (yes, the first name you thought of!) was creating unnecessary levels of drama by asking myself and other forum members to provide him with fake email addresses in order to get back on the forum, which I have to admit I was gobsmacked about - I enjoy lurking, and occasionally posting, on here, but I’d personally be worried if the forum held such an integral part in my life that I’d consider such levels of bellendery if I was banned.

Lefties have an undeniable tendancy to live in echo chambers and it's highly amusing seeing them trigger on STW w[u]henever they're challenged with facts over feelings, and long may this continue.[/u]

[img] [/img]

Well played, great to see some parody accounts on here. 😀

Indeed enft

Avoided this thread (despite some of false accusations) as cougs OP request is clear. But since it’s inpossible to rationally discuss the root cause the underlying issue remains and cannot be debated openly.

Very obvious again today - but clearly can’t be reported either. 😯

Still, easier to remember the words we were told as kids - sticks and stones.....

it's highly amusing seeing them trigger on STW

Being a troll is highly amusing for the troll.

Anyway, this thread… my thoughts are that stopping the long threads will just result in more shorter threads on connected topics. Will that really be easier to moderate? If the mods think so, then fair enough, cut the threads off when it seems a good point to do so. I very much doubt that will work out any better/easier to manage though.

[quote=tjagain ]*furiously hits report button*

<reports tj for anger management issues>

tjagain - Member

*furiously hits report button*

I'm pretty sure that was one of them... 😕

Indeed enft

Being a troll is highly amusing for the troll …and other trolls.

barnsleymitch - Member

but I did receive a number of emails from one of the contributors to the thread informing me that I was overweight, that my parents had not been married at the time of my birth, and that I should ‘get cancer’.

Crikey! 😯

I'll continue to wish various venereal diseases on those that mention Brexit in every unrelated thread, but hopefully no-one takes that too seriously.

barnsleymitch - Member
I’ve had a few run ins over the years with the usual big hitters on religion threads,

Barnsley! Where gave you been! Missed you!

Let's get back down to it shall we?

Right - god, bit of a nob no? 😀

Please don't ban me again Cougar, baby, xmas was horrible... 😥

😉

Oh woppit, you are a minx!

Yeah, that's a bit much. Who cares if you get banned or your thread gets locked, life should be a bit of a laugh. It's a shame that the banter devolves to the point that people are actually sending each other abusive emails.

I think the easiest thing to do is ban everyone who’s contributed to this thread for a month.

sbob - Member

tjagain - Member

*furiously hits report button*

I'm pretty sure that was one of them...

Eh? I am confused by this post

Tom_W1987 - Member

Yeah, that's a bit much. Who cares if you get banned or your thread gets locked, life should be a bit of a laugh. It's a shame that the banter devolves to the point that people are actually sending each other abusive emails.

I had someone off here use my email addy to sign me up for a load of spam sites. Hence its hidden now

I think the easiest thing to do is ban everyone who’s contributed to this thread for a month.

Please guv, I promise to be good.

[img] /revision/latest?cb=20091230233249[/img]

I had someone off here use my email addy to sign me up for a load of spam sites. Hence its hidden now

Where does it stop being banter and start being abusive? Emails are clearly abusive, but what about the forum? A lot of us come here because STW can be pretty funny at times.

I do think upvote/downvotes are a good idea, like Pinkbike and Reddit or the awards at arrse eg "Funny" "Insightful" "Show-Again-Braincell" - so we can self moderate. I reckon that might allow us all to back off a bit, before we all go over the top in more heated threads.

tjagain - Member

Eh? I am confused by this post

The word used in the post you were replying to with your "*furiously hits report button* " post, not your post.
I didn't want to quote the word for obvious reasons.

Hope that makes sense.

[quote=Tom_W1987 ] Where does it stop being banter and start being abusive? Emails are clearly abusive, but what about the forum?
We all have different banter-levels. I was guilty of over-stepping the banter with Kryton57, maybe because I assume that forum regulars are much like mates we have at the pub etc. I've reigned it in since then. With other posters I do know outside of the forum I'm more likely to indulge a bit.

Yeah, I'm guilty of it as well.

I really do think some kind of award system for posts would be a really great way of telling each other when we've gone too far. Instead of hitting report, we can tag each others posts with say something like the following emoji... 😯 , and each post can build up a collection of reactions from other users - I think that would give a good indicator in regards to how your post has been viewed by others. The problem with the report button is that it's not a visible indicator of your behaviour until you get banned or warned. I don't even get warning emails/PM's either.

Very obvious again today - but clearly can’t be reported either.

You don't half talk some mince, THM.

As I said in the second post, I'm not saying "don't report posts" I'm saying "don't make posts which require reporting." As well you know.

Ok take it back. Didn’t read that post

But nice example with opening line there !! Glad it’s only half talk mince mind...

Where does it stop being banter and start being abusive?

Any warning recieved shoud give people a clue.

[quote=enfht ]Lefties have an undeniable tendancy to live in echo chambers

feeling left out, snowflake?

Ta sbob

Any warning recieved shoud give people a clue.

I think my email junks STW ones - plus I'm hardly ever logged into it. So the warning won't come in time for a lot of the lunacy. I don't think the current system in place is visible enough.

Is there anyway that the serial offenders could have an enforced pause before they post? Like the slow down yo move to fast if you try to post too quickly? some of us a 2 minute " do you really want to post that" pause might reduce the intemperate posts

You could connect STW to a 'tone analyser' service that are available on the internet.

people have moderator, still not a customer, Lazarus and reformed troll next to their name. Could we not just have Cockwomble or lacking social skills for the repeat offenders and whistle blower or telltale next to those who are over eager with the report button?

barnsleymitch - Member

I’m struggling to recall the last time I reported a thread. I’m probably showing my age here, but I think it was one about the kids programme ‘Lazytown?’, which contained some (in my opinion) pretty dodgy comments about one of its young female actors (and by young I mean early teens).

That's going back a bit. I vaguely remember Fred going after someone on that thread, insisting they were a 'nonce' (his words).