[Closed] Types of forum user

first rule of banhammer is don't talk about banhammer
second rule of banhammer...

Wonder if it'll get called into service from this thread?

It seems you are better off crying to the mods every time someone dares to affront your sensibilities, than occasionally take it on the chin, realise it takes two to tango or that life is too short to run to the powers that be over every little thing.

This can be a great place, I was after a knob for an mfi in-house cooker but did not know how to source one after mfi went bust as I did not know the manufacturer. Someone on here knew the maker and I got one.

New forum tagline:

[i]"STW: We Know a Thing or Two about Knobs Here"[/i] 😉

Given that the mods are actively trying to mould the forum into a friendlier, more respectful and good-humoured place to hang out, I should think that they [i]welcome[/i] "reportings" of abusive posters. I've had no hesitation in helping them achieve their objective...

That's very good of you. I think some of us will miss you though.

I take it that is meant to suggest that my posts are abusive. Clearly, as I am still here, that is not the case, unlike say, Fred et al.

Given that, I'm not sure if your comment is in any sense meaningful?

I take it that is meant to suggest that my posts are abusive. Clearly, as I am still here, that is not the case, unlike say, Fred et al.

I don't think I've ever read an abusive post from you Mr Woppit. However I've seen plenty of negative, trolling and argumentative ones - would you agree?

Clearly, as I am still here

Yes. Don't go ****ing up this thread too please.

😀

Given that, I'm not sure if your comment is in any sense meaningful?

It wasn't meant to be meaningful, it was meant to be silly.

Good heavens ([i]sic[/i]) I do seem to be getting a lot of comments from people who don't want me to respond.

However I've seen plenty of negative, trolling and argumentative ones - would you agree?

Negative, in the sense that I have a point of view that opposes other points of view, you mean? Like the "Bloody Atheists" one? I'm not completely clear that simply having an opposing point of view and pursuing it deserves the "negative" perjorative...

Trolling - yeah. Occasionally, just for a livener. Guilty as charged, m'lud.

Argumentative. What, we're not allowed to argue, now? That wipes out 90% of the forum doesn't it?

Cougar - Member

Given that, I'm not sure if your comment is in any sense meaningful?

It wasn't meant to be meaningful, it was meant to be silly.

My apologies.

Anyway, don't let me *** up the thread.

Argumentative. What, we're not allowed to argue, now? That wipes out 90% of the forum doesn't it?

That seems to be the case. Recent ban-hammers were primarily for arguing.

Seems the Mod Squad are working hard to produce a happier, friendlier, more relaxed forum where no one ever disagrees and everyone is afraid to fart. 😕

My apologies.

Anyway, don't let me *** up the thread.

No offence meant. I tend to assume that my posts have implied smileys at the end these days.

*Parp*

You know, everyone keeps talking about this Ban Hammer. I don't get it. He's hardly done anything of note since Crockett's Theme, has he?

My point woppit is simply that YOU are as guilty as anyone of breaking the forum guidelines.

Let he who is without sin hit the report post button and all that.

*Parp*

Reported.

yossarian - Member

My point woppit is simply that YOU are as guilty as anyone of breaking the forum guidelines.

Let he who is without sin hit the report post button and all that.

Oh, STOP it! You're ***ing up the thread!

Argument and debate is what this forum is about - it makes you re-evaluate your personal point of view. My own beliefs have been challenged and subsequently changed following another users contribution. However some on here are not able to restrains themselves from publishing lengthy screeds multiple times on a single thread. This is off-putting and unattractive to those that don't aspire to Big Hitter status.

On a personal note I couldn't care less what tag I'm given - I'm fairly certain I've been on the end of less flattering ones outside the forum 😀

Oh, STOP it! You're ***ing up the thread!

I should start my own 😆

I tried that, it didn't survive... 😉

Argument and debate is what this forum is about - it makes you re-evaluate your personal point of view.

I agree - gathering different points of view is one of the things I like best about this place: it constantly challenges my own viewpoints and enlightens me.

But it seems the management have other aspirations for it.
And it [i]is[/i] their ball.

some on here are not able to restrains themselves from publishing lengthy screeds multiple times on a single thread

Guilty as charged. 😳 I don't aspire to Hit Big, I just like to explain myself clearly and sometimes I get overly verbose in doing so.

But it seems the management have other aspirations for it.

Nonsense! Read the sticky at the top of the forum for the reality.

Nonsense!

Sorry, this is getting heated and abuse is beginning to creep in.

I'm stepping away.

Ah, so you actually understand the distinction we are making and you are clearly trolling then.

It makes me laugh how when some people get banned from here they go to bikemagic and start a thread about it.Do people need attention so badly that they see it as a badge of honour to be banned from a mtb forum.

I understand what you say in [url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/our-forum ]your Sticky[/url] Mark, and I even agree with it.

But I don't [i]personally[/i] think that recent actions have necessarily matched those stated goals.

The aim of making the forum more friendly and positive is laudable.

But as I watch people being picked off and banned for life, people that I have not always agreed with but with whom I have had long, interesting, informed and sometimes even polite discussions with; I find myself increasingly twitchy, watching what I say, posting less and tiptoeing around trying not to upset anyone.

That isn't, for me, the [i]"like a pub full of (middle-aged) mountain bikers"[/i] forum that I have grown to love.

Sorry.

There's a difference between arguments and abuse. Personally, I don't see why protracted debates are a bad thing in and of themselves; it's fairly obvious what's going on when, say, a religion thread reaches a page count in double figures, and reading them isn't mandatory. It's easy to avoid if you don't like that sort of thing.

The problem comes in when it descends into ad hominem attacks. That's the sort of thing which breeds ill feeling and needs swift moderation. I don't really understand why excessive arguing = lifetime ban, in isolation.

I reckon the no. 1 cause of genuine nastiness/unpleasantness/divisiveness on the forum stems from users being encouraged to report each other. The answer is more mods, recruited from every user group (including the rogues) and a greater emphasis on proactively assisting the debates rather than punitively stopping them, banning people and appealing to users to report each other which is so wide open for abuse it isn't true.

I feel for the owners in some ways. I'm guessing they never expected to be running a forum of this size with all of the bollocks that it entails.

I reckon the no. 1 cause of genuine nastiness/unpleasantness/divisiveness on the forum stems from users being encouraged to report each other

That's a very different view and not sure how you came up with that. We ask for people to report posts as it's just impossible for us to monitor the forum and all the posts, we don't always agree with reports. Even if we do a lot of the time the post may just be deleted and no other action taken. No one other than the person reporting and the mods know if there has been a report unless we mention it in the warning.

Drac: would it be worth trying an official "yellow card" system for posts?

Some official sign that a post is close to crossing the line, is being watched, and that everyone should back down [i]before[/i] action is taken?

[img] [/img]

The current situation sometimes seems to go very quickly from a some ill-considered words being exchanged to the thread being locked and people being disappeared.

It would hopefully prevent things getting that far and help people understand exactly where the line is in future.

.

Edit: actually a yellow card is a bit wendyball. How about:

[img] [/img]

It's not impossible for you to have a far better handle on what's getting posted, it has a cost in terms of time and money attached to it that's all. My opinion has been formed by observing posts by people who report others and the reactions to them.

Encouraging people to report each other because it's not possible for the site owners or their staff to monitor some of the content says something fairly fundemental does it not? Having a process for reporting illegal/inappropriate content by users is fine however that isn't the message you are giving out.

An idea worth considering Graham.

It's not impossible Drac, it has a cost attached to it that's all

And who is going to pay for this?

Who do you think Drac? Don't tell me cost can't be absorbed from the various income streams that the business has.

And who is going to pay for this?

I hear the sites traffic is continually increasing. So maybe there is a bit of extra cash available from increased ad revenue rates?

Who do you think Drac? Don't tell me cost can't be absorbed from the various income streams that the business has.

Mark can comment on this better but my understanding is that it really couldn't.

What's the hourly rate for a moderator then?

£1 if you're at the coalface, like Drac.

50p, if you're one of the shadowy ones who lurk at the periphery.

What's the hourly rate for a moderator then?

0 we do it voluntarily.

How can it not be possible to recruit more then? How many unique users do you have? I'm sure you could get a dozen decent people on board without too much fuss. And you should have one mod chosen by the users. Perhaps then you might start to turn this forum back towards what you want.

Perhaps then you might start to turn this forum back towards what you want.

I reckon the no. 1 cause of genuine nastiness/unpleasantness/divisiveness on the forum stems from users being encouraged to report each other.

This. And the anonymous tags too. Both just offer an opportunity for those in desperate need of a dose of MTFU, those that crave to be offended on someone elses behalf and those with a very broad streak of nastiness simmering inside to cause trouble, safe in the knowledge that no one knows who has doled out the virtual kick to the ribs. A cowards charter.

Having said that, I don't really give two flooks about what goes on on here. It's virtually all forgotten once I've logged off anyway. Some posters seem to spend an embarrassing amount of time here though, whereas I'd rather be doing something interesting, constructive or lucrative all day instead. This place is taken far too seriously by way too many people - 'owners' included.

And the anonymous tags too. Both just offer an opportunity for those in desperate need of a dose of MTFU

I do miss the tags, and used them often. I do not consider the use of them cowardly, or leave me needing a hot steaming cup of MTFU. Most the time they were quite amusing...but I guess they could be used to be nasty. I say bring them back, but hovering over the tag will display the user who posted them, perhaps?

p.s Al = Cupcake, Volvo For Sale, Cirque Le Jerk, Buy Eggs etc etc

The tags were an interesting example. I don't think I ever saw one that was particularly unpleasant but there were plenty of ego battles waged through them. Some were bloody hilarious. But I suppose it's just another thing to moderate, another thing for people to report and another way for people take offence.