When is a forum over modded

[DingBatMan]

First topic message reminder :

I refer to this thread

https://www.606v2.com/t7624-why-are-you-deleting-every-single-post-i-make

And I ask the question

Is this evidence of autocratic leadership by the mods?

Forums with constant input by mod and admin teams inevitably become a bias place, where only arguments in-line with their opinions are tolerated the irony being that the very posters who are over modded are the ones who make the forum and give it its importance.

There is a line.

Posters, Threads, Comments etc
-----Line of Rule-------
Mods

That line should remain clear, and should ONLY be crossed by the Mods when the rules are broken. Not when someone says something that you done like.

Think about it.

[Unknown Brother]

Can't we all just post in peace, sit down, put the tennis on and have a cuppa tea.

These sort of petty threads are the reason most people didn't mind 606 closing. Too many people with a victim complex. Leave the MODs and Admins alone, they do what they do so we have a good place to discuss sports and other interests.

[greybeard]

I think as a generic debate topic "When is a forum over modded" could actually generate interesting comment.

However, if it descends into "A mod did this and I don't like it" then it diverges from the general. At that point it gets no one nowhere (ooh, awful grammar there)

[Adam D]

Ok and can you provide some evidence of where this has occured?

As I said earlier, we do our best and give up a lot of our free time in doing so. We are not here to make this a better experience for you, we're here to make it better for everyone as a whole.

All you seem to be doing is picking a fight, which is a tad sad if you ask me. Most posters agree that we try very hard to keep things going here adn that we do a fine job.

Just look back through your posts in this argument. You have changed your main argument so many times. It's clear to me and others that you're merely antagonising us on purpose and I won't play any part in it.

Just take my assurances that we're trying our very best to keep things moving along smoothly.

Genuinely i concur with all you say, and this debate has risen out of the comments by GreyGhost and the following thread where he asked why his comments were deleted.

My simple question is if there is a rule for the forum members then why did it change for GG? and as i said, i never liked his attitude on the old site but he was still within the rules and thus not subject to modding. Just because his comments caused an argument.

I have actually had enough of entertaining this guy any further.

Every single point was addressed on the previous thread. Comments by GG were complained about. Some were upheld, some were not. Those that were, were removed. Everyone is under the same scrutiny.

You have insulted me personally by talking to me in a condescending tone. You have been asked to stop it but continue. If you continue to try and argue with us, you will be banned.

As Enforcer and Hero have stated, we do this for everyone and at the moment you are diverting our attention away from more important issues. We have way better things to do with our time. And thankfully it has now ended as any further comments by you on this thread are in direct conflict with an admins request for you to stop. hence you would be breaking a rule. Rule breaking after warning = ban.

[Pete C (Kiwireddevil)]

Ok and can you provide some evidence of where this has occured?

As I said earlier, we do our best and give up a lot of our free time in doing so. We are not here to make this a better experience for you, we're here to make it better for everyone as a whole.

All you seem to be doing is picking a fight, which is a tad sad if you ask me. Most posters agree that we try very hard to keep things going here adn that we do a fine job.

Just look back through your posts in this argument. You have changed your main argument so many times. It's clear to me and others that you're merely antagonising us on purpose and I won't play any part in it.

Just take my assurances that we're trying our very best to keep things moving along smoothly.

Genuinely i concur with all you say, and this debate has risen out of the comments by GreyGhost and the following thread where he asked why his comments were deleted.

My simple question is if there is a rule for the forum members then why did it change for GG? and as i said, i never liked his attitude on the old site but he was still within the rules and thus not subject to modding. Just because his comments caused an argument.

I've already addressed this in the rugby board, but for what it's worth, 2 of GG's posts were deleted (by me) yesterday. Separately a thread he started was closed this morning as the responses he received were starting to descend into personal abuse.

I'll address the deletions I made. First of all, a number of complaints had come in on the English RWC squad debate earlier yesterday with respects to posts made about national origin of squad members. In order to "cool the discussion down" before it descended I asked that people back off the ethnicity angle and focus more on the squad's merits, and I also stated that I'd be deleting any subsequent posts that "wummed" around player origin. The thread then moved back into a pretty good (IMO) discussion about the squad. GG subsequently made a couple of short posts that purely attacked the origin of players, in a tone that pretty much guaranteed an aggressive response. So, as promised up-thread, I removed them. And I dare say that if I hadn't done it, a fair number of people would be criticising the Mods for not stopping WUM posts.

[dummy_half]

Hero
"Where I would disagree with you though is that I don’t want this them v us culture here, that by posting as a regular Joe so to speak on the board it hopefully removes that it shows we’re more approachable and we are at the end of the day wanting to chat about said sports or whatever the topic matter is. I don’t feel that when I enter a discussion that’s underway that it then stifles the debate, that suddenly people should feel on edge because there’s an elephant in the room and it’s not something that I feel has happened."

I (and I think almost any other contributor) don't work on the 'oh, there's a mod here, best behaviour everyone' approach, but just keep all posts to a respectable level (other than a bit of teasing about Welsh rugby players - however I try to keep it to the level of banter rather than anything that could be considered WUMming).

In fact I think it is very valuable that the moderators and admins are also active members of the forums they look after, so that they can see both when the lines are being crossed and when a certain poster is essentially spamming multiple threads with the same argument.

[DingBatMan]

Thank you for your points DIngbatman and I hopefully will address them here:

I created the site initially, I did so on the evening of when the BBC announced the cuts in services and as a result the 606 would cease to exist. I was a frequent user of 606 for many, many years and over that time made what I consider a large number of friends, however anonymous they are due to the internet, usernames etc I still feel that I could call them friends as we’ve probably discussed more topics and chatted longer than I have with many real life friends.
It was due to this I decided to create the site. I wanted to stay in touch, I wanted to continue these friendships and not have them suddenly cut out of my life. Immediately a number of them joined, but it wasn’t just within my immediate circle that joined, golfers signed up, I’d not advertised it to them but suddenly here they were and asking for a golf section, saying they too wanted to remain in touch with their friends, that they were in the same predicament that I was in. It’s wasn’t just our group, for each sport it emerged there too were communities so at that point the decision was made to invite them as well onboard, let them remain in the circles they’d created.
An admin team was created of the guys that originally had assisted me in the creation of the site but soon other joined as admin and moderators, several of which I’d never spoken to prior to the site creation.

Anyway that’s enough of the history of the site and back more to the discussion over ‘should mods post on the board in a non mod role’.
I can see both sides to the argument and can see your point on this. Where I would disagree with you though is that I don’t want this them v us culture here, that by posting as a regular Joe so to speak on the board it hopefully removes that it shows we’re more approachable and we are at the end of the day wanting to chat about said sports or whatever the topic matter is. I don’t feel that when I enter a discussion that’s underway that it then stifles the debate, that suddenly people should feel on edge because there’s an elephant in the room and it’s not something that I feel has happened.

I appreciate that response. Nothing more to say on that.

Please report any posts where a user has been threatened and we will look into it.

Enforcer i give you ME
Quoting HOBO.
"Dingbat - do you enjoy posting on this forum?"
"Dingbat - I strongly suggest that you stop this debate now. You are bieng hostile towards a admin with your last post."

For the record, my last post was "And again point proved. "

mmm yes im a real rebel.

Simply making points in an adult fashion of which i think conforms to the brief laid out by Hero.

[Fernando]

"Dingbat - do you enjoy posting on this forum?" - that's not threatening behavior, it's a question

"Dingbat - I strongly suggest that you stop this debate now. You are bieng hostile towards a admin with your last post." again not threatening just telling you stop arguing with him

neither of them are threatening behavior and you know it dingbat so stop trying to cause trouble go back to your board and discuss your sport and if you have a issue there hit the report button and it'll be dealt with.

[DingBatMan]

I've already addressed this in the rugby board, but for what it's worth, 2 of GG's posts were deleted (by me) yesterday. Separately a thread he started was closed this morning as the responses he received were starting to descend into personal abuse.

I'll address the deletions I made. First of all, a number of complaints had come in on the English RWC squad debate earlier yesterday with respects to posts made about national origin of squad members. In order to "cool the discussion down" before it descended I asked that people back off the ethnicity angle and focus more on the squad's merits, and I also stated that I'd be deleting any subsequent posts that "wummed" around player origin. The thread then moved back into a pretty good (IMO) discussion about the squad. GG subsequently made a couple of short posts that purely attacked the origin of players, in a tone that pretty much guaranteed an aggressive response. So, as promised up-thread, I removed them. And I dare say that if I hadn't done it, a fair number of people would be criticising the Mods for not stopping WUM posts.

For what its worth kiwireddevil

If the abuse starts then yes modding should take place.

However, if a question of where the squad are taken from upsets someone then tough luck. its a fact and its a fact thats been reported in every newspaper today due to the twitter comments by waldron. So your deleting of those posts has created this argument and was ill advised. A person offering comment on where the england squad is coming from does not amount to racism but is questioning the IRB modus operandi and thats should not be subject to deletion because you would prefer that they discuss the merits of the squad?

f you prefer that then start a thread called (the merits of the england squad) or something. I think perhaps all this could be avoided dont you. rhetorical question mate.

[Adam D]

PM for you dingbat.

[Sponsored content]