-
Originally Posted by BIRMANBOY
What a wonderful world that would be...one where you could rely on people to do the right thing all the time. As much as most of us try ..the reality is that people are imperfect beings and that shows up in the occasional flare up in even the politest of society's. Rules are useful in reminding those with short memories and fuses that certain behaviours are counter productive and will not be tolerated. 95% of posters are probably fine but why should the aberrant 5% be permitted to take undue advantage. This is why there needs to be someone moderating and acting as an impartial referee. Problem then of course is that in any dispute the "aggrieved" party questions the parentage and motives of the referee. So it is imperative that the rules are simple, accepted by all participants prior to engagement and simple and obvious for the referee and or umpire to get it right. Bad rules are almost as bad as no rules. I'm not saying the ST rules are bad ..what I'm saying is that when you get situations like this its crucial to look at underlying causes. If people understand the rules and transgress there is no comeback available so moderation is expected and accepted. When there is too much room for interpretation, then there is possible comeback and transgressors have themselves a platform.
How about things stay the same but MOD gives reasons for a warning or ban and if a certain large number say they dont agree -the poster gets the benefit of the doubt and comes back.
Alot of bans are met with a bit of mild humor by most(ok he did have it coming)--but occasionally alot feel a poster banned has been really hard done --Im not talking a full on debate--just a place where you can tick a box or something----I can definitely remember a few ''Bring back XX'' It would also maybe take a bit of heat off the MOD--(dont think it would work for getting posters banned though--people have been known to gang up)
-
Originally Posted by skid
How about things stay the same but MOD gives reasons for a warning or ban and if a certain large number say they dont agree -the poster gets the benefit of the doubt and comes back.
Alot of bans are met with a bit of mild humor by most(ok he did have it coming)--but occasionally alot feel a poster banned has been really hard done --Im not talking a full on debate--just a place where you can tick a box or something----I can definitely remember a few ''Bring back XX'' It would also maybe take a bit of heat off the MOD--(dont think it would work for getting posters banned though--people have been known to gang up)
Actually - I like this idea. Lets call it "mercy by populous request" ... already the old Romans had such a system. And while it didn't work for Jesus (remember - Pontius Pilate tried), they used to govern the (known) world for roughly 500 years (or longer - depending how you count), i.e. it seemed to have worked for them.
----
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)
-
Originally Posted by BlackPeter
Actually - I like this idea. Lets call it "mercy by populous request" ... already the old Romans had such a system. And while it didn't work for Jesus (remember - Pontius Pilate tried), they used to govern the (known) world for roughly 500 years (or longer - depending how you count), i.e. it seemed to have worked for them.
And if that fails we can give crucifiction a go
-
Elections thread is where behaviour gets most out of hand with a succession of very left wing commentators attempting to impose their point of view on everyone else by non-stop posting. I have counted and commented on where one of these people have posted 5 times in succession (several times) with no other poster getting a word in. They are also quick to call other posters fascists, racist any other hateful label they can think of. They are there every day without letting up in their attempt to impose a party line and politically correct thinking. I suggest rules that (a) no poster may post more than one post at a time (b) posters may not put up more than 2 posts per day on any one thread (c) posters can only post on alternate days (d) personal abuse of other posters is out including labeling them as fascist or racist.
cheers,
The Major
-
Last edited by Crackity; 14-12-2015 at 07:34 PM.
-
One issue that I think causes quite a bit of angst and niggle between posters is when someone is misquoted, particularly when it happens from the same posters again and again. The rules that most have suggested are common sense, however labeling someone racist as an example when the post is clearly just that, isn't defamatory if its accurate. Not easy for the moderators I agree.
Good example is I get labeled a lefty on the political thread consistently when I voted for a right wing party in the last election. ;-)
So someone's lefty might be just right of centre, but not far right as they would like. So what I'm saying is, its subjective.
Anyway its a tough job being a moderator & as long as they are fair they have my full support.
Hopefully you find my posts helpful, but in no way should they be construed as advice. Make your own decision.
-
Originally Posted by Major von Tempsky
Elections thread is where behaviour gets most out of hand with a succession of very left wing commentators attempting to impose their point of view on everyone else by non-stop posting. I have counted and commented on where one of these people have posted 5 times in succession (several times) with no other poster getting a word in. They are also quick to call other posters fascists, racist any other hateful label they can think of. They are there every day without letting up in their attempt to impose a party line and politically correct thinking. I suggest rules that (a) no poster may post more than one post at a time (b) posters may not put up more than 2 posts per day on any one thread (c) posters can only post on alternate days (d) personal abuse of other posters is out including labeling them as fascist or racist.
cheers,
The Major
Well there major...thats a pretty strong set of rules you got there(alternate days and all that)
Im gunna take a wild guess and say you must not be in the ,what you call left wing camp.
Ive never associated those with left wing views as politically correct--usually their views are more for change to the system.
I guess some are loopy and some are quite good at getting people to at least think about issues.
Anyway,it will be interesting to see how many agree with your proposed rules.
Remember ..if you want to comment its tues ..so wait til thurs
Last edited by skid; 15-12-2015 at 05:26 PM.
-
Originally Posted by skid
Well there major...thats a pretty strong set of rules you got there(alternate days and all that)
Im gunna take a wild guess and say you must not be in the ,what you call left wing camp.
Ive never associated those with left wing views as politically correct--usually their views are more for change to the system.
I guess some are loopy and some are quite good at getting people to at least think about issues.
Anyway,it will be interesting to see how many agree with your proposed rules.
Remember ..if you want to comment its tues ..so wait til thurs
Im picking the Major is not a pinko Commie either Skid
see you same time same place Thu
Last edited by Crackity; 15-12-2015 at 05:49 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Crackity
Im picking the Major is not a pinko Commie either Skid
see you same time same place Thu
Going by the wonderful jokes he used to post I would think he is true "blue".lol
-
Originally Posted by Daytr
One issue that I think causes quite a bit of angst and niggle between posters is when someone is misquoted, particularly when I like collecting pictures of unicorns and taking long walks down the beach
Not sure that makes sense Daytr?
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks