PDA

View Full Version : New Forum Rules



Vince
12-12-2015, 02:51 PM
Ok, so obviously we need some new rules around posting etc.

I invite members to post here some rules they would like to give a definitive as to what is right & wrong, what will get you a warning and what will get you a temporary banning and a permanent one.

What I'm looking for is you guys make the rules and you guys abide by them, - just the set of golden rules with nothing too long-winded.

Regard's,
Vince

P.s - Keep this thread about the rules and nothing else please!

minimoke
12-12-2015, 03:09 PM
OK. I'll get the ball rolling.

No personal abuse of a Member including the use of expressions of bigotry, racism, sexism, hatred or profanity.

No providing of information which could be construed as financial investment advice under (What ever Act)

No bringing the reputation of the Shareholder Forum, its owners, Members, Administrators Moderators etc into disrepute, including the making of defamatory statements

No spruiking stuff

No telling tales unless it is breach of one of these rules.

No grumbling, moaning whinging about anything related to this forum.

Vince
12-12-2015, 05:45 PM
Thanks Minimoke!

Minerbarejet
12-12-2015, 06:19 PM
Thanks Minimoke!
Reinstate all banned members.
Second Chance
No Trolling
Also
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down Excessive thumbs down 1 week ban/2 week ban/ Bye byes 1 year
Stock Held Yes NO and Sentiment
Buy Hold Sell

BlackPeter
12-12-2015, 06:56 PM
OK. I'll get the ball rolling.

No personal abuse of a Member including the use of expressions of bigotry, racism, sexism, hatred or profanity.

No providing of information which could be construed as financial investment advice under (What ever Act)

No bringing the reputation of the Shareholder Forum, its owners, Members, Administrators Moderators etc into disrepute, including the making of defamatory statements

No spruiking stuff

No telling tales unless it is breach of one of these rules.

No grumbling, moaning whinging about anything related to this forum.

Think I could live with these rules ...

Propose to add something related to openness / transparency / disclosure:

- disclosure required for posters with admin / moderator rights & conflict of interest resolution process (moderators who are as well posters are only able to penalise posters if they are impartial in the related discussion) - a simple referral process should solve this.

- Every moderator has a unique ID (based on my understanding that STMOD might be a number of people)

- long term bans (more than some days) can be appealed. Appeal process as proposed by Birman boy (e.g. referral to a panel of say one moderator and 2 or 3 posters excluding the moderator who decided about he original ban)

... and I'd like a clear escalation process like e.g. proposed by miner (starting with warning / short ban (days) and only if this does not work, long ban (months). permanent ban in my view only for repeat offenders (3 strikes) and really bad behaviour

agree as well with BirmanBoy's proposal that Moderators should explain the reason for any warnings / bans by referral to the respective (violated) rule.

Lizard
12-12-2015, 07:23 PM
Expected disclosure of related party interests or significant conflict of interest (i.e. other than minority shareholder <5% retail investor)

Vince
12-12-2015, 08:34 PM
No Trolling
Also


Thanks Minerbarejet, - care to define you understanding of trolling to make it clear.

Vince

Vince
12-12-2015, 08:36 PM
Think I could live with these rules ...

Propose to add something related to openness / transparency / disclosure:

- disclosure required for posters with admin / moderator rights & conflict of interest resolution process (moderators who are as well posters are only able to penalise posters if they are impartial in the related discussion) - a simple referral process should solve this.

- Every moderator has a unique ID (based on my understanding that STMOD might be a number of people)

- long term bans (more than some days) can be appealed. Appeal process as proposed by Birman boy (e.g. referral to a panel of say one moderator and 2 or 3 posters excluding the moderator who decided about he original ban)

... and I'd like a clear escalation process like e.g. proposed by miner (starting with warning / short ban (days) and only if this does not work, long ban (months). permanent ban in my view only for repeat offenders (3 strikes) and really bad behaviour

agree as well with BirmanBoy's proposal that Moderators should explain the reason for any warnings / bans by referral to the respective (violated) rule.

Thanks BP - good points!

Vince

Vince
12-12-2015, 08:37 PM
Expected disclosure of related party interests or significant conflict of interest (i.e. other than minority shareholder <5% retail investor)

Agree, thanks Lizard

Crackity
12-12-2015, 08:56 PM
Vince - you know my thoughts - thanks for the PM ;)

BIRMANBOY
12-12-2015, 09:12 PM
A few more thoughts/ideas into the cauldron
In the spirit of keeping it simple here are my thoughts on the golden rules.
(1) No personal abuse either direct or implied.
(2) No direct (personalised ) aggressive criticism or belittling of other investors methodologies. (This is not supportive of our shared goals and is not welcomed or encouraged. Countering posts should be polite, civilized and framed in such a way that they don’t leave individuals feeling belittled or perceived as idiots.)
(3) All posters should have to disclose positions if they are employed by a Share market listed/associated company. If they are in a “top ten shareholder” position this should also be detailed. This, along with list of all shareholdings should be set as a “signature” for all posters and then is visible on all posts. I don’t believe this is asking too much and also adds some relevance andor questions as to posters motivation in posting.
(4) No posts that have elements of defamation or discrimination.

I think that any reported post should be measured and could be judged as being one of following.
(a) Not contrary to rules
(b) Contrary but minor or first offense..equals warning
(c) Contrary but serious escalation , even if first offense, equals one week ban
(d) Contrary and second offense on same subject..equals one week ban
(e) Contrary and third offense on same subject..equals 3 month ban
(f) Contrary and 4th offense on same subject ..permanent ban from forum

Regards trolling, spruiking, downramping, pumping,dumping and associated endeavours. Since these are hard to prove and extremely open to interpretation, maybe let these be dealt with in the normal interaction of day to day posting. Being questioned by fellow posters should be sufficient to keep it under control. Its hard to draw a line between natural enthusiasm and pumping so let it go and let posters enjoy their wins and moan about their losses. It becomes obvious to most posters in anycase

Joshuatree
12-12-2015, 09:32 PM
Hi Vince great idea
Thumbs up work well, thumbs down don't. A person gets the message if there are low or no thumbs up.

No attempting to influence/ monopolise ;....people/the thread, with multiple posts; maybe limit number of posts per day on any one thread.

No continual Ramping or Bagging of stocks

No Swearing

1st offence a warning
2nd offense 1- 3days suspended
3rd 7 days
4th 30 days
5th 60 days

Jantar
12-12-2015, 10:21 PM
I moderate another forum where the rules are much more lenient than on here, but that doesn't make the job easier, it makes it much harder. Further, on that forum it is very difficult to get banned completely, but some do manage it.
Three things we do there to keep the forum free flowing that may be of some use here:

1. Have a thread in off topic where almost anything goes. Basically, in that thread, the rules are simple: No abuse (but teasing is OK), and nothing that would contravene any laws of the country. Anything that is out of place in other threads gets moved to this thread rather than being deleted, so that if two members are having an argument they can continue to argue without swamping a genuine thread. We call this thread Pointless Drivel.

2. There is a stage between warning and banning where a member's posts are fully moderated. I.e. approved by a moderator before appearing on the forum. Continued abuse during this process will lead to a severe suspension or a ban. During this process no pms may be sent or received. This still allows for important information to be imparted or serious comment to be made.

3. Warnings. when given, have a pre-determined expiry date (1 month for minor through to 3 months for more serious ones). This prevents moderators from having a beef with a member and punishing them for something that happened 2 years ago.

Joshuatree
12-12-2015, 10:32 PM
maybe let these be dealt with in the normal interaction of day to day posting. Being questioned by fellow posters should be sufficient to keep it under control. Its hard to draw a line between natural enthusiasm and pumping so let it go and let posters enjoy their wins and moan about their losses. It becomes obvious to most posters in anycase

Respectfully disagree.Unfortunately this hasn't worked in the past hence a recent ban. Relentless spruiking is very different to promoting a stock as is continuous bagging is different to choosing to sell or not buy a stock and giving reasons. Its the mods job and guidelines need to be clear for all imo..

Joshuatree
12-12-2015, 10:39 PM
quote Jantar

1. Have a thread in off topic where almost anything goes. Basically, in that thread, the rules are simple: No abuse (but teasing is OK), and nothing that would contravene any laws of the country. Anything that is out of place in other threads gets moved to this thread rather than being deleted, so that if two members are having an argument they can continue to argue without swamping a genuine thread. We call this thread Pointless Drivel.
and punishing them for something that happened 2 years ago.[/QUOTE]

Great idea.I set up the "After Market Lounge" thread for this ,and humour, sharing int links etc. We could reactivate it or n maybe better to start a new one.

axe
12-12-2015, 10:47 PM
I would like to see a very visible main page disclaimer for this site stating that the views of posters here are opinions only and are in no way financial advice.
Technically stating "DYOR" is giving someone advice do to their own research........ which is still advice.....

Most important rule for the internet:
Do not be offended if someone disagrees with you on the internet.





However , when understand that disagreeing with someone there is a very fine line between personal criticizing and criticizing an idea / statement.
Most of the time even if you are criticizing and idea, and saying eg; "idea x is stupid" , then a person who believes idea x will probably think you are actually saying that they are stupid for believing idea x.

minimoke
13-12-2015, 06:28 AM
To keep the ball rolling.....
A few more thoughts/ideas into the cauldron
In the spirit of keeping it simple here are my thoughts on the golden rules.
(1) No personal abuse either direct or implied.
more an Admin issue - but the only person who can complain about rule one is the aggrieved person - not a bystander


(2)No direct (personalised ) aggressive criticism or belittling of other investors methodologies. (This is not supportive of our shared goals and is not welcomed or encouraged. Countering posts should be polite, civilized and framed in such a way that they don’t leave individuals feeling belittled or perceived as idiots.) Kinda the same as rule 1? and will perhaps makes things a bit sterile

(3)All posters should have to disclose positions if they are employed by a Share market listed/associated company. If they are in a “top ten shareholder” position this should also be detailed. This, along with list of all shareholdings should be set as a “signature” for all posters and then is visible on all posts. I don’t believe this is asking too much and also adds some relevance andor questions as to posters motivation in posting. No I am against this one. My shareholdings are my personal business. This is a forum, not an investment advice seervbice so any views, unrestrained should be welcome



I think that any reported post should be measured and could be judged as being one of following.
(a) Not contrary to rules
(b) Contrary but minor or first offense..equals warning
(c) Contrary but serious escalation , even if first offense, equals one week ban
(d) Contrary and second offense on same subject..equals one week ban
(e) Contrary and third offense on same subject..equals 3 month ban
(f) Contrary and 4th offense on same subject ..permanent ban from forum
Agreed, but how a bout a bit simpler.
Moderators cannot contribute to treads
Complaints can only be made against a rule and by a participant in that thread
Upheld complaint earns a "warning (wee red light thing that goes next to the Green light Reputations) that lasts say 6 months."Mods decide first 2 red lights
Three red lights (on any threads combined) earns say a one week ban. Next ban is for say one month, next six months next one year.
Decision on third red light decided by Jury of peers, not a Moderaotr


Regards trolling, spruiking, downramping, pumping,dumping and associated endeavours. Since these are hard to prove and extremely open to interpretation, maybe let these be dealt with in the normal interaction of day to day posting. Being questioned by fellow posters should be sufficient to keep it under control. Its hard to draw a line between natural enthusiasm and pumping so let it go and let posters enjoy their wins and moan about their losses. It becomes obvious to most posters in any caseAgreed - rules need to be simple and objective. Dont make the Mods job harder by allowing subjectivity.

Oh, and another bit of admin rule.
- Posters are solely responsible for opening, amending , deleting pasts. Admin reserves the right to add a footnote (eg "this post has earnt a warning"". None of this wholesale deletion of all posts when a Member spits the dummy. No deleting of posts by Mods. Flag it as a rule breaker sure, but move on.

skid
13-12-2015, 08:59 AM
No direct (personalised ) aggressive criticism or belittling of other investors methodologies.QUOTE

I agree with your ''aggressive'' and ''belittling'' but I believe its fair game to question other methodologies--how else do we learn?

I think most can tell when posts are starting to turn negative and even abusive (a sure sign is when those adjectives start popping up)

I agree about not deleting posts of departing members--when we make comments -they should stay IMO

I suppose we need to get clear whether its fair game to question company's performance or even motivation (leaving comments about posters out of the mix aside from disagreeing)--(obviously repeated remarks one way or the other should be minimized)

It would be interesting to know whether posters feel that the rules are to strict or to lax at present

iceman
13-12-2015, 09:22 AM
Respectfully disagree.Unfortunately this hasn't worked in the past hence a recent ban. Relentless spruiking is very different to promoting a stock as is continuous bagging is different to choosing to sell or not buy a stock and giving reasons. Its the mods job and guidelines need to be clear for all imo..

Thanks Vince for giving us the opportunity to comment on new rules.

There isn’t much to add as other posters have come up with a fairly comprehensive list. My view is in line with what minimoke, Black Peter, Lizard and Birmanboy have posted.

I do not like the thumbs up thumbs down idea. We already have a facility to agree or disagree with posts and these are now open to anyone to look at. I think that is sufficient.

I do agree with Birmanboy about the pumping, dumping downramping etc, leave it to be dealt with in he normal interaction of day to day posting. Posters can easily put those they don’t like on the “ignore” function

winner69
13-12-2015, 09:23 AM
Probably posted this own wrong thread previously. Short summary - probably existing rules are enough.

What is the purpose / objective of Sharetrader? Without knowing this what's the point if having 'enforceable' rules beyond those of common decency, politeness and some legal protection constraints. These seem to be in place?

From the owners perspective t is probably a means to reach out to many like minded people so they can make money (advertising, direct marketing etc). Your details are valuable to them.

But what about us?

The owners tout - www.sharetrader.co.nz - the only on-line communityfor share traders in NZ

The header on this page says - NZ's number one share market forum for investors

The NZX Forum is - Your place to discuss the instruments listed on the NZX

So it seems we are a community where we have forums to discuss things.

Communities are what participants want to make it. A Forum by definition is a public place for people to hold open discussions (ie have a conversation).

It seems that what can be discussed is the root if the current discontent on ST.

It seems some want a regimented disciplined approach to what is said on a topic - like strictly on topic and no real constructive discussion on pro and cons or whatever on a stock. That seems a sterile boring place to be.

Communities thrive by open discussion (sometimes vigourous / sometimes unpalatable to some). It is the members themselves who generally control how far these discussions go .....without the need torun of to the referee if one is not happy. This creates vibrant community and not a disciplined regimented one.

I prefer the latter model. If that means people aren't happy with me saying on the Scales thread that my home baked apple turnovers (on topic) they can either ignore it or pull me into line in a nice sort of way - but such is not red flags or banning material.

Too many rules and too much disciplinary actin and this this forum is stuffed - stuffed by the collective us and probably to the dismay of the owners.

Just my rave on a Sunday morning after the AC DC gig last night. In spite of wind and rain and technical difficulties a really spectacular event, great show. Betcha the residents of Thorndon didn't appreciate the cannons booming out at 11.30 - they were loud, really loud.

Baa_Baa
13-12-2015, 09:39 AM
Personally I think its fraught to try and over simplify anonymous internet conduct, behaviours, moderation, consequences etc. It is complicated, and subjective. But other sites have developed guidelines, there are numerous examples, ST needn't re-invent them imho.

The following (links below) work OK in most cases, the Mods (individual Id's) are quite active on the very busy threads and generally consistent in applying the rules. There are some 'features' which may not be able to be implemented on ST but imo work very well, the thumbs up/down, and the forced disclosure in particular.

Codes Guidelines http://hotcopper.com.au/help/code
Terms of Use http://hotcopper.com.au/help/terms
Privacy Policy http://hotcopper.com.au/help/privacy
Defamation Guide http://hotcopper.com.au/help/defamation

BIRMANBOY
13-12-2015, 10:34 AM
So re your responses to my post # 1...actually anyone can report a post not solely the aggrieved person. Simply click on icon at bottom left of post.
#2 similar but different...its possible to rubbish someone elses choices and investing style and not be abusive, but at the same time make them feel bullied. There is a way of doing it which can be constructive and supportive which is surely more productive.
#3 not to question your motives ..but whats the harm in disclosing your (our) interests. Personally I feel it adds to the weight of the post/poster if I see they have skin in the game. its too easy to be critical when you don't have anything to lose or gain. Also its all anonymous anyway so I don't see the issue.
#4 details obviously need to be hammered out but ultimately once set should be easy to follow and understand.
Which posts to delete and when and can mods do it or posters are another discussion in my view. what we should be focussing on first is the rules and whether they are fair , manageable and easily administered. I'm assuming the moderators don't get paid for what they do so lets make their job easier and less tiresome and less time absorbing.
To keep the ball rolling.....
more an Admin issue - but the only person who can complain about rule one is the aggrieved person - not a [/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]bystander
[FONT=Calibri]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri] Kinda the same as rule 1? and will perhaps makes things a bit sterile
[FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri] No I am against this one. My shareholdings are my personal business. This is a forum, not an investment advice seervbice so any views, unrestrained should be welcome

Agreed, but how a bout a bit simpler.
Moderators cannot contribute to treads
Complaints can only be made against a rule and by a participant in that thread
Upheld complaint earns a "warning (wee red light thing that goes next to the Green light Reputations) that lasts say 6 months."Mods decide first 2 red lights
Three red lights (on any threads combined) earns say a one week ban. Next ban is for say one month, next six months next one year.
Decision on third red light decided by Jury of peers, not a Moderaotr

Agreed - rules need to be simple and objective. Dont make the Mods job harder by allowing subjectivity.

Oh, and another bit of admin rule.
- Posters are solely responsible for opening, amending , deleting pasts. Admin reserves the right to add a footnote (eg "this post has earnt a warning"". None of this wholesale deletion of all posts when a Member spits the dummy. No deleting of posts by Mods. Flag it as a rule breaker sure, but move on.

BIRMANBOY
13-12-2015, 11:17 AM
Its great to see people giving assorted opinions and contributing ideas...this is how products and services keep getting better. Also kudos to ST and moderators for allowing the discussion take place. Most of us, if we are honest with ourselves, are probably not perfect (or even close) when it comes to our reactions when our processes are being criticized and or called into question. In the end, any product is generally always better when the intellectual resources of many individuals co-operate. The posters gain by exchanging ideas and systems and the forum owners/operators gain by building size and credibility. A forum without enthusiastic and engaged participants is going nowhere and will in fact create openings for others to provide similar but improved services. So again great that ST is keen to see and implement positive changes. I'm not a big or even medium poster but I do like efforts being made to assist and enhance everyone's enjoyment.

minimoke
13-12-2015, 12:34 PM
#3 not to question your motives ..but whats the harm in disclosing your (our) interests. Personally I feel it adds to the weight of the post/poster if I see they have skin in the game. its too easy to be critical when you don't have anything to lose or gain. Also its all anonymous anyway so I don't see the issue..
Still not sure what value this adds. And fraught with difficulty. For example I've posted on the RIS thread. What do you want to know. That I am a holder, how many I own (couldn't tell you - no idea), How much I paid for them (no idea - came from some convoluted backdoor process), How much are they worth now (no Idea since I dont know how many I hold)

Say I want to contribute to PEB of which I hold none. So I'm going to tell you I hold 20,000. Happy now?

Having or not having skin in the game I dont think adds anythng other than nosey parkers seeing what I hold. It doesn't enhance my ability to analyse the issues and have an opinion. Its a forum afterall. The most respected opinions ought to be the ones backed by evidence

And Rule One - I guess it gets up my nose when people take offence on behalf of others. For example I have been called all sorts of things in threads. I've a thick skin and dont take offence. I'd be mortified if someone complained on my behalf - I'm quite able to do it myself. I accept there are some thinner skinned people. This is a sharetrader forum not some nancy world where we need to be looking after the vulnerable - they should stay on the TradeMe message boards. If a person cant take a bit of stick being in the sharemarket probably isn't for them - and if they are upset they ought to have a free call to the Mods to call a halt.

BIRMANBOY
13-12-2015, 01:46 PM
Everyone entitled to an opinion...Seeing that a poster is a holder is sufficient ...anything else is just unnecessary unless they are substantial (top ten) holder or they are somehow connected to the company. Both of these elements should be disclosed in my view. In fact I believe that this is presently in the rules somewhere. As for whether or not one is a holder doesn't stop anyone from posting. How much weight is put on the post is as you say based mostly on the content and its relevance, However I personally believe that comments coming from holders or previous holders carry a bit more weight. Others may not but living through an experience surely should carry some meaning? Re your second point as to "nosey parkers", you are obviously a thick skinned person who can deal with a bit of grief..that's great but its not all about you here. Unfortunately some people a easily put off and can be adversely affected by something you would just shrug off. I don't mind being labelled a "nosy parker" if by reporting a post it shows some solidarity and sensitivity to someone who has been embarrassed and or humiliated. Unfortunately we are not all created equal in our ability to withstand hardships so I believe we should not assume that everyone will "harden up". I guess that makes me a "nancy boy" LOL
Still not sure what value this adds. And fraught with difficulty. For example I've posted on the RIS thread. What do you want to know. That I am a holder, how many I own (couldn't tell you - no idea), How much I paid for them (no idea - came from some convoluted backdoor process), How much are they worth now (no Idea since I dont know how many I hold)

Say I want to contribute to PEB of which I hold none. So I'm going to tell you I hold 20,000. Happy now?

Having or not having skin in the game I dont think adds anythng other than nosey parkers seeing what I hold. It doesn't enhance my ability to analyse the issues and have an opinion. Its a forum afterall. The most respected opinions ought to be the ones backed by evidence

And Rule One - I guess it gets up my nose when people take offence on behalf of others. For example I have been called all sorts of things in threads. I've a thick skin and dont take offence. I'd be mortified if someone complained on my behalf - I'm quite able to do it myself. I accept there are some thinner skinned people. This is a sharetrader forum not some nancy world where we need to be looking after the vulnerable - they should stay on the TradeMe message boards. If a person cant take a bit of stick being in the sharemarket probably isn't for them - and if they are upset they ought to have a free call to the Mods to call a halt.

skid
13-12-2015, 03:03 PM
Still not sure what value this adds. And fraught with difficulty. For example I've posted on the RIS thread. What do you want to know. That I am a holder, how many I own (couldn't tell you - no idea), How much I paid for them (no idea - came from some convoluted backdoor process), How much are they worth now (no Idea since I dont know how many I hold)

Say I want to contribute to PEB of which I hold none. So I'm going to tell you I hold 20,000. Happy now?

Having or not having skin in the game I dont think adds anythng other than nosey parkers seeing what I hold. It doesn't enhance my ability to analyse the issues and have an opinion. Its a forum afterall. The most respected opinions ought to be the ones backed by evidence

And Rule One - I guess it gets up my nose when people take offence on behalf of others. For example I have been called all sorts of things in threads. I've a thick skin and dont take offence. I'd be mortified if someone complained on my behalf - I'm quite able to do it myself. I accept there are some thinner skinned people. This is a sharetrader forum not some nancy world where we need to be looking after the vulnerable - they should stay on the TradeMe message boards. If a person cant take a bit of stick being in the sharemarket probably isn't for them - and if they are upset they ought to have a free call to the Mods to call a halt.

I agree--Some have been involved with a share ,have bought and sold for a very good reason--there is no reason why they shouldnt be able to voice that reason--It may save someone elses skin---We all like good things to happen--and we dont like bad things to happen--but when bad things happen ,learning damage control is a valuable asset.

Im assuming BB you are referring to the Hot copper style with the holding or not holding tick--I personally dont have a problem letting people know if Im not currently holding--but while I dont like down rite meanness ,I also find that many things are becoming over regulated. I personally would not like to go further down that road.

I guess many have noticed that there are some who have become more or less the official ''spokesman'' for a number of companies. Its an interesting phenomena and Im not going to comment on whether its a good or bad thing,except to say that with that much skin in the game it is possibly easier to take offense and many spats have originated from this situation. Thats a hard one because anyone who has put in so much energy is pretty extra ordinary if they are not more attached--guess its just good to bear that in mind.

Sarcasm?--Well that would be pretty difficult to enforce but maybe a gentle reminder to habitual offenders?

And lastly...Let's not forget the difference between guidelines and hard core rules

PS-I hope the majority find playing the devils advocate sometimes and trying to think outside the box a bit is not to disruptive.

Snoopy
13-12-2015, 03:39 PM
OK. I'll get the ball rolling.

No personal abuse of a Member including the use of expressions of bigotry, racism, sexism, hatred or profanity.

No providing of information which could be construed as financial investment advice under (What ever Act)


I don't think authorised financial advisers could ever post 'advice' on this forum. The simple reason is they have no idea who their 'client' is and what their client's circumstanes are: having an anonymous person on the internet as your 'customer' doesn't cut it.

But as far as someone expressing their own opinion as to whether a particular stock or bond is worth buying selling or holding - -that shouldn't be classed as 'advice'. I see nothing wrong with that. In fact, it is a core reason for the forum to exist. Merely stating an opinion though is not that useful on its own. Best you post why you think a certain way.



No bringing the reputation of the Shareholder Forum, its owners, Members, Administrators Moderators etc into disrepute, including the making of defamatory statements


As long as defamatory statements sanctions do not cover "In my opinion, ..... etc." IOW a defamatory statement is not defined as simply as something that the moderators just disagree with.



No spruiking stuff


I think there are enough members with common sense on the forum to point out when something is being spruiked. Ideally a poster should declare their own position (whether they are looking to buy or sell or hold for example) when they post. But such a rule would be unenforcable. Best just to rely on other members to police this one. I don't think a special 'no spruiking' rule is needed.



No grumbling, moaning whinging about anything related to this forum.


Well meaning, but far too general and subjective.

SNOOPY

PS

The most important guideline of all should be.

*/ As a poster, don't regard yourself as too self important! You are only setting yourself up to be very easily offended if you do that! Maybe a minimum skin thickness should be required before posting?

AND

*/ Make your point once and move on, accepting that others my disagree. No point in playing an endless ping pong game of disagreement over one idea.

skid
13-12-2015, 04:15 PM
Im kinda confused--Is there only one moderator (Vince) or are there several?

Minerbarejet
13-12-2015, 06:06 PM
Ignore list.
Advise posters they have been placed on an ignore list and who the anonymous poster is that has done so.
1. If a poster gets too many he may realise that he is not flavour of the month generally speaking and as a consequence may apply more thought to what he is saying.
2. In order to prevent ongoing discourse and unwarranted ignore, ie ganging up, if a poster ignores someone it becomes valid for two weeks and the ignore cannot be removed.
This stops you ignoring someone and then sneaking back for a look and carrying on as before.
I am guilty of this.
It would also make you think before ignoring someone in the first place which may make the ignoree in turn think about what he/she has said.
Just a suggestion, ignore it by all means.:)

nextbigthing
13-12-2015, 08:33 PM
My opinion - No moderation other than deleting anything illegal or racist, sexist etc. Otherwise, free for all. If someone repeatedly posts like an idiot then hit the ignore button. If two grown men want to act like schoolgirls having a bunfight online then let them make fools of themselves, we can simply skip past it or enjoy it with some popcorn if you're that way inclined.

Only exception, one day bans max for someone who clearly needs a cool down, like that time the Moose got drunk and started abusing a CEO :D

And previously banned posters back and encourage those who have chosen to leave to come back (via email).

Just my opinion.

BIRMANBOY
13-12-2015, 08:39 PM
MBJ.being a student of the injustice system, you well know that ignorance of the law is no excuse. So by ignoring the ignoreee, is this a sign of my ignorance or am I merely just another ignorant ignoror. I'm having trouble coming to grips with that...in fact I'm gnawing on the knowing and could use some guidance.... as could you apparently. Lets keep it simple...just don't read anything from posters that have exhibited anti-MBJ sentiment or inclination....but hang on ..just a quick peek..you know you want to...we all have been guilty. I like to think of it as glass half full behaviour ..always looking for betterment and improvement in the status quo. Judith Collins is living proof of this positivity.
Ignore list.
Advise posters they have been placed on an ignore list and who the anonymous poster is that has done so.
1. If a poster gets too many he may realise that he is not flavour of the month generally speaking and as a consequence may apply more thought to what he is saying.
2. In order to prevent ongoing discourse and unwarranted ignore, ie ganging up, if a poster ignores someone it becomes valid for two weeks and the ignore cannot be removed.
This stops you ignoring someone and then sneaking back for a look and carrying on as before.
I am guilty of this.
It would also make you think before ignoring someone in the first place which may make the ignoree in turn think about what he/she has said.
Just a suggestion, ignore it by all means.:)

warthog
13-12-2015, 08:54 PM
Ok, so obviously we need some new rules around posting etc.

I invite members to post here some rules they would like to give a definitive as to what is right & wrong…Regard's,

Well that's incorrect use of punctuation for a start.

BIRMANBOY
14-12-2015, 07:39 AM
So to get this back on track which is Forum Rules. Where are we at? Has a new draft set been formulated by MODS that we could comment on....needs to be a staged project otherwise will get put in the too hard basket. This whole uproar has been precipitated by the rules and how they are interpreted, and by whom.

RGR367
14-12-2015, 07:40 AM
OMG we could not even agree on some simple rules :D This is going to be really GREAT!!!

RGR367
14-12-2015, 07:40 AM
OMG we could not even agree on some simple rules :D This is going to be really GREAT!!!

skid
14-12-2015, 09:25 AM
OMG we could not even agree on some simple rules :D This is going to be really GREAT!!!

There was'nt much going on ,on the other threads,RGR,it was raining outside,etc:)

ie:ignore list--Imo mandatory informing people that others have put them on the ignore list,just fuels the fire.
If you want to ignore -just ignore.


a few questions..If someone repeatedly talks of ''secret information'' that will affect a share--how does one respond?

If someone says they have voluntarily left but has been asked to come back to defend a share-is it ok to ask
who asked them?

Is it ok to ask a poster if they are reincarnation of a previous poster? and is it ok to return as another poster?

Is it ok to get drunk and read share trader(ok -I was kidding on that last one):)

Ah Bugger--maybe we should just not mess with it except for the mods giving a reason why someone is on thin ice:)

bull....
14-12-2015, 09:50 AM
My opinion - No moderation other than deleting anything illegal or racist, sexist etc. Otherwise, free for all. If someone repeatedly posts like an idiot then hit the ignore button. If two grown men want to act like schoolgirls having a bunfight online then let them make fools of themselves, we can simply skip past it or enjoy it with some popcorn if you're that way inclined.

Only exception, one day bans max for someone who clearly needs a cool down, like that time the Moose got drunk and started abusing a CEO :D

And previously banned posters back and encourage those who have chosen to leave to come back (via email).

Just my opinion.

I agree with points above

simla
14-12-2015, 01:06 PM
Rules always backfire in my experience. Just look at all the traffic stuff the police constantly come up with and it doesn't seem to achieve anything much.

Personally, I prefer the golden rule instead: do unto others etc. On a forum like this, that boils down to simply dealing with the problem of trolls. Nobody has ever come up with a clear definition of that, so rules are a bit pointless, and that's what moderators are for surely? I've been trolled a bit (in my opinion) but I don't expect to be totally protected from that, merely for the forum to exercise judgement from time to time to calm things down. Life isn't perfect.

And I think people have to give Vince less stick when he does make decisions. With due respect, but isn't complaining about who has been banned just more trolling, of Vince? By all means send him a PM, but in public? After all, someone has to make decisions. Agree that many bans should be short term, but sometimes people have such volatile personalities that they aren't well suited to forums like this in the long term?

However, separately, I think outsiders may understand the purpose of this forum less than regulars, and so I would like to see a general disclaimer at the top all the time reminding people that these are just personal opinions. I mention that myself from time to time on posts, but that's a really tedious and repetitive thing to do, and I think it should be displayed at the top of the forum, even if not in huge letters.

So, no, I'm not in favour of fixed rules. Sorry, Vince, but I think you just have to keep standing in the middle from time to time, rather than coming up with rules. Yes, it's been a bit messy lately, but I think that will settle down again.

BIRMANBOY
14-12-2015, 02:00 PM
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.
Rules always backfire in my experience. Just look at all the traffic stuff the police constantly come up with and it doesn't seem to achieve anything much.

Personally, I prefer the golden rule instead: do unto others etc. On a forum like this, that boils down to simply dealing with the problem of trolls. Nobody has ever come up with a clear definition of that, so rules are a bit pointless, and that's what moderators are for surely? I've been trolled a bit (in my opinion) but I don't expect to be totally protected from that, merely for the forum to exercise judgement from time to time to calm things down. Life isn't perfect.

And I think people have to give Vince less stick when he does make decisions. With due respect, but isn't complaining about who has been banned just more trolling, of Vince? By all means send him a PM, but in public? After all, someone has to make decisions. Agree that many bans should be short term, but sometimes people have such volatile personalities that they aren't well suited to forums like this in the long term?

However, separately, I think outsiders may understand the purpose of this forum less than regulars, and so I would like to see a general disclaimer at the top all the time reminding people that these are just personal opinions. I mention that myself from time to time on posts, but that's a really tedious and repetitive thing to do, and I think it should be displayed at the top of the forum, even if not in huge letters.

So, no, I'm not in favour of fixed rules. Sorry, Vince, but I think you just have to keep standing in the middle from time to time, rather than coming up with rules. Yes, it's been a bit messy lately, but I think that will settle down again.

westerly
14-12-2015, 02:32 PM
Rules always backfire in my experience. Just look at all the traffic stuff the police constantly come up with and it doesn't seem to achieve anything much.

Personally, I prefer the golden rule instead: do unto others etc. On a forum like this, that boils down to simply dealing with the problem of trolls. Nobody has ever come up with a clear definition of that, so rules are a bit pointless, and that's what moderators are for surely? I've been trolled a bit (in my opinion) but I don't expect to be totally protected from that, merely for the forum to exercise judgement from time to time to calm things down. Life isn't perfect.

And I think people have to give Vince less stick when he does make decisions. With due respect, but isn't complaining about who has been banned just more trolling, of Vince? By all means send him a PM, but in public? After all, someone has to make decisions. Agree that many bans should be short term, but sometimes people have such volatile personalities that they aren't well suited to forums like this in the long term?

However, separately, I think outsiders may understand the purpose of this forum less than regulars, and so I would like to see a general disclaimer at the top all the time reminding people that these are just personal opinions. I mention that myself from time to time on posts, but that's a really tedious and repetitive thing to do, and I think it should be displayed at the top of the forum, even if not in huge letters.

So, no, I'm not in favour of fixed rules. Sorry, Vince, but I think you just have to keep standing in the middle from time to time, rather than coming up with rules. Yes, it's been a bit messy lately, but I think that will settle down again.

Good post

westerly

skid
14-12-2015, 03:22 PM
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)

BlackPeter
14-12-2015, 04:52 PM
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.

Crackity
14-12-2015, 04:57 PM
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 ;)

Major von Tempsky
14-12-2015, 04:58 PM
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

Crackity
14-12-2015, 06:14 PM
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

Absolutely Major - also if you were a communist dedicated to the overthrow of the capitalist system we love so well then you would be justifiably miffed to be called merely ' left wing ' ;)

I'm sure communists get hurt feelings too when they get mislabeled :)

Daytr
14-12-2015, 06:36 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.

skid
15-12-2015, 04:24 PM
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:)

Crackity
15-12-2015, 04:48 PM
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 ;)

percy
15-12-2015, 05:01 PM
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

nextbigthing
15-12-2015, 09:03 PM
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?

pierre
15-12-2015, 10:28 PM
Have you ever tried to get a committee to write a letter?
It doesn't work. Someone has to prepare a draft that others can modify until an agreed solution is reached.

I think Vince is going about this project the wrong way. Here's what should happen IMO:
1 Vince publishes a draft set of rules (he must have some already that are used to ban or unban posters)
2 The draft rules to include the punishments for transgressions so everyone knows what to expect when they cross the line.
3 Members get the opportunity to comment on any of the proposed rules and penalties they don't like or wish to change.
4 Vince reviews the comments and publishes a final revised set of rules and penalties.
5 We then all know what is allowed and what is not.
6 The rules are applied by STMOD without fear or favour.

Easy!

gv1
16-12-2015, 09:18 PM
No comments. I have excused myself from this site UNTIL ROGER returns!!!!
Merry Christmas and a Happy New year everyone.;)

Vince
16-12-2015, 09:28 PM
No comments. I have excused myself from this site UNTIL ROGER returns!!!!
Merry Christmas and a Happy New year everyone.;)

And for that comment you're permanently gone... won't tolerate this from a small group of trouble makers anymore.

Vince

Meister
16-12-2015, 10:02 PM
And for that comment you're permanently gone... won't tolerate this from a small group of trouble makers anymore.

Vince

This right here is EXACTLY what I don't want to see. Rule #1 - don't overreact to harmless posts. A ban should be for serious offences only.

I lean heavily towards winner's comments on minor moderation for only the most serious of things, letting posters handle things themselves. There is great risk in banning people, especially more active members.

I also agree with pierre in that a draft list probably needs to be proposed first before big progress will be made, but perhaps this thread will serve to help generate the initial draft.

Vince
16-12-2015, 10:43 PM
This right here is EXACTLY what I don't want to see. Rule #1 - don't overreact to harmless posts. A ban should be for serious offences only.

I lean heavily towards winner's comments on minor moderation for only the most serious of things, letting posters handle things themselves. There is great risk in banning people, especially more active members.

I also agree with pierre in that a draft list probably needs to be proposed first before big progress will be made, but perhaps this thread will serve to help generate the initial draft.

Yes really! What you haven't seen is the hatred spread through emails to other members encouraging them to influence others and make stupid posts all generated by a small group who think they rule the forum.

It's only a small group which are ruining it for others and quite honestly I may even post these emails so you can see who they are and what has been said, - think you'll change you opinion fast after that!


BTW - you're spot-on with your last paragraph.

Vince

h2so4
17-12-2015, 09:15 AM
Could be a consequence of world sharemarkets tracking sideways. Things are not very exciting atm and posters have nothing better to do. KW warned of the dangers when markets tracked sideways. Check the asx postings maybe 1 or 2 per day.
I'm sure this will pass and all will be forgiven and forgotten.
Cheers

Jay
17-12-2015, 12:22 PM
Re Vince's reply, to Meister well that helps clarifies a few things, as we do not see what goes on behind the scenes. and some obviously did not think anyone else would see either!

Secondly, this thread and a couple of others - Site slow to load and Views on the Moderation.. don't show up in my "New Posts" when clicked on, any ideas why?

QOH
17-12-2015, 07:04 PM
S
My opinion - No moderation other than deleting anything illegal or racist, sexist etc. Otherwise, free for all. If someone repeatedly posts like an idiot then hit the ignore button. If two grown men want to act like schoolgirls having a bunfight online then let them make fools of themselves, we can simply skip past it or enjoy it with some popcorn if you're that way inclined.

Only exception, one day bans max for someone who clearly needs a cool down, like that time the Moose got drunk and started abusing a CEO :D

And previously banned posters back and encourage those who have chosen to leave to come back (via email).

Just my opinion.

Totally agree with this, surely we are all adults here, who can pick and choose which posts, posters and threads interest us and simply scroll past the rest, or put the poster on ignore.
Don't we have enough "rules" in our lives without having to worry about being banned from an online forum for upsetting someone.

Exodia
17-12-2015, 07:28 PM
S

Totally agree with this, surely we are all adults here, who can pick and choose which posts, posters and threads interest us and simply scroll past the rest, or put the poster on ignore.
Don't we have enough "rules" in our lives without having to worry about being banned from an online forum for upsetting someone.

Agree with this also

1leon
18-12-2015, 09:25 AM
[ originally posted by QOH "Totally agree with this, surely we are all adults here, who can pick and choose which posts, posters and threads interest us and simply scroll past the rest, or put the poster on ignore.Don't we have enough "rules" in our lives without having to worry about being banned from an online forum for upsetting someone. QUOTE]"



The reality is that some posters are not posting like adults but abusing the anonymity that this site provides. It seems to me that if posters adopted the guideline of whether they would be prepared to put their name to their post we would have less abuse ramping down ramping and trivial nonsense on the whole site. It strikes me also a good disciplinary action would be to require an irritant member to have the option of withdrawing or having his/her name released.

skid
19-12-2015, 02:01 PM
I remember when they first made the reputation comments transparent(revealed the names)It was quite an eye opener-(I think there must have been some red faces--Lets face it -behind the scenes emails to gang up is a bit on the dark side--I dont think I was the only one to be surprised at this.--It kind of makes it a bit harder to pre judge bannings

h2so4--things may be getting more exciting if Mon (US time)doesnt pull out of this potential dive..

Daytr
21-12-2015, 09:51 PM
Very good! Ha ha. But lets leave the unicorns out of this. I mean what did they ever do to you.... ;-)


Not sure that makes sense Daytr?

Daytr
21-12-2015, 09:55 PM
Really that's quite interesting re the behind the scenes stuff you mention. Some people obviously have too much time on their hands.
Hard to moderate when you have that going on to contend with as well.



Yes really! What you haven't seen is the hatred spread through emails to other members encouraging them to influence others and make stupid posts all generated by a small group who think they rule the forum.

It's only a small group which are ruining it for others and quite honestly I may even post these emails so you can see who they are and what has been said, - think you'll change you opinion fast after that!


BTW - you're spot-on with your last paragraph.

Vince

xafalcon
22-12-2015, 08:21 AM
You may wish to consider limiting off-topic ramblings. A few threads I have come across in the past have had large numbers of posts between 2 or 3 authors that drift considerably from specific share/market/company discussions. "The lounge" would be an appropriate place for such conversations

Hard to moderate as determination can be somewhat subjective

percy
22-12-2015, 01:59 PM
You may wish to consider limiting off-topic ramblings. A few threads I have come across in the past have had large numbers of posts between 2 or 3 authors that drift considerably from specific share/market/company discussions. "The lounge" would be an appropriate place for such conversations

Hard to moderate as determination can be somewhat subjective

Some times the ramblings can be a bit like the AGMs I attend.
You often pick up more after the meeting than during it.!! .

Aaron
23-12-2015, 02:58 PM
Ignore this post and me if I continue to ask dumb questions.

Just as a matter of interest, is there an ignore button option on sharetrader? With that we could self regulate.

kizame
03-01-2016, 02:37 PM
S

Totally agree with this, surely we are all adults here, who can pick and choose which posts, posters and threads interest us and simply scroll past the rest, or put the poster on ignore.
Don't we have enough "rules" in our lives without having to worry about being banned from an online forum for upsetting someone.
I have to say I agree with you, Bannings for the most part will work against the forum,whilst some silly stuff gets posted,there are some knowledgable people being banned that I quite enjoy reading their comments.
I feel the forum in the most part, should be self governing with Vince only dishing out a short term ban for serious offences, of which I'm sure everyone knows what they would be.
Vince your banning of g1 permanently,even though there were (emails),is a bit tough mate.
Everyone has the right to ignore anyone they think is going overboard,I think bannings for the most part are doing a disservice to the richness of this forum.
A list of etiquete (sp) on the front page,plus the 1 thing that will get you a short term ban of 2 weeks,(very serious though,not just an opinion) I think would be enough and trial it for a year.
And the 1 thing that could get you that ban -- Abuse of any kind. including swearing.