Forum Rule Changes including Introduction of Infraction System

[Burgey]

FFS SS. No offence but for someone so intelligent you don't half miss the point sometimes.

At this point I don't care which words you do and don't allow, I just wish to point out thw arbitary inconsistency you are promoting. If you are going to infract for words that aren't insults (I'll get to that in a minute) on the basis that some soft ****s might get offended by them, then how the **** do you justify a bunch of posting that clearly caused offence against some England supporters? You can't justify it other than by deciding to call us precious or whatever it was you said, which btw could be construed as an insult.

As for buffoon. Sick of the word myself, just FTR. But so you know, it does not have the same meaning as fool. It means someone who does silly things, usually to make people laugh. Like a sledger or Burgey I guess. I use it when my children do something silly - give me the context BS all you want but you think I'd throw actual insults at three of the people I actually give a **** about?

You lot have made a ****ing forum announcement declaring it an insult and we've had people like Migara decrying it as an attack but it's not. In the context which it was used when this train was set in motion Burgey was justified in saying it because Migara was taking a stance that led one to believe he was surely joking.

I don't care about that anymore but I do care about your hypocritical inconsistencies that are ruining the forum.

I wasn't joking ftr. He was being a buffoon.

 

[fredfertang]

I've just remembered something - when I were nobbut a young and timid articled clerk there was a pompous prig of a Judge in my local court who used to take obvious pleasure in embarassing us youngsters by accusing us of being buffoons in front of our clients - painful memories so on reflection I think the word should be filtered from now on

 

[GIMH]

I wasn't joking ftr. He was being a buffoon.

Yep. Without doubt and all jokes aside, he was.

 

[Furball]

Just wondering - isn't that, by your definition, trolling as well ? I know you said pages later in that thread that you didn't mean it, but isn't that they the very definition of trolling ? Posting something to rile others ?

Yep.

Except I've praised India's batsmen, particularly in ODIs, plenty in the past. It was clearly a joke.

 

[Jono]

Well, I'm just glad I don't waste my time with Cricket Chat anymore given the crap that seems to go on in match threads.

Love it when people say this. Must always point out that they are above Cricket Chat.

Match threads are fine mate. A couple of series (and Australia vs. England was the same e.g. Social and Flibberty, as much as the posters want to pretend it wasn't) gets fired up and a few passionate supporters go over board.

**** can only imagine what people would have thought of CC back in 2004 and 2005 when there were so many more trolls.

 

[Flem274*]

Play the poster, not the post.

Best typo

Love it when people say this. Must always point out that they are above Cricket Chat.

He isn't pointing out he is above CC. If he doesn't want to post/read CC because he finds it tedious or whatever, that's his call. And he has the right to say why he doesn't read/post there as well.

But anyway, I flounce from this thread because you are all wankers and Madagascans are racist ****s.

 

[Jono]

I never said he doesn't have the right to say it.

But you are right, perhaps Heath isn't saying what I accused him of so retract that bit.

But I really think people have overreacted, as if Cricket Chat has trolls in every thread. It's blatantly not the case.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Ashes match threads did my head in. Posters who are normally reasonable were just spouting the same crap over and over. Seems to be the norm for the majority of match threads at least, and then the occasional thread I do post in seriously in Cricket Chat - such as the overrated player thread gets closed as it gets sidetracked on a fallacy and/or irrelevance.

It reminds me of the story of Sysiphus.

 

[Jono]

I thought the Ashes thread did get awful as well, which is why I find it ironic that its now been seen in a revisionist manner as if all was hunky dory whereas the India vs. England thread was woeful.

But I'd say on the whole match threads are fine. India vs. SA was fine for the most part, and the Ashes threads was really only ruined by a couple of posters who just posted a ****load.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I thought the Ashes thread did get awful as well, which is why I find it ironic that its now been seen in a revisionist manner as if all was hunky dory whereas the India vs. England thread was woeful.

But I'd say on the whole match threads are fine. India vs. SA was fine for the most part, and the Ashes threads was really only ruined by a couple of posters who just posted a ****load.

Well, my interest is generally in Tests - not ODIs so I've hardly been participating in match threads recently, but generally the problems seem to be at their biggest when opposing groups are at their largest. Was the SA/India thread decent because there are so few SA fans here? God knows. But the Ashes threads were atrocious at time. It's clear to me that there are people on all sides who posts with the intention to wind up. All I'm trying to say is that from my point of view, and as someone who is yet to be infracted, I think the general atmosphere has been more tense since the rollout of the infraction system than it was before. So, to that end, something isn't working.

 

[benchmark00]

I never said he doesn't have the right to say it.

But you are right, perhaps Heath isn't saying what I accused him of so retract that bit.

But I really think people have overreacted, as if Cricket Chat has trolls in every thread. It's blatantly not the case.

Only the threads you post in has a troll tbf.

 

[Furball]

I really don't get what was up with the Ashes threads.

 

[Jono]

Haha really? flibbertyjibber and social were brutal.

 

[Furball]

Nah, social was hilarious.

 

[Jono]

Of course it was hilarious, your team was winning so you didn't get pissy.

 

[Howe_zat]

The match threads were quite disappointing at times - especially when they started being taken over by some guff about ground sizes or what the crowd were supposed to be doing. But by and large I thought they were pretty good.

I got the impression that around the time that I joined, this was an excellently moderated forum. I still think the moderators aren't being given due credit but I don't think the change was entirely necessary.

 

[GIMH]

I thought the Ashes threads were okay with the odd day that exploded. But then I know some people were upset with my posting in them so I dunno.

I guess one-day match threads are more likely to spill over quicker compared to slow burners like The Ashes which just had the hot spots that Jono referred to.

I'd like to go on record and agree with Jake btw. The period from the appointment of new mods last summer up to infractions coming in is easily the best period of moderation since I've been here. The change was unnecessary and has turned good moderators into...well, I dunno. Bad ones?

Edit - by change I mean approach. Infractions aren't the problem its the way they are being applied. I actually thought infractions were a good idea, but that's because I was naïve enough to assume nothing else would change much.

 

[Nate]

Next to the 'Quote', 'Multi-Quote' and 'QR' buttons, there should be a 'Buffoon' one imo.

 

[GIMH]

I like the idea in theory; what would the button do Nath?

 

[Sanz]

Oh yeah, my comments towards the Indian team and her fans was out of line but I detest being called racist.

So what is the reason for calling the entire fan base and their cricketer as "wankers" ?