Forum Rule Changes including Introduction of Infraction System

[silentstriker]

Not plural. One is enough for me.

 

[Shri]

It's possible but very highly unlikely since we probably wouldn't see it (it would have to be a weird case, like doing it repeatedly to deliberately annoy the mods). Like if you were to do it right now, I'd give you 700 infraction points.

This should be fun.

 

[GIMH]

Not plural. One is enough for me.

I could be wrong but I think what he's getting at is that he cant see that any rules have been broken, not a case of how many.

 

[GIMH]

I think he should email James as there's not much point having a straw poll amongst members on here, which would just cause James to dig his toes in...

I think I might be missing something here, but just FTR it was not a serious question posed by Furball (via me) but rather a comment on a certain poster in the WC forum

 

[Fusion]

I could be wrong but I think what he's getting at is that he cant see that any rules have been broken, not a case of how many.

I could be wrong, but he was answering your deleted post.

 

[GIMH]

How dumb am I

 

[Nate]

Getting sick of the moderation. Not afraid to use the word buffoon.

 

[Adamc]

Yeah, the moderation in the India v Netherlands thread was a bit silly. Page after page of atrocious posts but Nath's amusing and relatively harmless post was the one that gets deleted. Maybe there were more egregious posts that were deleted also, but Nath's posts pretty clearly weren't the main problem in that thread (though Fusion to his credit did caution Dhoni_fan). Also found it a bit odd that someone was cautioned for 'avoiding the filter' (an s followed by three asterisks) but the trolling in the posts preceding it didn't attract mention. To me the latter is a bigger problem than the former.

 

[Fusion]

Getting sick of the moderation. Not afraid to use the word buffoon.

Yeah, the moderation in the India v Netherlands thread was a bit silly. Page after page of atrocious posts but Nath's amusing and relatively harmless post was the one that gets deleted. Maybe there were more egregious posts that were deleted also, but Nath's posts pretty clearly weren't the main problem in that thread (though Fusion to his credit did caution Dhoni_fan). Also found it a bit odd that someone was cautioned for 'avoiding the filter' (an s followed by three asterisks) but the trolling in the posts preceding it didn't attract mention. To me the latter is a bigger problem than the former.

We reviewed and took action against the posts made by Dhoni_fan by infracting him. After he’s been infracted, there is no good reason to mock him (however humorous the attempt). You may deem it harmless, but he may not, and can respond in a negative manner and further derail the thread. And I assume the “trolling” being referred to were the posts made by Dhoni_fan. If so, he was infracted and hence the posts did attract attention.

 

[Adamc]

It was just odd that Nath's post was singled out for caution. There were several posts ridiculing Dhoni_fan and the entire tone of the thread was antagonistic. I compared him to rodgie ffs, surely that was worse than what Nath posted.

I understand the need to review the posts before deciding the appropriate action but I think mods should be more proactive in cautioning (not necessarily infracting) posters whose manner is affecting the thread negatively before the situation gets out of hand. Obviously there is not always a mod in the thread, but there was in this case. Minor issues like filter avoidance generally don't need to be commented on in the thread. Just edit the post and send the poster a PM or something. Trolling or generally crap posting should be commented on publicly as it derails the thread.

 

[Shri]

We wouldn't be having this problem if I were a mod.

 

[four_or_six]

As Fusion said, after a poster has been infracted, there is no good reason to mock him.

Additionally, if people have a genuine issue with posting in a thread, it is helpful if it is reported (particularly at the time over in retrospect) so that we can have a look at it. This is much more helpful, and constructive, than posting a comment here, or in the thread.

 

[Fusion]

It was just odd that Nath's post was singled out for caution. There were several posts ridiculing Dhoni_fan and the entire tone of the thread was antagonistic. I compared him to rodgie ffs, surely that was worse than what Nath posted.

I understand the need to review the posts before deciding the appropriate action but I think mods should be more proactive in cautioning (not necessarily infracting) posters whose manner is affecting the thread negatively before the situation gets out of hand. Obviously there is not always a mod in the thread, but there was in this case. Minor issues like filter avoidance generally don't need to be commented on in the thread. Just edit the post and send the poster a PM or something. Trolling or generally crap posting should be commented on publicly as it derails the thread.

I get your point and I understand the negative reaction to Dhoni_fan for his posts. However, once action has been taken against him by the mods, continuing to chide him is not productive. Also, I did not make a huge deal about the post by Nath by infracting him – I simply deleted it and left a word that I thought it was unnecessary. I just didn’t want others to continue to take shots at Dhoni_fan and risk further derailment of the thread. Surely that can’t be considered heavy-handed? If I came across as such, I apologize. Like I said, my main intention was to keep the thread on subject (the discussion of the match) and to prevent it from side-tracking about discussion on individual posters.

 

[Teja.]

I understand that Dhoni_fan is infracted already for this but he completely killed today's thread and a good part of the previous Ireland thread as it turned to a volley of him making aggressive posts and getting responded to with . Is it possible for the mod team to warn/request him beforehand to not make excessively aggressive, offensive posts in the next India game thread and hence keep the thread more friendly? It's not much use if he racks up an infraction for it in the end but still murders the next thread too.

 

[Fusion]

I understand that Dhoni_fan is infracted already for this but he completely killed today's thread and a good part of the previous Ireland thread as it turned to a volley of him making aggressive posts and getting responded to with . Is it possible for the mod team to warn/request him beforehand to not make excessively aggressive, offensive posts in the next India game thread and hence keep the thread more friendly? It's not much use if he racks up an infraction for it in the end but still murders the next thread too.

If he continues his behavior, then it will certainly lead to a ban. Suffice to say he’s on a very short leash.

 

[Adamc]

I get your point and I understand the negative reaction to Dhoni_fan for his posts. However, once action has been taken against him by the mods, continuing to chide him is not productive. Also, I did not make a huge deal about the post by Nath by infracting him – I simply deleted it and left a word that I thought it was unnecessary. I just didn’t want others to continue to take shots at Dhoni_fan and risk further derailment of the thread. Surely that can’t be considered heavy-handed? If I came across as such, I apologize. Like I said, my main intention was to keep the thread on subject (the discussion of the match) and to prevent it from side-tracking about discussion on individual posters.

Now that you've explained it I appreciate the intention, but I've always thought that deletion was reserved for particularly egregious posts or spam, of which Nath's post was neither (but if I hadn't seen it before it was taken down I would have thought it was far more offensive than it was). If that's not the case then fair enough. But thanks for actually responding and not dismissing my comments out of hand.

My issue with the infraction system in general is that it doesn't sufficiently allow for mods to deal with offences that don't necessarily fit into neat categories and therefore require more proactive or nuanced moderating. Thus obvious but minor breaches like filter avoidance are usually acted upon quickly, but ill-defined breaches which are far more damaging to a thread are generally not acted upon until the thread has long since been derailed. Again I'm aware that mods can't be everwhere at once and I take f_o_s' point about reporting posts, but coverage and consistency are nonetheless pretty important aspects of a well-moderated forum.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah, the moderation in the India v Netherlands thread was a bit silly. Page after page of atrocious posts but Nath's amusing and relatively harmless post was the one that gets deleted. Maybe there were more egregious posts that were deleted also, but Nath's posts pretty clearly weren't the main problem in that thread (though Fusion to his credit did caution Dhoni_fan). Also found it a bit odd that someone was cautioned for 'avoiding the filter' (an s followed by three asterisks) but the trolling in the posts preceding it didn't attract mention. To me the latter is a bigger problem than the former.

I'm yet to see the thread in question so perhaps I shouldn't comment yet, but as is always the case, abuse is a lot harder to definitively recognise than trolling. What a lot of people determine to be trolling could easily be a misguided or biased, but genuine, cricket opinion. We're not going to give someone an infraction for posting up a cricket-based opinion we disgaree with unless we're sure they're posting it up purely to rile up someone else. If someone plays the poster rather than the post and inflames the situation by making an abusive or even sarcastic comment, though, that's very easy to recognise and it won't be tolerated at all, even if it's deemed to be a "smaller problem" than someone having a stupid opinion.

In the end, we're not the opinion police. People are free to post their opinions about cricket but once you get any more personal than calling an individual idea crap then we'll step in. Negative opinions about members (rather than singular posts) overall do not make for a good forum and only inflame the situation. It's true that members with no idea who are biased and post crap that people can't stand to read aren't good for the forum either, but policing that would be far too subjective and open to bias itself, so we don't attempt it.

I may revise this opinion after I see the thread but if the posts were anything like Dhoni_fan's previous efforts then I think this applies.

 

[Teja.]

If he continues his behavior, then it will certainly lead to a ban. Suffice to say he’s on a very short leash.

Yeah, Cheers Fusion.

Only hope the leash is short enough that if he does continue in the same way, he gets banned before he does major damage to the thread.

 

[four_or_six]

Yeah, Cheers Fusion.

Only hope the leash is short enough that if he does continue in the same way, he gets banned before he does major damage to the thread.

I think it's also worth pointing out here that it is possible to put someone on ignore if you find their posting particularly annoying. Then, as long as everyone else isn't reacting to them constantly, it should help you enjoy the forum more.

 

[Adamc]

I'm yet to see the thread in question so perhaps I shouldn't comment yet, but as is always the case, abuse is a lot harder to definitively recognise than trolling. What a lot of people determine to be trolling could easily be a misguided or biased, but genuine, cricket opinion. We're not going to give someone an infraction for posting up a cricket-based opinion we disgaree with unless we're sure they're posting it up purely to rile up someone else. If someone plays the poster rather than the post and inflames the situation but making an abusive or even sarcastic comment, though, that's very easy to recognise and it won't be tolerated at all, even if it's deemed to be a "smaller problem" than someone having a stupid opinion.

In the end, we're not the opinion police. People are free to post their opinions about cricket but once you get any more personal than calling an individual idea crap then we'll step in. Negative opinions about members (rather than singular posts) overall do not make for a good forum and only inflame the situation. It's true that members with no idea who are biased and post crap that people can't stand to read aren't good for the forum either, but policing that would be far too subjective and open to bias itself, so we don't attempt it.

I may revise this opinion after I see the thread but if the posts were anything like Dhoni_fan's previous efforts then I think this applies.

I agree, and this is the point I've tried to make in the post above yours. There's nothing inherently wrong with Dhoni_fan or anyone else expressing their opinions about the relative cricketing prowess of India vis-a-vis the Netherlands. The issue in this case (and I don't mean to make this about D_f specifically, but it's an instructive example) is that he posted a controversial opinion several times, was called out for it, made a thread apologising for it but not actually redacting the opinion, then continued to post the same thing several times and riling people up to the point where people started blocking him.

It's not immediately clear here whether his conduct falls into any of the categories for infraction, but it's clear that his posting and the responses to his posting creates a poor atmosphere in any thread he participates in. This doesn't require an infraction system to sort out, it merely requires mods to be more proactive in instructing posters when their posting is becoming disruptive, and I don't actually think the infraction system helps with issues like this at all.