Reporting Posts

[BoyBrumby]

This is a pretty close reflection of my opinion on things. I wish he didn't get the reaction that he is craving for.

The problem is that we (CW) are, essentially, a debating society after a fashion. The whole raison d'être of the place is the exchange of opinion on a subject most of us care about to lesser or greater extents. It's natural tempers do occasionaly run high, so ignoring someone who posts (as one sees it) cobblers is easier said than done. Especially, he said returning to a previous hobby horse, given the shortcomings of the ignore feature.

When someone is an obvious reincarantion of a previously banned (multiply so) member it does somewhat steam the greens when they are allowed to post with impunity and, when one points out the obvious, the initial response is always the same "no-one deserves this kind of speculation; thread closed" as if we're calling him a kiddy fiddler or something.

When the speculation is proved to be right (he has a fairly distinctive posting style which becomes apparent eventually) surely it should add weight to call for a more proactive approach to banning him without the need for DNA evidence.

 

[fredfertang]

Ageism worse for forum atmosphere than trolling, imo

........... and on a related point I see darth018 has been banned for being a multi, yet it is not known who the other account belongs to - am I misunderstanding something 'cos I can't work that one out?

 

[duffer]

Ageism worse for forum atmosphere than trolling, imo

It's okay, they won't realise.

 

[Burgey]

It's okay, they won't realise.

Haven't you got some (c)rap music to go and listen to, young man?

 

[Burgey]

This is a pretty close reflection of my opinion on things. I wish he didn't get the reaction that he is craving for.

Try being someone who one of these multis posts a message to about your kids. Then see where you think the onus should lie on banning them.

Assuming those charged with the banning are old enough to comprehend how that may play out, which is generally not the case, hence the ****house cautious response to it all.

/reverseagism.

 

[Flem274*]

With Anil and Athlai on this one.

By causing such a ****storm, you are letting the trolls win.

I was going to dig that Athlai quote. Cheers.

Fusion and PEWS have expressed things quite eloquently. All I have to add is if you don't respond to an attention seeking troll, they will get more desperate for a reaction and will step far enough over the line that we nail them so hard they won't dare make another multi for an entire day next time around.

Instead, we get to sift through reported posts where people have reacted to the troll, or worse, are trolling the troll and anyone of his/her/it's nationality in return.

 

[keeper]

I maintain that the reaction he got from some members was worse than his actual posting.

Isn't that what provocateurs do, what they're good at?

In my short experience on this board I think the moderation is excellent and the mood maintained to a very good level. But I honestly think you dropped a bollock with Bun, a moron whose sole intent was to quite clearly **** stir and was allowed to do so right through the summer.

I agree posters could help by ignoring trolls.

 

[Furball]

Try being someone who one of these multis posts a message to about your kids. Then see where you think the onus should lie on banning them.

Assuming those charged with the banning are old enough to comprehend how that may play out, which is generally not the case, hence the ****house cautious response to it all.

/reverseagism.

This. Some of the posting in this thread has been a joke.

 

[benchmark00]

This place is being ran ****ly aws.

My desire to post here is getting less and less every day, especially after my joke ban.

What's also unacceptable is the poor level of communication mods have with members. They don't reply to email or other forms of communications, they're simply not willing to discuss issues on or off the forum.

cbf though.

 

[keeper]

, especially after my joke ban.

Must have been a cracking joke.

Can you pm it to me?

 

[benchmark00]

srsly.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Fusion and PEWS have expressed things quite eloquently. All I have to add is if you don't respond to an attention seeking troll, they will get more desperate for a reaction and will step far enough over the line that we nail them so hard they won't dare make another multi for an entire day next time around..

I'm beginning to think the mods are trolling with their uncanny ability to miss the point.

You want us to ignore them and report them. Great. Fantastic. I'm absolutely fine with that. I can ignore them and I can report them.

What follows is a Brazil-esque bureaucracy which is seemingly designed to further infuriate the law abiding post reporter.

The united front doesn't help matters. It really is coming to something when Mr. Right Wing himself, PEWS, appears to be the [albeit vague] voice of reason.

 

[Hurricane]

Instead, we get to sift through reported posts where people have reacted to the troll, or worse, are trolling the troll and anyone of his/her/it's nationality in return.

Are you saying that if people react to the troll that the troll won't get into trouble even if you read the thread and can see they started it.

Or are you saying that in those cases you feel like you have to infract multiple parties troll included and hence you find it easier to give everyone a free pass.

 

[benchmark00]

This united front horse **** is a disgrace ftr.

James expects mods to not say what they think just so they can fall in line so he looks good? lololololol.

 

[Hurricane]

I would like to see an inquest into why he was allowed to make 2000 posts. And statistics on the number of reported posts about him.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Yeah, I demand Sir Paul Condon does an investigation into malpractise at CricketWeb.

 

[benchmark00]

Surely we'll be seeing a few moderators fall on their sword as a result of this. Need to clear out some dead wood.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah, I demand Sir Paul Condon does an investigation into malpractise at CricketWeb.

The irony being that's just about the standard of proof required before someone is banned for being a multiple troll

 

[Cevno]

I would like to see an inquest into why he was allowed to make 2000 posts. And statistics on the number of reported posts about him.

While we are at it, would like to see the same inquest about Streetwise,aussie,WfduBen,BhupinderSingh and certain other non permanently banned or not currently banned posters.

 

[Flem274*]

I'm beginning to think the mods are trolling with their uncanny ability to miss the point.

You want us to ignore them and report them. Great. Fantastic. I'm absolutely fine with that. I can ignore them and I can report them.

What follows is a Brazil-esque bureaucracy which is seemingly designed to further infuriate the law abiding post reporter.

The united front doesn't help matters. It really is coming to something when Mr. Right Wing himself, PEWS, appears to be the [albeit vague] voice of reason.

We don't respond officially every time for the reasons James has outlined above.

Personally I'm quite happy to respond to cases. I've done it off the forum, but I'm quite happy for someone to leave me a VM with their email address as well. I can't respond to absolutely everything, but if it looks important I'll get in touch.

If you spam my wall with questions about reported posts though, I'll probably give out your email address to various Nigerian banks.

Oh, and I fully agree with the summary of my moderatership Ding Dong presents in the future.

As I said, while we can't reply to everything, if you want to take something up with me (even if it's just to check we got the report and have made a decision) then I have no problem with that.