-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Question on ban announcements
- Thread starter honestbharani
- Start date
Neptune
State Vice-Captain
It’s a real shame. There’s always a couple to ruin it for everyone
Adders
Cricketer Of The Year
1 message a minute eh?
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Bish pls
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
This post reminds me long lost banned member Dhonisgland, whose father took the family to Somalia from Chennai for a better life.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Pretty sure it was Sunday morning when I woke up and he'd messaged me saying 'b&'
Two elements, I suppose.
We've had to take a harder line on ***ual references for Google Ads reasons, basically. Too many of them and Google disqualifies CW from ads, and the revenue that keeps the site running disappears.
As for the more "subtle" ones that probably wouldn't trigger Google implications in isolation, the old messaging that CW is supposed to be a family-friendly forum still holds.
cpr
International Coach
Was that message actually broadcast that plainly anywhere? If it was it passed me by. If it wasn't then it really should be - Most of us can respect rules when we understand and appreciate why they are there. We might disagree and flirt around the family friendly one, but the revenue stream would, for me anyway, make me think twice.
nightprowler10
Global Moderator
Hmm, not sure if there was ever an announcement per se, would send the message that that's the only reason mods care when the family forum reasons definitely apply. We've all very openly talked about it though. We even had to go back and purge the hottest women thread 
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
"The message" Dan was talking about was in reference to the numerous warnings we gave the members he was talking about. So yes, it was broadcast to them via those warnings and then infractions before the actual bans. We haven't made a general announcement about it because we didn't want to make a big deal out of a handful of posters -- we contacted them specifically with warnings.
In terms of the "harder line" he mentioned, I guess we have, but
1. It's always been in the rules, we've just been trying to enforce it a bit more the couple of weeks
2. The reason we've been trying to enforce it a bit more isn't because the Google Ads policy changed, but because the nature of the posting in Off Topic has. In days gone by sometimes a ***ual reference would appear kind of organically as a response to something and it'd be fine because they were relatively rare, but at the moment a handful of people seem to have decided that making ***ual references is funny in itself, and are trying to make as many as possible just for the sake of it. This has meant we've had a lot more of them, which puts us in the firing line of the Google Ads policy in a way that we weren't before.
I don't speak for all the mods, but I genuinely couldn't care less on a personal level how many ***ual references people make on the forum. But if Google flagged us and decided we couldn't have ads anymore... and then James had to pay for that revenue gap out of pocket because a few people thought it was funny... then yeah I'd care a lot about that.
Last edited: