| State of the Board Discussion 18:16 - Jun 5 with 60595 views | PhilTWTD |
Another not overly pleasant day on here, even though we've had a signing, even if not a particularly high profile one.
Despite its not particularly brilliant or insightful starting point the 'All these protesters' thread has rather got to the crux of one of the bigger issues at the moment.
There are a number of posters who, rather than engaging in debate on an issue - political, brexit-related usually - post an insult aimed at a group they disagree with or something deliberately inflammatory without having any intention of involving themselves in any actual debate. It's all got very snipey, not just at other users but in a wider sense, protesters being today's target.
The forum has always been a friendly, inclusive place, welcoming to all, a community. Disagreements and argument maybe, but for the most part there's been an underlying geniality and good humour, posters have helped one another out and looked out for one another. This does appear to be being undermined by the recent unpleasant undertone.
While we've always been the ones running the site, we've never sought to be overly dictatorial. We've often put matters relating to it to posters. I don't particularly like banning people (although we have banned one user as Gav had an investigate and discovered a long-banned user with a new name), I usually give posters more than enough warnings to give them ample chance to use the board in line with the manner in which most others post.
Should we be a bit more draconian in how we police this sort of thing? Getting a bit fed up with how the last few days have progressed. We've gone from abuse PMs being a rarity to them becoming frequent most days. Have had a fair bit going on away from TWTD lately and haven't really needed the additional unnecessary hassle.
Obviously the sort of nonsense outlined above needs to end or we will have to ban a few more users, but any thoughts on how else we can try to get things back to normal? |  | | |  |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:02 - Jun 6 with 2952 views | Ryorry |
| State of the Board Discussion on 09:03 - Jun 6 by Kropotkin123 |
As someone who doesn't post on here regularly, I think there is a divide on how more regular and less regular visitors interact.
If I am early for a meeting, I might pop on, read, comment and disappear. Naturally, I'm drawn to more interesting posts and comment where I feel something hasn't been said that might provide a different perspective or maybe relate to a general feeling I see that people haven't expressed.
I don't have the time to then deal with any fallout from that post. Indeed, I don't see it as my job to babysit those that can't read a differing opinion without getting upset about it.
Some people consistently refuse to deal with an idea and instead focus on the most pointless aspects of the post. So I rarely reply to their posts. This may be deemed as posting something inflammatory. But I don't want to waste my life arguing with someone who has rabid opinions.
When someone like Mullet posts interesting but differing opinions, that are well thought through. I am far more likely to write something back to him. Because I believe he is rational.
Back to the subject of time, sometimes I think a post makes a good point or bad point and thumb it up or down. I don't feel I need to explain every last point as to why something is good or bad. Simply thumb up = I agree, thumb down = I don't. But more regular posters get really offended. A dent in their ego, rather than something more flippant.
I think this is because other more regular posters systematically downvote people. Following someone who disagreed with them and relentlessly downvoting their every post. It is tedious reading these comments and must be equally tedious for the recipiant. I think limiting the number of people you can downvote per week might help. Or limiting the number of times you can downvote a user. Or if you downvote someone 5 times it gives a temporary 1 month ignore.
If someone starts a post with "Numbskulls... x, y and z, lol" I will downvote it. It is deliberately toxic, aimed to inflame. I've even reported some of these in the past because honestly, if you set a framework like this from the outset, then you set boundaries were other more serious namecalling is deemed okay. I think this one of the key areas that have let the board slip. It is the same in the politics section.
I used to enjoy posting on politics, but the framing of discussions are even worse there. I rarely give my opinion, unless it is something that won't upset people's current fragile state. Solving that side of things is more difficult. but I do believe that there are people in there that have no interest in football and are only here to whip up unrest. The same way we as a club were targeted by the EDL in the past. |
Excellent post. I'd add that it's not just the most obviously angry, abusive, WUMs or trolls that are the problem, but a (thankfully small) number of people who are a lot more subtle with continual sly digging at, & misrepresentation of, individual posters who they've decided that they dislike - sometimes over extensive periods, even years.
Particularly problematic because it can be subtle enough that almost nobody notices apart from the actual targets themselves. |  |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:11 - Jun 6 with 2935 views | giant_stow |
I do have a serious suggestion for philippe. I think part of the reason some debates go pear-shaped is because they're not allowed to burn themselves out: you pull the thread (to protect the peaceful majority from nonsense, quite rightly) but it leaves things to fester. In fact they often restart when you do a new thread asking for calm (again a reasonable move from you, but it almost always happens).
So I suggest a small sub- board completely separate from the main one (no filters). This would be called 'contentious' and all threads which turned would gget moved there, where the participants (ha) would be free to go for it until its run its course. Obviously hate search and threats would lead to an immediate ban.
This would leave the peaceful majority free of the spats or emotive political debates, while offering space for more difficult content.
Thank me later |  |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:14 - Jun 6 with 2925 views | footers |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:11 - Jun 6 by giant_stow |
I do have a serious suggestion for philippe. I think part of the reason some debates go pear-shaped is because they're not allowed to burn themselves out: you pull the thread (to protect the peaceful majority from nonsense, quite rightly) but it leaves things to fester. In fact they often restart when you do a new thread asking for calm (again a reasonable move from you, but it almost always happens).
So I suggest a small sub- board completely separate from the main one (no filters). This would be called 'contentious' and all threads which turned would gget moved there, where the participants (ha) would be free to go for it until its run its course. Obviously hate search and threats would lead to an immediate ban.
This would leave the peaceful majority free of the spats or emotive political debates, while offering space for more difficult content.
Thank me later |
Ooh, may I also add to this that having a billion threads on the same subject doesn't help. Why people create multiple threads when there are plenty of others on the same topic is beyond me. Keep it all in one place and join the current discussion instead of creating more threads to police...
 |  |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:18 - Jun 6 with 2909 views | Darth_Koont |
Good post but I agree with Swanners that hopefully this reminder is acted on.
What I would say re: banning or warning users, is that if there's a clear pattern of posters "discussing" politics, football or whatever by throwing out incendiary comments or insults then not actually willing to discuss/engage then that's just trolling.
I like the wide and varied discussions on here but people should think about contributing to threads rather than damaging them and turning them into a slanging match. |  |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:19 - Jun 6 with 2904 views | giant_stow |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:14 - Jun 6 by footers |
Ooh, may I also add to this that having a billion threads on the same subject doesn't help. Why people create multiple threads when there are plenty of others on the same topic is beyond me. Keep it all in one place and join the current discussion instead of creating more threads to police...
|
Exactly - we don't need 20 threads on antisemitism (i pick that one because I've participated (again ha)) when one big one would keep it all the same place and easy to find.
Just let them breath, but breath out of sight. | |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:19 - Jun 6 with 2901 views | BiGDonnie |
Can you enforce certain posters to ignore each other? |  |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:19 - Jun 6 with 2902 views | never_lose_the_faith |
The Trouble is that there are far too many snowflakes these days, who take things so personally.
I have one on here, we don’t see eye to eye to say the least, but have agreed to leave each other alone. I don’t understand why this site needs policing at all, just grow up and man up. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:22 - Jun 6 with 2886 views | giant_stow |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:19 - Jun 6 by BiGDonnie |
Can you enforce certain posters to ignore each other? |
I would guess the technical problem there is that it would only work when both users were logged in, which isn't always the case. | |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:23 - Jun 6 with 2882 views | leitrimblue |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:11 - Jun 6 by giant_stow |
I do have a serious suggestion for philippe. I think part of the reason some debates go pear-shaped is because they're not allowed to burn themselves out: you pull the thread (to protect the peaceful majority from nonsense, quite rightly) but it leaves things to fester. In fact they often restart when you do a new thread asking for calm (again a reasonable move from you, but it almost always happens).
So I suggest a small sub- board completely separate from the main one (no filters). This would be called 'contentious' and all threads which turned would gget moved there, where the participants (ha) would be free to go for it until its run its course. Obviously hate search and threats would lead to an immediate ban.
This would leave the peaceful majority free of the spats or emotive political debates, while offering space for more difficult content.
Thank me later |
Participants😊😊😊 |  | | |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:25 - Jun 6 with 2876 views | giant_stow |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:23 - Jun 6 by leitrimblue |
Participants😊😊😊 |
Woi!
cark head. | |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:25 - Jun 6 with 2874 views | Darth_Koont |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:19 - Jun 6 by never_lose_the_faith |
The Trouble is that there are far too many snowflakes these days, who take things so personally.
I have one on here, we don’t see eye to eye to say the least, but have agreed to leave each other alone. I don’t understand why this site needs policing at all, just grow up and man up. |
That's all very well but what are these people even doing posting if it's about manning up.
It seems there are more people who need to man up, put their money where their mouth is and be willing to discuss stuff. Rather than throw out statements and then not want to be challenged on them.
On a side note, people should also learn to take themselves a lot less seriously, other people's posts less personally and generally park their egos at the door. | |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:32 - Jun 6 with 2840 views | footers |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:25 - Jun 6 by Darth_Koont |
That's all very well but what are these people even doing posting if it's about manning up.
It seems there are more people who need to man up, put their money where their mouth is and be willing to discuss stuff. Rather than throw out statements and then not want to be challenged on them.
On a side note, people should also learn to take themselves a lot less seriously, other people's posts less personally and generally park their egos at the door. |
People just need to take a quick look at my sig to know the score.
Man up and agree with me. Then we'd all get along :) | |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:35 - Jun 6 with 2830 views | BiGDonnie |
On second thoughts, while the politics and arguing is a bit tiresome it throws up some cracking threads, I used to get right involved, then I grew up.
Would you want to take that away from TWTD, maybe it's what make this place what it is. | |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:36 - Jun 6 with 2821 views | BiGDonnie |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:22 - Jun 6 by giant_stow |
I would guess the technical problem there is that it would only work when both users were logged in, which isn't always the case. |
I don't think I've logged out in 15 years. | |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:51 - Jun 6 with 2771 views | Darth_Koont |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:36 - Jun 6 by BiGDonnie |
I don't think I've logged out in 15 years. |
Have you tried prunes? | |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:56 - Jun 6 with 2744 views | wkj |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:00 - Jun 6 by Marshalls_Mullet |
Do what you need to do Phil, its your board.
I think 3 strikes and youre out is more than fair enough.
You've never messaged me about conduct, so by that measure, I think youre pretty tolerant!! |
Clearly you have Phil on ignore then ;-) |  |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 13:04 - Jun 6 with 2713 views | hoppy |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:36 - Jun 6 by BiGDonnie |
I don't think I've logged out in 15 years. |
And when you did, was a mug involved?
Reports of the time were that it wasn't a log anyway... |  |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 13:09 - Jun 6 with 2693 views | bluefunk |
I’ve been a member of this forum for over 20 years, even though I am not the most active contributor, so I wanted to add my support to your efforts to improve matters, as this is my lifeline to matters ITFC.
I would say that there have been several occasions where the tone has been fractious although none as extreme as this. Rather than being disagreements on ITFC or football topics, this is most obvious on political threads, hardly the purpose of the site. However, part of the strength of the forum is its diversity, in all senses so banning certain topics would damage the board imo.
The problem appears to be that some regular posters are too prone to name calling those who don’t agree with them, even to the point of referencing posters who aren’t even contributing. Add in a bit of herd mentality, and it has often made for very uncomfortable reading - I can think of one particular poster who has frequently been the subject of “debatable” comments, even when they have been absent from the board.
I am no expert on running/moderating a message board, and I would like to see a return to more tolerant times here - hopefully a topic like this will promote that. If not, then others have made good suggestions, such as forced and mutual ignore facilities, but ultimately, if posters will not follow the rules then ban them and make public the reasons for doing so. |  | | |
| State of the Board Discussion on 13:26 - Jun 6 with 2643 views | BiGDonnie |
| State of the Board Discussion on 13:04 - Jun 6 by hoppy |
And when you did, was a mug involved?
Reports of the time were that it wasn't a log anyway... |
That's taking things too far. I do have boundaries. | |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 13:46 - Jun 6 with 2579 views | Ryorry |
| State of the Board Discussion on 12:02 - Jun 6 by Ryorry |
Excellent post. I'd add that it's not just the most obviously angry, abusive, WUMs or trolls that are the problem, but a (thankfully small) number of people who are a lot more subtle with continual sly digging at, & misrepresentation of, individual posters who they've decided that they dislike - sometimes over extensive periods, even years.
Particularly problematic because it can be subtle enough that almost nobody notices apart from the actual targets themselves. |
The downvote speaks for itself. | |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 13:48 - Jun 6 with 2573 views | Bluesquid |
An example from a couple of weeks ago...
Was involved in a thread and i posted a comment to which SpruceMoose replied and he had his say followed by "Thanks hun x".
Now i understand that he didn't agree with what i posted but was there really a need for him to make that snidey, sarcy little comment at the end?
I've never be rude, disrespectful or insulting to him so i don't understand why he had to make it, just low in my opinion and there was no need for it.
These small snidey little digs build up on the board over time and create a bad atmosphere and if we were having a discussion with someone in the pub that we didn't know we wouldn't behave in that way there and we shouldn't do it here either, just basics of a decent exchange. | | | |
| State of the Board Discussion on 13:49 - Jun 6 with 2563 views | jeera |
| State of the Board Discussion on 22:22 - Jun 5 by MJallday |
I would remove downvoting full stop. Keep upvotes if you must but downvoting can sometimes be inflammatory
Just 20 worth |
Down-voted just to keep in the spirit of things.
Agree with you that the down-vote serves no purpose other than to antagonise and would be a good thing to remove if possible.
The up-vote is really useful though.
Maybe the down-vote could be kept for use on J2 only as he just gains an abnormal amount of votes. I don't understand what goes on there. No one should be that popular. It's just not right. |  |
| |
| State of the Board Discussion on 13:49 - Jun 6 with 2560 views | lowhouseblue |
| State of the Board Discussion on 13:46 - Jun 6 by Ryorry |
The downvote speaks for itself. |
quite. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
