One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: WilliamPowell on April 12, 2015, 06:05:25 PM
-
All,
We have had a lot of complaints about the constant negativity, trolling, baiting and abuse of fellow posters.
We have lost quality people over the last 6-8 months simply because they refuse to post on here anymore because the hi-jacking of threads and the abuse they have copped
We have posted numerous warnings to no avail. We've re-iterated the 3 strikes policy but it to has fallen on deaf ears
Over the past 3 weeks we have issued a number of suspensions (more than a dozen) but clearly based on the last 24-48 hours that message clearly didn't get through to the majority.
Just today I have had to edit posts where people have abused others (told them to "f off"), used crass language to try and make a point that is clearly offensive (using the term being "raped"), created a thread that in the end did nothing but took swipes at other posters for no other reason than they disagreed with people. This is the sort of stuff we are trying to put an end to.
The swamping of threads with childish/mindless, same-old same-old negativity for negative sake where virtually every player, club official and the club itself is bagged incessantly for all past sins, just kills any proper discussion and interesting debate and that has turned people off from reading and contributing.
We have absolutely no problem with people being critical of things. We want discussion, solid debate and differing opinions. And let's be honest after yesterday's effort people have the right to be critical. But to turn on other posters and abuse solely because they have a differing opinion is not on. It actually says more about the person resorting to that rather than those who are prepared to discuss and debate the issues.
We've always believed one of OER's strengths over the years was the intelligence and respect of most debates even the critical ones and that people on both sides felt comfortable in expressing their views. Unfortunately, the way things stand at the moment we appear to losing that balance
So now we as mods find ourselves in a no win situation
We issue suspensions and the majority suspended complain that we are (a) being too harsh, (b) over reacting to a few posters, (c) claim provocation into abusing others or (d) simply deny or refuse to acknowledge responsibility for their actions
Then on the other side we have people complaining that we are doing nothing or not enough despite the suspensions.
So we've decided to ask you what it is you want? OERites will determine the next move
The question is straight forward:
Does the Forum require tougher penalties for the baiting, trolling and abuse towards fellow posters
YES or NO
We are prepared to leave the thread open if people want to post comments
But let me make clear, any comment left that directly abuses or baits another poster will result in a strike under the 3 strikes policy, no ifs, buts, maybes or "I was just kidding". Everyone is entitled to their opinion and no one will be disadvantaged by what they post but turning on others will not be tolerated.
We are taking this very seriously and we urge all posters even those out there who haven't posted for ages but still read to vote so we can get as much data and feedback as we can. We want people to be honest. Currently we've decided you will not be able to see the poll results until after it is closed.
The poll will remain open until Wednesday when it will be locked and we will the review everything and let everyone know the outcome
This is a chance for everyone to have their say, we suggest you take it
WP & Mr OE
-
It poos me that we all barrack for the same club, want the same results and wish for long term off field success yet we turn on each other like you wouldn't believe. I often wonder if us fans have created the culture we we complain about at the club.
-
Personally I think censorship is never a good thing.
-
I think the swear filters should come off for 24 hours after a loss so everyone can get what they want out of their systems. They should say what they want without it being censored ... then the censorship should come back until after the next match.
-
im one who has been suspended. rightly so i may add. my excuse was retaliation and its here where it gets gray. i know posters troll me and i also have been abused in subtle ways tht dont quite cross the line its constant and its subtle and its still abuse.
in the main i have been inclined to just let it go, if i think its warranted i have returned fire.
i actually think that is wrong and it does detract from threads, id rather we debate the topic at hand id rather people be allowed to be as positive as they like or as negative as they like about the topic without the resorting to trolling and abuse.
im all for making it tougher to troll and be abusive. im also against stopping people from having their views regardless of how negative or positive people percieve them to be.
-
I agree with claw. Personally, swearing doesn't worry me, although saying things like we got raped by the umpires is a bit harsh and should be edited. My main concern is the way we turn on those we disagree with. There's heaps of posters I don't agree with but I won't get personal with them, indeed most times I just read their comments and let them go.
-
I have a real issue with being banned previously for being too critical of the club.
I also have a real issue with posters being unable to be critical of players and the club without so called 'quality people' reporting them for trolling, baiting and the like.
Saying 'player x is rubbish' and then being called names, reported and banned. The name calling is edited by the mods and the name callers aren't banned.
Then after a loss, as has been shown, consensus is player x is rubbish, the so called quality posters go missing and play the man, get a reaction then report the poster. If that's not trolling or baiting I don't know what is.
Who's trolling and baiting who? Ask yourself.
I reckon over the last 12 months of might have reported one post. I respect the others rights to have an opinion even if it is contrary to others including name calling of me. It seems apparent now that everyone is reporting everybody. Why?!!!! How many reports are there a week? We should be told.
The other week Ox got a post deleted in the Morris thread which showed a teapot. A teapot!
How do we define a quality poster BTW? By a positive, non club-critical mentality who personally attacks others for their opinions and reports these by the dozen?
If that's who the preferred site member is then good luck with the site in the future.
This sites point of difference to other richmond forums has always been it's tolerance of both positive and negative opinions along with witty and quirky posts.
The tolerance has progressively diminished. Any sort of creative or edgy posts, once left, are now sanitized. Why?
The outcome will be a sanitized, relatively censord site devoid of the ability to speak ones mind
-
I like posting my thoughts on OER. Its definitely cathartic after a loss. I don't think anyone here doesn't love the Tigers & would love nothing more than the club to succeed. I don't think any post should be personal unless it's in good fun & everyone knows your taking the pee.
The only thing I don't like is when posters question another posters allegiance to the club. I think that is a low gutless reaction to someone who may be regarded as negative.
I don't see anything wrong with negative posts , for goodness sake, how can anyone be positively buoyant with a club that's let us down for the best part of 35 years? It's also any posters right to be positive about the club if they want to as it gives good balance.
I enjoy reading most posts especially the comical ones its all in good fun.
We are allowed to be happy and we should be allowed to be peeed off too when the club lets us down as often as it has.
-
I don't think the issue is criticism of players or club but rather the personal attacks........is this correct?
-
Get rid of the sooks and recruit.
The so called negativity isn't.
It's deals in fact.
Fact I believe, is a criteria for posti substance?
Negativity is a name given to it by those who, well let's just say, live in another time zone.
It's these people who mirror the clubs weakness and unknowingly perpetuate mediocrity.
My reactive posts are how I deal with the twisted emotion this stuffn club causes me.
Being banned, to me, incites disrespect and animosity toward not the admin but the gimp who complained to the teacher.
Personally I don't want those type in our supporter base. :lol
With so much wrong with the club is it any wonder the "intelligent" ones get a little frustrated ? ;D
Lmao@The Teapot being homophobic, Dooks.
I wasn't dirty with WP, like I said but rather the teapots who lagged.
-
What's my personal attack record like?
Pretty stuffn good I reckon.
-
People should only be banned if they start threatening via PMs, otherwise.....everybody's a grown up guys, come on....we're adults.......let it go..........
-
I have a real issue with being banned previously for being too critical of the club.
I also have a real issue with posters being unable to be critical of players and the club without so called 'quality people' reporting them for trolling, baiting and the like.
Saying 'player x is rubbish' and then being called names, reported and banned. The name calling is edited by the mods and the name callers aren't banned.
Then after a loss, as has been shown, consensus is player x is rubbish, the so called quality posters go missing and play the man, get a reaction then report the poster. If that's not trolling or baiting I don't know what is.
Who's trolling and baiting who? Ask yourself.
I reckon over the last 12 months of might have reported one post. I respect the others rights to have an opinion even if it is contrary to others including name calling of me. It seems apparent now that everyone is reporting everybody. Why?!!!! How many reports are there a week? We should be told.
The other week Ox got a post deleted in the Morris thread which showed a teapot. A teapot!
How do we define a quality poster BTW? By a positive, non club-critical mentality who personally attacks others for their opinions and reports these by the dozen?
If that's who the preferred site member is then good luck with the site in the future.
This sites point of difference to other richmond forums has always been it's tolerance of both positive and negative opinions along with witty and quirky posts.
The tolerance has progressively diminished. Any sort of creative or edgy posts, once left, are now sanitized. Why?
The outcome will be a sanitized, relatively censord site devoid of the ability to speak ones mind
there are many truths in this post IMHO :thumbsup
-
YES
-
I support that
-
hmm dooks i agree with a lot of that. look at us two we have had some prtty heated gos at each other in recent times . some of it probably outside the rules which i apologise for.
ive never ever reported a poster until just recently that is after i got suspended and i thought no im not allowed to return fire so i just reported it.
i suppose the message is simple if they troll or abuse just report em.
to every poster on here im happy to wipe the slate clean and start from scratch yes even you al. at the end of the day all i want to do is talk footy, talk richmond and whats wrong, and how we think we can be better.
im keen to hear peoples vies on players strengths weaknesses how we can fix recruiting what needs to be done with list management etc. ive never ever been much on the positives as i have always thought there are plenty a majority who talk about em.
i like to be honest and as such my perspective comes from one who thinks we are very ordinary and have a long way to go. so i ask people keep that in mind when they wonder why i focus on the negatives.
-
People should only be banned if they start threatening via PMs, otherwise.....everybody's a grown up guys, come on....we're adults.......let it go..........
yep, pretty much sums it up.
some need to.....
(http://s.quickmeme.com/img/c6/c6021eef472bd698547d4d98a95e81e429313039367ed8a8cdc0deb39cc8adad.jpg)
-
I don't think the issue is criticism of players or club but rather the personal attacks........is this correct?
In one sense yes. And that's easy, just refrain from name calling. Easy.
The grey area is the supposed trolling and baiting. The current test appears to be, if someone reports you for perceived trolling or baiting then it's likely you'll cop a ban. Or at least have your post deleted. Even if you're only being critical of the club and not intending to (or actually) trolling or baiting, it's to far outside the comfort zone of some site members to read anything negative, so they report the said poster to get their post deleted that they don't agree with.
-
would you cop personal attacks in the workplace ,are they appropriate in the school yard?
-
I actually think the forum is run well with a good balance of what is acceptable and what isn't. Posters should not be humiliated and denigrated but at the same time a little tongue in cheek jab can be quite funny and brings one back to the site. I have had many laughs on here as there are many witty comments made by my fellow posters. As long as they don't get personal, I think it is actually healthy.
As for the team and especially those who run it, they should be prepared for harsh criticism. Although constant negativity can become tiresome, I can understand that after 35 years of no success, those in charge have had ample time to right the wrongs of previous administrations, and should be open to harsh criticism. It is frustrating seeing teams just pass us by and get better while we continually are middle of the road side.
-
hmm dooks i agree with a lot of that. look at us two we have had some prtty heated gos at each other in recent times . some of it probably outside the rules which i apologise for.
ive never ever reported a poster until just recently that is after i got suspended and i thought no im not allowed to return fire so i just reported it.
i suppose the message is simple if they troll or abuse just report em.
to every poster on here im happy to wipe the slate clean and start from scratch yes even you al. at the end of the day all i want to do is talk footy, talk richmond and whats wrong, and how we think we can be better.
im keen to hear peoples vies on players strengths weaknesses how we can fix recruiting what needs to be done with list management etc. ive never ever been much on the positives as i have always thought there are plenty a majority who talk about em.
i like to be honest and as such my perspective comes from one who thinks we are very ordinary and have a long way to go. so i ask people keep that in mind when they wonder why i focus on the negatives.
No harm done whatsoever. I respect your right to have your say and for the record I havent reported you.
-
The trolling rule has been exploited by the meek.
-
The meek shall inherit the earth...............see even the man above says this
-
would you cop personal attacks in the workplace ,are they appropriate in the school yard?
at work id just punch ya same went for when i was at school. its funny how little abuse goes on when people realise they may pay a price.
we are on a computers and unfortunately people know they are immune from retribution.
-
punching people in the head is tolerated in your work place?where do you work ?the salt mines of Stalingrad?
-
The trolling/baiting test needs to be discussed and clarified
-
I think a big part of the trolling that people get away with but in turn is what gets the ball rolling into an argument is the snide little comments a lot of people make. Things like "if you don't see it you're delusional", "you're an idiot if you believe that", "oh you're just an apologist" and particularly snide comments on peoples intelligence just because they don't agree with they way you think. I think most have done it including myself and all it takes is one to do it and then the return fire starts.
I have had many laughs on here as there are many witty comments made by my fellow posters. As long as they don't get personal, I think it is actually healthy.
That's it folks, the doctor has spoken ;D
-
I don't think the issue is criticism of players or club but rather the personal attacks........is this correct?
In one sense yes. And that's easy, just refrain from name calling. Easy.
The grey area is the supposed trolling and baiting. The current test appears to be, if someone reports you for perceived trolling or baiting then it's likely you'll cop a ban. Or at least have your post deleted. Even if you're only being critical of the club and not intending to (or actually) trolling or baiting, it's to far outside the comfort zone of some site members to read anything negative, so they report the said poster to get their post deleted that they don't agree with.
my experiences here with the mods havs been mostly good. ive only had retaliatory posts deleted i think, and most of my posts focus on the negatives and i dont think ive ever been in trouble for being too negative. mainly because i do try to back up what im saying with something its hardly ever like dud delist. nothing else but hack. id i call em a dud i give my reasons.
-
l use the term "raped" often. So this is a banned word ?
-
l don't spent alot of time on the forum these days. But harden up some of you guys & girls. If your willing to insult your club, You should be willing to take some abuse if you say something stupid. Truth hurts some people. Stop ya crying & get on with supporting the club. ;D
:gotigers
-
LMAO what a thread :clapping
-
Ironically, the whiners haven't spoken up?
-
That's because there snipers from under cover
-
That's because there snipers from under cover
yep :thumbsup
-
Need an option for who gives a poo
-
People should only be banned if they start threatening via PMs, otherwise.....everybody's a grown up guys, come on....we're adults.......let it go..........
yep, pretty much sums it up.
My thoughts as well.
-
I think a big part of the trolling that people get away with but in turn is what gets the ball rolling into an argument is the snide little comments a lot of people make. Things like "if you don't see it you're delusional", "you're an idiot if you believe that", "oh you're just an apologist" and particularly snide comments on peoples intelligence just because they don't agree with they way you think. I think most have done it including myself and all it takes is one to do it and then the return fire starts.
I have had many laughs on here as there are many witty comments made by my fellow posters. As long as they don't get personal, I think it is actually healthy.
That's it folks, the doctor has spoken ;D
Do people actually get offended at being called 'delusional', an 'idiot' or an 'apologist'? Do people actually report other people who call them this? LMFAO
Who cares what other people think. Know thyself and harden up
-
That's because there snipers from under cover
yep :thumbsup
Interesting there's a handful of site members who have voted but are not willing to discuss the matter in an open forum.
-
Can I also request that the list of banned words be published in the site rules area of the thread? They don't have to be spelled out but at least communicated so we all get the gist as to why they are banned.
For example, I tried to post a word earlier which is a brand of anti depressant and I was locked out of posting with a forbidden message. But then you can say the word rape.
-
That's because there snipers from under cover
yep :thumbsup
Interesting there's a handful of site members who have voted but are not willing to discuss the matter in an open forum.
No not really, quite expected
-
l have used the word raped many of times, Yet have never been told otherwise. Then again l'm not one to read my own posts so if they are edited l don't know. The word l use is in the Herald Sun just about everyday so when l use it, l'm refering to the team getting beaten badly or a player is beaten badly by his opponent. l have used it often when coaching also. ;D it's a good way of getting into the players head :lol
-
don't name the thread "OER to decide" if your going to delete suggestions
-
I think a big part of the trolling that people get away with but in turn is what gets the ball rolling into an argument is the snide little comments a lot of people make. Things like "if you don't see it you're delusional", "you're an idiot if you believe that", "oh you're just an apologist" and particularly snide comments on peoples intelligence just because they don't agree with they way you think. I think most have done it including myself and all it takes is one to do it and then the return fire starts.
I have had many laughs on here as there are many witty comments made by my fellow posters. As long as they don't get personal, I think it is actually healthy.
That's it folks, the doctor has spoken ;D
Do people actually get offended at being called 'delusional', an 'idiot' or an 'apologist'? Do people actually report other people who call them this? LMFAO
Who cares what other people think. Know thyself and harden up
Some people do but it's more the retaliation that follows
-
You report, we decide.
-
Can I also request that the list of banned words be published in the site rules area of the thread? They don't have to be spelled out but at least communicated so we all get the gist as to why they are banned.
For example, I tried to post a word earlier which is a brand of anti depressant and I was locked out of posting with a forbidden message. But then you can say the word rape.
The former is done by our hosts as an anti-spam mechanism which we (the mods) have no control over. So certain brands of medications or gambling related words (po-ker) will result in the "forbidden" message.
-
So anyway, show your cards.
No from me.
-
Listen,
I know who the two are who dobbed on me anyway :shh
Now is your chance to man up and voice your personal concerns.
Are you able to articulate your standpoint without fear of retribution?
Oh look....
-
Can I also request that the list of banned words be published in the site rules area of the thread? They don't have to be spelled out but at least communicated so we all get the gist as to why they are banned.
For example, I tried to post a word earlier which is a brand of anti depressant and I was locked out of posting with a forbidden message. But then you can say the word rape.
The former is done by our hosts as an anti-spam mechanism which we (the mods) have no control over. So certain brands of medications or gambling related words (po-ker) will result in the "forbidden" message.
Ok that makes sense. Thanks OE
-
I like the site and for the most part posters are informative on the Tiggers and the game.
Whatever happens, happens.
Go Tigers. :gotigers
-
punching people in the head is tolerated in your work place?where do you work ?the salt mines of Stalingrad?
im a tradie and most tradies i know will only tolerate so much.
-
im happy for change. if it means people stay and it encourages people to join the site so be it. lets see the site grow not shrivel away to nothing.
i will say this though the sites good because it hasnt been overly officious. so theres pros and cons.
-
Reported.
SNIP
And why a post to say you reported it?
No need for that either
BTW the person who the original post was directed at in jest (think one of these :lol is a good indication it was indeed in jest) hasn't complained so not sure what the problem is but for consistency I've removed it
-
Just wondering, is there a sense of irony with a thread about a question of moderation being so heavily moderated?
Has the decision been made and this thread is the first implementation?
-
Reported.
SNIP
And why a post to say you reported it?
No need for that either
BTW the person who the original post was directed at in jest (think one of these :lol is a good indication it was indeed in jest) hasn't complained so not sure what the problem is but for consistency I've removed it
Because I'd be called gutless if I didn't so I'm manning up.
He might not have seen it and it's good you nipped it in the butt before he did, was a perfect example of baiting. I'm sure if he did retaliate he'd be copping a lot more than "a snip for consistencies sake". I'm also sure if someone else said that they'd be getting a strike too.
-
Reported.
SNIP
And why a post to say you reported it?
No need for that either
BTW the person who the original post was directed at in jest (think one of these :lol is a good indication it was indeed in jest) hasn't complained so not sure what the problem is but for consistency I've removed it
Because I'd be called gutless if I didn't so I'm manning up.
He might not have seen it and it's good you nipped it in the butt before he did, was a perfect example of baiting. I'm sure if he did retaliate he'd be copping a lot more than "a snip for consistencies sake". I'm also sure if someone else said that they'd be getting a strike too.
I didn't see it.
-
Reported.
SNIP
And why a post to say you reported it?
No need for that either
BTW the person who the original post was directed at in jest (think one of these :lol is a good indication it was indeed in jest) hasn't complained so not sure what the problem is but for consistency I've removed it
Because I'd be called gutless if I didn't so I'm manning up.
He might not have seen it and it's good you nipped it in the butt before he did, was a perfect example of baiting. I'm sure if he did retaliate he'd be copping a lot more than "a snip for consistencies sake". I'm also sure if someone else said that they'd be getting a strike too.
I didn't see it.
not you ox was aimed at me.if the post thats not there anymore is to go by. i just ignored it reckon that peees em off more.
-
Reported.
SNIP
And why a post to say you reported it?
No need for that either
BTW the person who the original post was directed at in jest (think one of these :lol is a good indication it was indeed in jest) hasn't complained so not sure what the problem is but for consistency I've removed it
Because I'd be called gutless if I didn't so I'm manning up.
He might not have seen it and it's good you nipped it in the butt before he did, was a perfect example of baiting. I'm sure if he did retaliate he'd be copping a lot more than "a snip for consistencies sake". I'm also sure if someone else said that they'd be getting a strike too.
I didn't see it.
not you ox was aimed at me.if the post thats not there anymore is to go by. i just ignored it reckon that peees em off more.
And that's the thing - we're all big people and all have that option. Trying to please and calm everyone by over-moderating will only drive more away, we have to be able to have a crack and should only be moderated when it gets purely and overtly abusive, racist, sexist etc.
-
Reported.
SNIP
And why a post to say you reported it?
No need for that either
BTW the person who the original post was directed at in jest (think one of these :lol is a good indication it was indeed in jest) hasn't complained so not sure what the problem is but for consistency I've removed it
Because I'd be called gutless if I didn't so I'm manning up.
He might not have seen it and it's good you nipped it in the butt before he did, was a perfect example of baiting. I'm sure if he did retaliate he'd be copping a lot more than "a snip for consistencies sake". I'm also sure if someone else said that they'd be getting a strike too.
I didn't see it.
not you ox was aimed at me.if the post thats not there anymore is to go by. i just ignored it reckon that peees em off more.
And that's the thing - we're all big people and all have that option. Trying to please and calm everyone by over-moderating will only drive more away, we have to be able to have a crack and should only be moderated when it gets purely and overtly abusive, racist, sexist etc.
Nailed it Smokey
-
Reported.
SNIP
And why a post to say you reported it?
No need for that either
BTW the person who the original post was directed at in jest (think one of these :lol is a good indication it was indeed in jest) hasn't complained so not sure what the problem is but for consistency I've removed it
Because I'd be called gutless if I didn't so I'm manning up.
He might not have seen it and it's good you nipped it in the butt before he did, was a perfect example of baiting. I'm sure if he did retaliate he'd be copping a lot more than "a snip for consistencies sake". I'm also sure if someone else said that they'd be getting a strike too.
I didn't see it.
not you ox was aimed at me.if the post thats not there anymore is to go by. i just ignored it reckon that peees em off more.
And that's the thing - we're all big people and all have that option. Trying to please and calm everyone by over-moderating will only drive more away, we have to be able to have a crack and should only be moderated when it gets purely and overtly abusive, racist, sexist etc.
Nailed it Smokey
Natural selection. ;D
-
Just noticed this thread and read through all the posts. Some decent comments here. I've been on the forum for a number of years and only started reporting posts in the last month when I was banned. Not anything personal against the poster or even a complaint - more a comment on the inconsistency of the moderation.
It's a bit like the holding the ball interpretation, I don't care how you interpret it - just be consistent.
So my reporting to moderators is more to do with consistent moderation of the forum.
Personally, it's a soap box so jump on and go for it - you want some sting in the threads, it's makes for an edgy debate.
I don't particularly like incessant negativity but it's a matter of prerogative.
I reckon baiting overly positive posters is poor form and admit to reacting but it's like a mosquito bite.
Sometimes you scratch it and other times you can't be arsed.
-
Reported.
SNIP
And why a post to say you reported it?
No need for that either
BTW the person who the original post was directed at in jest (think one of these :lol is a good indication it was indeed in jest) hasn't complained so not sure what the problem is but for consistency I've removed it
Because I'd be called gutless if I didn't so I'm manning up.
He might not have seen it and it's good you nipped it in the butt before he did, was a perfect example of baiting. I'm sure if he did retaliate he'd be copping a lot more than "a snip for consistencies sake". I'm also sure if someone else said that they'd be getting a strike too.
How do you do that?
-
How do you do that?
The same way you nip it in the bud, but more erotic
-
:rollin
-
Voting has closed
This thread will be locked while we review all feedback
Everyone should be able to see the final result
Thanks to everyone who took the time to vote and leave comments
-
All,
As you all know a few weeks ago we ran a poll asking if OERites believed we needed to have tougher penalties regarding the trolling, baiting and abusing of other posters
You would all be aware the poll result was 15 to 14 in favour of tougher penalties. No doubt a close result but none the less a result that says we need to tougher on posters who continue to deliberately bait and troll others.
While the majority in recent weeks have posted within the guildelines it would appear that some people have felt the closeness of the result meant that it was now some sort of “free for all” with what could be posted. On the other side we have had a small increase in the number of reported posts.
However, what we have found is that some folks who are reporting posts may need to consider the way they are posting. Why? Because some of their posts are the same types of posts that they are reporting/complaining about. As I have been known to say many times - you can’t have it both ways. Just some food for thought for EVERYONE!
Outside of the poll we also asked for feedback from posters on their views. The comments were interesting and varied. There were also some questions posed and we decided to address some of these with the hope that people have a greater understanding of why we as Mods do what we do.
1. Definition of Trolling & Baiting:
We were asked for a definition so this is what we’ve applied in the past and will continue to apply in the future
The Oxford Dictionary defines Trolling as:
“To make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them:
From: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/englipooroll?q=trolling#troll-2__14
EREALLY GUD DEFUNITION MAKUR November 11, 2004 defined it as: Typically unleashing one or more cynical or sarcastic remarks on an innocent by-stander, because it's the internet and, hey, you can." (Urban Dictionery)
The Cambridge Dictionary defines Baiting as:
"to intentionally make a person angry by saying or doing things to annoy them"
Fair to say that trolling and baiting got hand in hand.
The above is how we view it and we don’t think it can be disputed that is what a lot of people have done and do; do. Our site records of edited posts shows this type of posting in spades, usually by the same posters directed at the same posters
The following comment was made
The trolling/baiting test needs to be discussed and clarified
We think the definition is absolutely clear so it really doesn’t need to be clarified. What some people seem to have a problem with is the idea that their posts get reported and that simply a negative posts is deemed to be trolling or baiting. Nothing could be further from the truth. We have said time and time again that we have absolutely no problem with people being critical of the club as long as they express their view point without directly abusing others or starting threads that are clearly started to be provocative.
Examples of such trolling threads started in the last few weeks have included but not limited to:
“Where are the 'Hooray for Everything' crowd?”
“Are Richmond Full of Poo?”
“WAT was Right on Morris”
“Embarrassment of the AFL” (3 threads in 4 weeks)
Then there are the posts like these (again just from the last 5 weeks and not limited to):
Another hypothetical...
If you stopped making new threads that could just be posted in previously made threads, would more people post on this site?
All the debbie downers to jump on the loss and enjoy the ride
to which the reply was
And all the Dudley Do-Rights to hide away from the forum for 72 hours again because they realise they can't defend the club, or criticise the club and save face.
Bad enough had to sit through that crap, now have to put up with you dribblers too
You have been doing it for years pal so suck it up princess
Usual suspects, moderators , ban these idiots
All of the above were clearly posted in an attempt to get a response and/or hijack other discussions.
That’s why they get edited; not because they are negative but because they are there to do nothing more than bait, troll or abuse others.
We could list countless more examples of posters insulting other posters by calling them “fools”, autistic, mentally challenged and a like. But we think everyone is smart enough to acknowledge that; that sort of posting is not only unacceptable but simply not necessary. There has been a lot on negative comments posted since last Saturday’s loss and none have been removed and outside the childish, smut, gutter talk comments nothing has been edited.
2. The Comments within the Poll were heavily Edited:
Just wondering, is there a sense of irony with a thread about a question of moderation being so heavily moderated? Has the decision been made and this thread is the first implementation?
Have to say this one really annoyed the hell out of me (WP) because it was just not true let alone fair. We’ve re-checked the site records of what was edited out of the thread and there was a total of 10 edits (snips) out of 63 replies.
In summary:
- 4 posts were between 2 posters that had absolutely no relevance to the thread.
- Two were because of a reported post and were therefore removed.
- A further 3 related to a personal attack on another poster even though it was made very clear from the beginning that posts of that nature would be removed.
- The final one was an attack on a poster where their personal details were posted on the forum, which has quite rightly never been allowed. on OER
So to suggest the thread was “heavily moderated” is not true. Finally to suggest that a decision had been made before the poll was completed is simply offensive because outside of questioning our integrity it again was not true.
3. Listing how many Strikes posters have had issued:
We will not be doing this. Reason being that those who have their own personal feuds going could use the information to continue to bait others for the sole purpose of getting them permanently banned. All posters who have been issued strikes should be well aware of how many they have. If anyone is unsure of how many strikes they are sitting on I suggest the contact us ASAP and we will advise them
4. Turning off the Swear Filter after Games:
Answer to this one is no, won't be happening. Outside of the use the “C” word we are fairly lenient on this already. So there is no need for it to change. Throw in the fact there isn’t any magic switch that flicks it on and off so we are not in a position to do it anyway.
Which brings us the use of the “C” word. As everyone is aware we have a zero tolerance policy when it comes to using it in any form on the forum and a 48 hour suspension applies. However, what has become apparent is that the 48 hour suspension isn’t a deterrent as the same people just keep doing it. They post, take the suspension and then when they are peeved about something resort to using it again at a further point in time. As a result the penalty will now increase for multi offenders. After two 48 hour suspensions a third will result in 72 hours. A forth will result in a 1st strike of 1 week.
The Future & Penalties to be applied:
Another thing that is very evident is that that one of the issues that often results in baiting and insults is some posters seem to hold a clash/grudge (for want of a better word) with each other (and these clashes vary over different pairings of posters) and people let this 'grudge' or locked-in personal opinion of this other poster be reflected in their replies rather than take each post on its merits.
The reality is we don't have to and can’t be all buddies but everyone needs to be mature enough to leave the personal gripes/dislikes off the forum.
The forum does have an ignore list feature if you don't want to read another poster(s) posts. We would suggest that rather than resorting to snipes and petty insults you use this feature
A further reminder that any personal issues (feuds) or complaints that posters have are to remain off the forum and posters are to use the report to moderator function instead. We (the mods) will then decide what, if any, action should then take place (i.e edit or removal of post, suspension, etc) and our decision is final.
As we said at the beginning the poll result was close but the result is what it is. People have made their views clear. So with that in mind…
The 3 strikes policy will remain in place and will continue to apply to the constant baiting, trolling and abusing of other posters. And just to remind everyone (again) that posting directly on the forum to demand another poster be 'striked' or suspended on the forum will also not be tolerated and posters who try to employ this will face a strike themselves. This will be more heavily enforced going forward as we have been far to lenient on this. Also understand that one of these :lol will not be accepted as an excuse
The editing of threads that get hi-jacked with will also continue.
Details of the 3 Strikes policy can be found here: http://oneeyed-richmond.com/forum/index.php?topic=17325.0
Finally, our thanks to everyone who voted and left feedback.
If anyone one has any questions or further comments regarding anything we've outlined above please contact either Mr OE or myself via PM/email
Regards,
WP & Mr OE