Page 1 of 3
Match thread flame wars - What should the mods do?
Posted:
Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:51 pmby Bad Bob
Now that God Bless John Houlding has shown us the light, the moderators agree that we need to run this place democratically from now on. In that spirit, I was just looking through the Barnsley match thread and I noticed a few abusive exchanges between valued members. Ordinarily, I might take swift, unilateral action to nip this type of thing in the bud but that might be construed as too power-hungry of me. So, instead, I have decided to poll the Newkit community to determine the best course of action. The poll will remain open until 100 votes have been registered or until 3 days have elapsed, whichever comes first. Once the poll has closed, the moderators will review the results and pursue the democratically-selected course of action. I thank you for your timely assistance in helping us address this pressing issue and I hope that we can bring some closure to this problem sometime over the course of the next few days.
Sincerely,
Bad Bob on behalf of your moderating team
Posted:
Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:54 pmby account deleted by request
I would just duck for cover today Bob 
I voted for a WARNING pm, if they don't stop, just ban them, cards are a waste of time and only add to the problems. We have seen that people can be allowed back quickly (Lando) so lets stick with that from now on
Posted:
Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:55 pmby Ciggy
No one would have been none the wiser that there was a MODs section only fat trap Peewee opened his gob, I am quite dissappionted and shocked that you MODS actually aloud him back after his years of drivel.
Posted:
Sat Feb 16, 2008 6:32 pmby 112-1077774096
i think you mean 'allowed' sweetheart
card anyone is abusive, it will soon stop them, and this goes for EVERY poster, not just the ones the mods dislike
Posted:
Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:30 pmby woof woof !
Bad Bob wrote:Now that God Bless John Houlding has shown us the light, the moderators agree that we need to run this place democratically from now on. In that spirit, I was just looking through the Barnsley match thread and I noticed a few abusive exchanges between valued members. Ordinarily, I might take swift, unilateral action to nip this type of thing in the bud but that might be construed as too power-hungry of me. So, instead, I have decided to poll the Newkit community to determine the best course of action. The poll will remain open until 100 votes have been registered or until 3 days have elapsed, whichever comes first. Once the poll has closed, the moderators will review the results and pursue the democratically-selected course of action. I thank you for your timely assistance in helping us address this pressing issue and I hope that we can bring some closure to this problem sometime over the course of the next few days.
Sincerely,
Bad Bob on behalf of your moderating team
, great , I can catch up on some telly.
BTW Bob , John Holding amended his initial recomendation and if I understand him correctly (not that easy to do) we need 800 vote's
Posted:
Sat Feb 16, 2008 9:23 pmby Bad Bob
woof woof ! wrote:Bad Bob wrote:Now that God Bless John Houlding has shown us the light, the moderators agree that we need to run this place democratically from now on. In that spirit, I was just looking through the Barnsley match thread and I noticed a few abusive exchanges between valued members. Ordinarily, I might take swift, unilateral action to nip this type of thing in the bud but that might be construed as too power-hungry of me. So, instead, I have decided to poll the Newkit community to determine the best course of action. The poll will remain open until 100 votes have been registered or until 3 days have elapsed, whichever comes first. Once the poll has closed, the moderators will review the results and pursue the democratically-selected course of action. I thank you for your timely assistance in helping us address this pressing issue and I hope that we can bring some closure to this problem sometime over the course of the next few days.
Sincerely,
Bad Bob on behalf of your moderating team
, great , I can catch up on some telly.
BTW Bob , John Holding amended his initial recomendation and if I understand him correctly (not that easy to do) we need 800 vote's
Righto, Woof. In that case we may be looking at a resolution to this pressing issue sometime mid-March at the earliest. Should the people wish us to deliver PM warnings or cards for today's abuse, we will do so retroactively, of course. The will of the people must be carried out. 
Also, I would like to take this opportunity to urge all members to be prepared to cast your vote on a series of polls that are likely to be posted in the coming days. We anticipate that a number of Inter Milan supporters may attempt to infiltrate the site and wind-up our membership ahead of the match mid-week. In the past, we have moved quickly to ban such WUMs and, with your help, we can do so again. Polls concerning the fate of each individual WUM will be launched as the need arises and we ask for your cooperation to making the polling process a smooth one. If you see a new poll please:
1) cast your vote immediately
2) contact as many other members of Newkit as you can, urging them to vote
With your help, we can collect the required 800 responses with minimal delay and be in a position to ban the anticipated Inter WUMs sometime before the start of the close season.
Thanking you in advance for your cooperation,
Your Moderating Team
Posted:
Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:47 pmby account deleted by request
Posted:
Sun Feb 17, 2008 11:19 amby dawson99
we need to be stricter. ban people!!! ban them all.
they feck up = 2 dayban
feck up again = 1 week ban
feck up again = 1 month ban
feck up again = banned
Posted:
Sun Feb 17, 2008 3:57 pmby account deleted by request
dawson99 wrote:we need to be stricter. ban people!!! ban them all.
they feck up = 2 dayban
feck up again = 1 week ban
feck up again = 1 month ban
feck up again = banned
I suggested we ban everyone with less than 9001 posts , but it didn't go down too well
Maybe with all the fuss about democracy on the forum we could have a Mod overseer, voted for by the people for the people. I think you would make a great Mod boss Dawson.
Keep all the troublemaking Mods in line.
Posted:
Sun Feb 17, 2008 4:12 pmby dawson99
a modfather if you will. whenever i come online i want the tune from quadrephenia played
"we are the mods, we are the mods, we are the we are the we are the mods"
and i want leslie ash (pre fish lips) standing by.
Posted:
Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:49 pmby LFC2007
Other - electronic tagging.
Posted:
Mon Feb 18, 2008 1:27 pmby Sabre
Bad Bob wrote:Now that God Bless John Houlding has shown us the light, the moderators agree that we need to run this place democratically from now on.
IMHO one poster's opinion is not the opinion of houndreds. IMHO when we had real problems in a forum, such as the pórn links or the Spammers, most of the regulars agreed on this. In such cases of massive agreement then it's ok to change the methodology or setting new rules, like the n posts to create a new thread and that proved to be a valid measure.
The mods shouldn't change their methodology everytime they receive criticism.
Posted:
Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:30 pmby supersub
I agree
Posted:
Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:34 pmby Lando_Griffin
I vote you do nothing.
That way, the forum is much more fun for me.
Posted:
Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:55 pmby account deleted by request
Lando_Griffin wrote:I vote you do nothing.
That way, the forum is much more fun for me.
You're feet won't touch the ground when " Dawson the Terrible" takes charge mate