Should piss-taking opposing supporters be banned from the Big Board

[Brovion]

Thanks for the Gold Star I will wear it with pride ........can I ask why you are so bothered about names being put in the decision section anyway? can't see it matters to much to be honest

Well I'm not exactly losing sleep over it but since you asked there are three reasons why I raised it. Firstly if it's not going to be done 'properly' and 'completely' then there's no point in having it and Bozza himself has said that it should be kept up to date. When only half the bans are announced it does leave you wondering what's happened.

Secondly it's the transparency. Reading this thread (and others) it's obvious that a lot of people think that the mods don't do anything, and then every so often they over-react. If the decisions handed down from Mod Towers were more transparent then people could see that thought and effort goes into keeping NSC the bear garden we know and love. And by 'people' I also mean outsiders who might get the impression that NSC is an un-moderated free-for-all and thus might feel that going to the police or their solicitors is the only option they have.

Thirdly it sets the boundaries. We all know that the only real rule is "Don't be a dickhead", but as Titanic said if people could see instances of that then they'd have some practical guidelines as to where you (the mods) draw the line. If people see the names of five or six people all banned for racist abuse they might understand that it isn't tolerated.

And what DID happen to Sid if he wasn't banned by a mod? And would you give some thought to showing the infractions?

 

[TerryT]

Or ban for posting the SAME old dribble like saintswilltopplebrighton does for example. At the very least MOVE to an away fans section.

There are some good away fans, even some Palace, let them STAY on the main board.

Agree

 

[hitony]

Well I'm not exactly losing sleep over it but since you asked there are three reasons why I raised it. Firstly if it's not going to be done 'properly' and 'completely' then there's no point in having it and Bozza himself has said that it should be kept up to date. When only half the bans are announced it does leave you wondering what's happened.

Secondly it's the transparency. Reading this thread (and others) it's obvious that a lot of people think that the mods don't do anything, and then every so often they over-react. If the decisions handed down from Mod Towers were more transparent then people could see that thought and effort goes into keeping NSC the bear garden we know and love. And by 'people' I also mean outsiders who might get the impression that NSC is an un-moderated free-for-all and thus might feel that going to the police or their solicitors is the only option they have.

Thirdly it sets the boundaries. We all know that the only real rule is "Don't be a dickhead", but as Titanic said if people could see instances of that then they'd have some practical guidelines as to where you (the mods) draw the line. If people see the names of five or six people all banned for racist abuse they might understand that it isn't tolerated.

And what DID happen to Sid if he wasn't banned by a mod? And would you give some thought to showing the infractions?

Really not to sure where you get your statistic of 50% of the bans being announced? Personally I would have to disagree on that point, and I also think that the Moderators Decisions section is pretty much in the main kept updated, there may be good reason why someone has not put their decision on that section, but as i say I can't speak for other mods.

Again, as far as transparency is concerned, I would say that NSC is probably one of the most transparent message boards going, from the owner and the mods alike, peoples thoughts on how good a mod is or indeed is not will never stop, I can only speak with confidence over my own personal experiences, but some will dislike you purely because of a decision that you make, but that is all part and parcel of the job, it matters not who does it, opinions will never change regarding mods with some, basically the people who have major opinions about mods / moderating either think they could do it better or will just comment that we are all biased or misuse our positions, which just is not true, in my opinion.

I am sorry to disagree with you, but there is without doubt more guidelines than just "Don't be a Dickhead" NSC has strong views on many more areas than just that, homophobic comments, racism and recently the trolling and playground issues have come into it in a big way, all very well publicly documented by Bozza and the mods, in my opinion a member (new or old) is not going to go to the trouble of going to the Moderators decisions section, scroll through the individual threads and think, “Oh I better had not say such and such as that’s a banning offence”, it just wont happen, and from what I know the moderators decision section is probably one of the most least visited sections on the board, so I don't think it will set any boundaries.

As for what happened to another member, it is not for me to say, it is for the person who dealt with the matter to explain, and that was not me, and in any case it would be wrong to openly talk about a banned member, it would have to be done via PM and I think you will find Bozza condones that, he has openly stated that talking about banned members in a thread is not on, so sorry I can't assist on this occasion.
I do hope my opinions, thoughts and explanations are of some help, I personally want to and will help anyone I can, and I know there are many that will support me on that, and if I can ever be of any help to you please don’t hesitate in contacting me,

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

To be honest I've changed my view on this since voting - I'm not sure an away fans forum is best. I know the BBS have one, as do others, but their boards are wank compared to this one.

In fact, my personal preference would be for posts by piss-taking away fans to be confined to single threads on the same subject. i.e. just one thread called 3-1 FFS Murray or whatever, where all the Nigels can cream themselves over it together. And of course, Albion fans fed up with it will know not to open the thread.

The main problem with this is that mods would need to be very hot on merging any new threads, and I'm not sure the mods themselves have time to deal with this. Perhaps threads could be somehow "tagged" as of "away fan interest", so that away fans know which ones they can contribute to if they want to take the piss?

Good idea about the tags , how about a CBN (Contaminated By Nigels) tag ?

 

[Gus is god]

do we get a response if we report a thread?

 

[El Presidente]

do we get a response if we report a thread?

Sometimes.

 

[Gus is god]

ok cool

 

[hitony]

do we get a response if we report a thread?

What sort of response do you expect?

 

[Brightonfan1983]

It's the idiot brighton fans that are pissing me off more than away fans!. The ones that post wind up thread after wind up thread being delibrately negative.

I have to agree with this. Idiot posts by other teams' supporters I can take; one reads them mindlessly and moves to another thread. But the sometimes constant tedious drivel in the name of "it's a free country" and "this is a board for opinions" that I read from other Albion fans, well, again I read mindlessly and move to another thread.

NSC is excellent as it is. Just because a vocal minority here get wound up to extremes by obvious fishing by, say, Palace fans, is no reason I can see to introduce rules that appease this minority.

What about a rule that if you get wound up too easily by something on here, you should be moved to a mod-created 'time-out room' for the day like they have in some schools for behaviourally-challenged pupils? I guarantee that that would soon put a stop to people 'rising' and that mickey-taking threads would have minimal replies within the week.

 

[Gus is god]

What sort of response do you expect?

an acknowledgement an explanation if ya dont act on said post as why you believe its reasonable

 

[Titanic]

do we get a response if we report a thread?

I can assure you that EVERY reported post results in either a PM to the user concerned; a comment on the thread by a mod; a warning issued to the user; an infraction issued to the user; a ban issued to the user; a discussion among the Mods; a comment or sanction against the reporter (if malicious or repeatedly spurious); a decision to monitor an ongoing situation; or a positive decision to take no action.

I am not in favour of getting into extended discussion or debate about moderating decisions. Life is too short.

 

[SeagullinExile]

Deffo not...it's part of the game imo. When things ere not going well, we have to take it on the chin.

 

[Brovion]

...I do hope my opinions, thoughts and explanations are of some help...

Not really, but thanks for the reply anyway.

 

[hitony]

Not really, but thanks for the reply anyway.

Your Welcome.

 

[hitony]

an acknowledgement an explanation if ya dont act on said post as why you believe its reasonable

See post 132 above, it explains everything perfectly.

 

[MattBackHome]

A big fat NO from me. Yeah they're twats - so just ignore them.

 

[Albion Rob]

Yes, absolutely.

NSC is not a democracy and I have a very thin skin.

 

[Superphil]

It's the idiot brighton fans that are pissing me off more than away fans!. The ones that post wind up thread after wind up thread being delibrately negative.

 

[seagullondon]

People need to learn to man up. This is an internet forum not life or death

 

[Albion Dan]

I personally have no problem with shipping the idiots off to an away forum if they act like cocks. Works perfectly well on other boards and give less chance for our more intellectualy challenged fans to humiliate themselves.