Thread Hijacks

[sledger]

I've noticed of late, that threads in cricket chat, and general sports forum have become unbearable due their hijacking, the forum is becoming unreadable, and perhaps mention that certain posters have been seen less in these aprts of the forum of late, i'm thinking particularly of Brumby in the football thread and various cricket chat threads. I don't need to name any names, but I think it's pretty obvious to the majorty of the mod team who the main culprits are, the football thread being locked this afternoon is a prime example of this sort of thing, but it's by no means unique in this regard. But this sort of thing is actually beginning to make the forum totally unenjoyable, and not a lot seems to be being done about this.

[grecian]

Originally Posted by sledger

I've noticed of late, that threads in cricket chat, and general sports forum have become unbearable due their hijacking, the forum is becoming unreadable, and perhaps mention that certain posters have been seen less in these aprts of the forum of late, i'm thinking particularly of Brumby in the football thread and various cricket chat threads. I don't need to name any names, but I think it's pretty obvious to the majorty of the mod team who the main culprits are, the football thread being locked this afternoon is a prime example of this sort of thing, but it's by no means unique in this regard. But this sort of thing is actually beginning to make the forum totally unenjoyable, and not a lot seems to be being done about this.

Well, TBF, thread-hijacking is not unique to one poster around here, and it always seems to be allowed.

[G.I.Joe]

So, how about that Dale Steeeeyn, eh?

[grecian]

Originally Posted by G.I.Joe

So, how about that Dale Steeeeyn, eh?

Over-rated, not a patch on Alan Donald....

[G.I.Joe]

Originally Posted by grecian

Over-rated, not a patch on Alan Donald....

Better runner between the wickets, though...

[pasag]

Sledger, before you can comment on thread moderation, please answer these 10 questions on CW's history:

1. Who has the most posts for the year 2008?
2. Who won BOTM II?
3. Name two founding moderators
4. Name a poster who signed up on their birthday
5. Name a poster that got banned during the 2006 football world cup
6. Which cricketer came 4th in The Sean's top 25 cricketer vote?
7. Which is CW's most owned album?
8. How many DVD's does Pratters own?
9. What was the very first battle on the site?
10. Which poster has the record for most consecutive posts in a thread?

You have 25 minutes.

[GIMH]

[G.I.Joe]

bullet!

[GIMH]

Originally Posted by pasag

Sledger, before you can comment on thread moderation, please answer these 10 questions on CW's history:

1. Who has the most posts for the year 2008?

Richard

2. Who won BOTM II?

BoyBrumby

3. Name two founding moderators

Top_Cat & Andre

4. Name a poster who signed up on their birthday

andmark

5. Name a poster that got banned during the 2006 football world cup

broncoman (but it was reversed)

6. Which cricketer came 4th in The Sean's top 25 cricketer vote?

Ian Bell

7. Which is CW's most owned album?

(What's the Story) Morning Glory?

8. How many DVD's does Pratters own?

3 - the rest are illegal copies

9. What was the very first battle on the site?

The Battle of the Bands[/B]

10. Which poster has the record for most consecutive posts in a thread?

Richard

You have 25 minutes.

[BoyBrumby]

Ha, the football thread's been locked? Bloody hell. A new low for sanity.

[Matteh]

Thing with the football thread is that it openly appeared that a/some people/person was getting free reign with his ignorance/stupidity/downright denial that he could actually be wrong whilst the people that felt they were talking to an aggressive wall eventually snapped and made it personal due to a lack of other options in the face of such blatant denial of his/her's general poor and invalid points and then it was these people that were told to cool it and not make the situation worse.

Just seems that there's a mental flag that gets thrown up when there's a personal insult and the general context gets ignored. It's by no means solely this moderator group as it's definitely happened in the past too. Generally 95% of the time i have no quibbles to made regarding this, but there needs to be more...i guess open-ness regarding posters that are 'problems' as it's generally a last resort like today when us rank and file know for sure that stuff is going on behind the scenes.

This isn't really me having a go, but just calling for a better understanding so the majority know something is going on regarding the tiny minority.

[BoyBrumby]

Sounds like a job for Captain Ignore Function!

[Matteh]

It's odd, but it's like talking to a guy with bad tourettes. You know he's not going to say anything of importance, but you're still going to laugh at how bad it is until it finally gets boring.

[GIMH]

Originally Posted by BoyBrumby

Sounds like a job for Captain Ignore Function!

My problem with this is that if numerous posters see the need to have a poster on ignore, surely that is a huge sign of a forum atmosphere issue. For me, ignore is more designed for when there are obvious issues between two posters than having to filter out dross/trolling etc

[cpr]

Problem with threads when you have someone on ignore that it just becomes losts of posts saying 'This persons on ignore', then someone else quoting it and retorting, so you either get the full argument anyway, or just half. Either way you get a screen full of **** posts (Not just the footie thread, have a few posters on the old **** off list)