What's going on?

[sledger]

I respect him because of his noods.

 

[benchmark00]

ftr, did the Glam Announcements thread have n00dz in it?

 

[sledger]

ftr, did the Glam Announcements thread have n00dz in it?

Did it ever.

Would also like to use this moment to ask about getting the "millstones" thread re-opened.

 

[cpr]

Right, the following post is not aimed at anyone, and nobody to take it personally, otherwise i'll be round to kneecap you. OK?

I ended up skipping a fair chunk of the WC sub forum due to how low it sunk. Don't think I went in after England went out...

I had fun baiting the Aussies, the Yanks etc, took the retorts on the chin (still haven't changed my avatar back after losing a bet!) all fun etc. But **** me alot of people took too much too seriously, and got so wound up over next to nothing, causing big arguments. That's the reason why I don't frequent football forums, because people just go OTT when it comes to football, and it just ruins my enjoyment of the sport at times.

Personally, didnt find anything offensive from GF, uppercut etc. In fact I've found GF's constant swipes at Celtic in the footie threads more offensive, but I do have to accept he's a dirty 'gers fan so he's inclined to be wrong So no problems there. Some of the posts were utter garbage by many a member, so I just scrolled past the obvious arguments and waited for decent posts. No damage done.

But I'm sorry here, the 'the moderators shouldn't do this and that'. Maybe they shouldn't, but they are human, and they are still normal members here to discuss, debate etc. OK accuse them of double standards for doing what they are punishing, but point it out to another mod and let them decide... They cannot be expected to constantly have a mod head on, they will post what they think just as others do from time to time.

What saddens me is I hold the CW staff members in equal, possibly higher, regard. As such I'd expect even higher standards at times. If the mods are expected to show high judgement in their posting, i'd expect even higher from Staff Members, as they are representing website, there postings tell a story of who's behind the front page articles. If I was new to CW and the forums, i'd be judging the site on what the Staff Members are posting first, and if thats mud slinging matches I'd not have a high opinion of this place.... Hell that WC sub forum was bad enough to make any newbie consider planetcricket instead


I've seen lines in this thread along the lines of 'I think so and so is OK but the WC sub section made me really angry and now I want to rip his intestines out and feed them back to him etc etc etc...... Right, well ignore the WC then, its been, its gone, Its always brought the worst out of a football fan. Shake hands, brush it under the table, and start again, and if the problems start to come again then approach them as adults at the start, ask someone else to mediate if needs, but the 'He said this, she said that' attitude is mind-numbingly infuriating.

In regards to Sir Alex. Feel he's a precam multi? Whack him on ignore and be done. I think I did that at first purely because of the allegations (I felt they were true). He's not on ignore any more, not sure when he came off, either way he's done nothing to make me want to put him back on ignore.

Although there is a principle of not allowing people to flout a ban, the mods can't spend too much time chasing after any seriously persistent multi's. It'd be to the detriment of the forum if other people were posting garbage but it was being missed by the mods due to multi hunting. Sometimes a problem is best (or can only be) solved by taking a passive approach, see what springs up, wait and see if any rules are broken from that point onwards, and if so, ban that account again....

 

[sledger]

Reckon I should be banned tbh.

 

[Matt79]

Reckon Cribb has spoken the most sense in this thread so far.

 

[Flem274*]

It's a waste of time and bandwidth. Reading posts that are absolute rubbish is a pain in the arse.

Sir Alex, wtf ben, MNS: Several gazillion posts.

Threads about ham: Considerably less

Hmmm

 

[Sanz]

I am not sure what we are complaining about here, did we not ask for stricter moderation sometime back ? I think that's when GF became moderator and he seemed to be doing exactly what we asked for.

 

[DingDong]

i dont exactly know whats going on here but i bet its flem274's fault.

 

[Flem274*]

I love you too DingDong, and it's your fault I just sprayed coke all over my bed too.

 

[Cevno]

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/site-discussion/46320-venting-3.html

In this thread GIMH and Matteh both were defending GingerFurball and his action against HB and his inability to act against Burgey for a personal rant.
GIMH also defended him for banning Satyam ,just because he disagreed with general opinion.

Quoting James post in that thread before it was closed-

If a thread goes so over-board and personal insults start as what happened with that thread, then there's only one way the thread is going to go, and that's into closed-ville.

Anyone is entitled to their opinion on a topic, butit's up to the moderators to decide whether it's breaking forum rules or not. It isn't up to member(s) to decide what is right or wrong for the forum and for them to disagree with the decision publicly and take matters into their own hands.

Thread Closed and Merged with the original.

And now because he was banned they have got a axe to grind and has turned around.
As they say what goes around,comes around (or something like that)

 

[Cevno]

There have been some very silly threads opened in this Forum,which i think is a vioation against rules too.

 

[fredfertang]

Have to say I'm not surprised GF has taken a view on being a mod. As Sanz says my recollection is that when we had this discussion a while back the consensus was that stricter moderation was what was required, so it seems a bit rich to moan about it and particularly to single out GF

I may be wrong here but I'm assuming the mods act on the basis of some sort of collective responsibility rather than individually - it does seem a bit odd to me then that they do the modding on their individual accounts rather than some generic shared identity - the impression I get, and I might be completely wrong in this as I don't visit all of the forums, is that most of the active modding is done by a few of the newer mods - poor old GF in particular seems to have put hours and hours into it and anyone who does that voluntarily for such a thankless task gets my respect - heck on occasion he's even admitted to be being wrong - I do hope he carries on posting

On reflection though I have to say I think the stricter moderation, which I did support at the time, was wrong. Comments have been made about the quality of CC being dire and it is. There are a few factors in that some of which are cyclical but SJS leaving is a big one - essentially it was the new moderating standards that caused that and his loss was far too high a price

The bans have gone too far as well - I'm not keen on bans for "conduct" issues at the best of times but when you get GIMH banned for reacting then things have gone way too far - there have been others, social for one, who's banning I was surprised at. Long standing members have earned the right to be treated differently - I'm not saying that means being able to disregard the rules but bans for established members should be an absolute last resort, imo.

Multis are different - they should be banned and banned quickly. You get the odd one, like the_sean, which should obviously not be treated as breaking the rules, but generally they're just taking the piss - its unfortunate in some ways as the likes of Precam and Bruce Campbell do/did have something to offer but we're better off without them. As to Sir Alex I'm far from convinced he's Precam - I don't know what standard of proof the mods use for multis, and see no reason why it should be a particularly high one, but after the relative ease with which the other Precams were detected they must surely be pretty confident Sir Alex is Sir Alex and not Precam

There is a lot of stress on here at the moment which is a great shame - I get stress at home and I come here to get away from that - Mrs Fertang cant help being menopausal, well maybe she can but that's another issue, but some of the folk on here certainly don't need to be as chippy as they are

 

[Cevno]

Have to say I'm not surprised GF has taken a view on being a mod. As Sanz says my recollection is that when we had this discussion a while back the consensus was that stricter moderation was what was required, so it seems a bit rich to moan about it and particularly to single out GF

I may be wrong here but I'm assuming the mods act on the basis of some sort of collective responsibility rather than individually - it does seem a bit odd to me then that they do the modding on their individual accounts rather than some generic shared identity - the impression I get, and I might be completely wrong in this as I don't visit all of the forums, is that most of the active modding is done by a few of the newer mods - poor old GF in particular seems to have put hours and hours into it and anyone who does that voluntarily for such a thankless task gets my respect - heck on occasion he's even admitted to be being wrong - I do hope he carries on posting

On reflection though I have to say I think the stricter moderation, which I did support at the time, was wrong. Comments have been made about the quality of CC being dire and it is. There are a few factors in that some of which are cyclical but SJS leaving is a big one - essentially it was the new moderating standards that caused that and his loss was far too high a price

The bans have gone too far as well - I'm not keen on bans for "conduct" issues at the best of times but when you get GIMH banned for reacting then things have gone way too far - there have been others, social for one, who's banning I was surprised at. Long standing members have earned the right to be treated differently - I'm not saying that means being able to disregard the rules but bans for established members should be an absolute last resort, imo.

Multis are different - they should be banned and banned quickly. You get the odd one, like the_sean, which should obviously not be treated as breaking the rules, but generally they're just taking the piss - its unfortunate in some ways as the likes of Precam and Bruce Campbell do/did have something to offer but we're better off without them. As to Sir Alex I'm far from convinced he's Precam - I don't know what standard of proof the mods use for multis, and see no reason why it should be a particularly high one, but after the relative ease with which the other Precams were detected they must surely be pretty confident Sir Alex is Sir Alex and not Precam

There is a lot of stress on here at the moment which is a great shame - I get stress at home and I come here to get away from that - Mrs Fertang cant help being menopausal, well maybe she can but that's another issue, but some of the folk on here certainly don't need to be as chippy as they are

Agreed.

Except for the part about GF'S moderating.

Yes,he is putting effort in and i appreciate him for that,but his standards are inconsistent at times which often depends on his preferences.
If he could sort that out,he will be a great mod.

 

[Prince EWS]

Have to say I'm not surprised GF has taken a view on being a mod. As Sanz says my recollection is that when we had this discussion a while back the consensus was that stricter moderation was what was required, so it seems a bit rich to moan about it and particularly to single out GF

I may be wrong here but I'm assuming the mods act on the basis of some sort of collective responsibility rather than individually - it does seem a bit odd to me then that they do the modding on their individual accounts rather than some generic shared identity - the impression I get, and I might be completely wrong in this as I don't visit all of the forums, is that most of the active modding is done by a few of the newer mods - poor old GF in particular seems to have put hours and hours into it and anyone who does that voluntarily for such a thankless task gets my respect - heck on occasion he's even admitted to be being wrong - I do hope he carries on posting

On reflection though I have to say I think the stricter moderation, which I did support at the time, was wrong. Comments have been made about the quality of CC being dire and it is. There are a few factors in that some of which are cyclical but SJS leaving is a big one - essentially it was the new moderating standards that caused that and his loss was far too high a price

The bans have gone too far as well - I'm not keen on bans for "conduct" issues at the best of times but when you get GIMH banned for reacting then things have gone way too far - there have been others, social for one, who's banning I was surprised at. Long standing members have earned the right to be treated differently - I'm not saying that means being able to disregard the rules but bans for established members should be an absolute last resort, imo.

Multis are different - they should be banned and banned quickly. You get the odd one, like the_sean, which should obviously not be treated as breaking the rules, but generally they're just taking the piss - its unfortunate in some ways as the likes of Precam and Bruce Campbell do/did have something to offer but we're better off without them. As to Sir Alex I'm far from convinced he's Precam - I don't know what standard of proof the mods use for multis, and see no reason why it should be a particularly high one, but after the relative ease with which the other Precams were detected they must surely be pretty confident Sir Alex is Sir Alex and not Precam

There is a lot of stress on here at the moment which is a great shame - I get stress at home and I come here to get away from that - Mrs Fertang cant help being menopausal, well maybe she can but that's another issue, but some of the folk on here certainly don't need to be as chippy as they are

Major moderation decisions like bans and the likes are always made by the group after discussion, but things like closing threads, deleting posts, warning members etc are done an individual basis - mainly because they are things that really do need immediate action. We can't wait until everyone puts their 2c in over whether to close a thread because sometimes that can take three days. We try to be consistent and we discuss decisions after they're made to ensure some sort of precedent is set, but sometimes it does come down to individual interpretation and sometimes mods disagree. It's something we try to reduce as much as possible but we'd be lying if we said it didn't happen sometimes.

 

[Prince EWS]

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/site-discussion/46320-venting-3.html

In this thread GIMH and Matteh both were defending GingerFurball and his action against HB and his inability to act against Burgey for a personal rant.
GIMH also defended him for banning Satyam ,just because he disagreed with general opinion.

Quoting James post in that thread before it was closed-



And now because he was banned they have got a axe to grind and has turned around.
As they say what goes around,comes around (or something like that)

You know, it's possible for Corrin to agree with GF on one issue and disagree with him on others without being biased. In fact, that's actually a good example of a lack of bias. He's expressing his opinion on different issues irrespective of whether he likes the moderator in question.

 

[NUFAN]

Mods are like Cricket Umpires, they make so many good decisions, but everyone tends to focus on the ones they disagree with. Such a thankless job.

Cevno, Furball is no longer a moderator.

 

[social]

I know this is going to be an unpopular sentiment, but I actually believe that Sir Alex does contribute quite a bit of positive stuff to the forum and should be allowed to stay.

He is obviously very passionate about cricket and does make quite a few interesting observations

Furthermore, if it wasnt for regular posters like him, there'd have been any number of times when you could've shot a gun around the place and not been in any danger of hitting anyone

Now I know that he does enjoy the wind up and that can result in a thread going quickly to the dogs but surely that is as much the fault of people like me who are only too happy to indulge him from time to time

From a personal perspective, I think that posters who take any criticism of their favourite player/team/country/sport etc personally are far more annoying and a much greater blight on the forum.

Basically, if you not interested in debate then join LemmingsRus and talk to yourself

And I also find it interesting that there are a some people speaking out here whose only "positive" contribution many threads is the odd one-liner designed to annoy/humiliate somebody

Guys, it was mildly funny the first time but after 5683 times it's just old

Anyway, dont have any probs with the mods - thankless and underpaid job that I wouldnt do for quids

 

[Prince EWS]

Agreed.

Except for the part about GF'S moderating.

Yes,he is putting effort in and i appreciate him for that,but his standards are inconsistent at times which often depends on his preferences.
If he could sort that out,he will be a great mod.

Interesting.

I definitely think he was consistent in everything he did. The problem people had was that he wasn't always consistent with the other moderators (early on at least - I think it was a stigma that he kept despite changing the way he did things later on). Whether you agree with the way he handled things or not, I definitely don't think it's fair to say he wasn't consistent.

 

[Uppercut]

I dont care about the site as much as I used to but I am on as much, if not more. Despite being on here pretty much all day every day, I dont post very often in CC as there isnt much of interest or repy worthy. I never thought Id say it, but OT is really why I visit now (and that is from someone who was a committed CC guy.)

Have to say I feel exactly the same way, any interesting or funny discussions I've had for months have been outside of CC.

But I think that has a lot to do with the lack of decent cricket at the moment (damn BCCI!!!). The World T20 subforum was perfectly good, and I can't imagine there'll be any talk of a decline in standards when the Ashes rolls around again. Over the first half of last year we had two of the best test series I've ever seen, between Australia and South Africa, followed by the Ashes in England. It was a great time to be a cricket fan. This year we've had an unbearably uncompetitive Australian summer, Bangladesh and the West Indies getting their arses handed to them repeatedly and a bunch of T20. There's been a distinct lack of good test cricket so far this year- two matches between India and South Africa is about it. I think my absence from CC simply reflects a declining interest in cricket, especially when the World Cup was on. That forum is worse now than it's ever been, certainly in my memory, but when a good test series fiiiinally rolls around (particularly one involving Australia or England) the quality of posting usually recovers.