Reporting Posts

[Cevno]

And you aren't the only one that has reported posts and not got response or lead to a banning for a decent while, when the said poster is engaging in the same misdeamanours time and again.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I am not asking for double standards. His early posts were infraction worthy. I had no inkling that he was a multi, but he was clearly a troll. If his early infraction worthy posts had been appropriately infracted he would have been on much longer bans a lot earlier.

I take Phlegm's point that there was a lot of 'noise' around Bun's posting, but that happened much later and he could easily have copped a legitimate ban very early on in his posting career.

 

[Hurricane]

Wasn't referring to GIMH's ban or you personally having any issues with it.

But the fact that if you wanted him permabanned or harshly infracted only for trolling earlier, then the same rule would apply to others too when it takes time or accumulation of infractions for them to get banned. And then the harsher rule,will lead to further complaining at the Moderators for being too strict and what not the other side of the spectrum which happens now in any case.

You cannot just be harsher with one and deal with others lightly on the basis that one is accused of being a Multi, while the others have friends or is liked by others.(And am not referring to any user in particular here).

Your apparent support of Bun you are displaying here makes it difficult to gain community consensus.

I think you need to search your feelings and examine why you support him.

 

[Cevno]

I am not asking for double standards. His early posts were infraction worthy. I had no inkling that he was a multi, but he was clearly a troll. If his early infraction worthy posts had been appropriately infracted he would have been on much longer bans a lot earlier.

Maybe, you are right but without really seeing the posts in question can't comment on them specifically.

He trolled alright, from time to time but he certainly wasn't a Bruce Campbell or a OMM! and was pretty capable of subtle baiting from time to time like many others on the forum and mix it up with decent posting which i think made the task even more difficult. This is because when you infract him for that kind of post it automatically becomes a benchmark for the rest of the forum too.

Even his most ardent critics said that it was more a totality of his posts rather than individual posts that was a troll and also his implied association with a previously lunatic banned user, atleast in the later part of his posting on here.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Well, I missed out on Bruce Campbell and the few posts I saw from OMM seemed fine to me. Shows how little I read on here these days, I guess.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Think we all like the forum atmosphere thing. I thought the infractions was going to deal with it tbh, but I didn't realise how much people would hate getting infractions when they didn't lead to bans... it has caught me by surprise and I think the bar to giving them out is probably higher than originally intended.

In terms of multi's, BoyBrumby, it's not always as easy to spot as you claim. The one you called out earlier in the thread I can say 100% isn't a multi on Bun (not just there is no burden of proof either way - it is certain that he isn't).

Well if you're 100% certain there must be proof, no? Not asking what it is, obvz.

 

[Furball]

As I said above, we're all ears when it comes to forum atmosphere if you can get enough people on board. When the staff came to us and presented their case (complete with a classic Burgey rant) we agreed and took action. All I've heard for the past few months is "Bun is Precam" not "Bun is a drag on forum atmosphere." There was a lot of talk about giving him the forum atmosphere ban amongst the moderators, but it's extremely difficult to justify when Bun is trolling less than certain other members.

I need to go to dinner now, so I'll be back later.

Bollocks, I came to you guys with the "Bun is toxic for forum atmosphere" angle and the response I got back can basically be summed up with "we're not going to give him a ban because you don't like him." It's a joke that it took the staff to make basically the same argument I made before something was done.

 

[Cevno]

Your apparent support of Bun you are displaying here makes it difficult to gain community consensus.

I think you need to search your feelings and examine why you support him.

I am not supporting him at all. He was a troll/subtle baiter alright like many others in the past,present or future.And a absolutely disgraceful person now it has been revealed who he was and what his past misdemeanors have been.

But i feel people are giving him too much though or credit that he is due and it will really only give him more satisfaction if anything. He wasn't really the only reason or a major reason even for derailment of tour threads from time to time, he wasn't the sole reason for every other ban and people who are now trying to justify their bans versus him or saying it was only because of him are wrong AFAIC.

And saying that he should have been banned earlier for being a troll and for longer is too simplistic seeing as if the Mods are giving him the benefit of the doubt, the same standards as everyone else or the same system applies to him too. There have been around 20 bannings for different durations since the India - England series started but the reaction Bun got from others or the outrage about his ban or about him not being banned earlier etc.. is more because he was accused of being a Multi and has done the same kind of baiting in the past too under different guises, not because he was a troll above all other trolls or even the first one to get to 2000 posts or whatever number he was at.
Then there is a case of the same user posting as Blaze 18 apparently who was a pretty decent poster in isolation.

 

[Flem274*]

Personally with new members (and old members) I try to assume good intentions. Bad new members can and have become good ones. Flibbertyjibber is not the only example. When Turbinator first posted iirc he wasn't up to scratch either.

Bollocks, I came to you guys with the "Bun is toxic for forum atmosphere" angle and the response I got back can basically be summed up with "we're not going to give him a ban because you don't like him." It's a joke that it took the staff to make basically the same argument I made before something was done.

You were one of the few (perhaps the only one) to come forward with that argument though. Everyone else was far too busy calling him a multi in threads to actually organize a group of you to come forward and say "X is bad for the forum atmosphere and here are our reasons."

FWIW, there's a few members around right now that we would love to hear about with regards to forum atmosphere. In the past, we've only pulled it in extreme cases. I agree with the modus operandi, because I really don't like being the opinion/personality police. However, we do want to hear from our members and if enough of you contact us about posters we will take it into account.

 

[Daemon]

I am not asking for double standards. His early posts were infraction worthy. I had no inkling that he was a multi, but he was clearly a troll. If his early infraction worthy posts had been appropriately infracted he would have been on much longer bans a lot earlier.

I take Phlegm's point that there was a lot of 'noise' around Bun's posting, but that happened much later and he could easily have copped a legitimate ban very early on in his posting career.

This is why we should know whether a reported post has been infracted or not imo. In Heef's case he clearly didn't say anything and just reported posts but if he didn't know whether or not they were infracted I can understand where the frustration comes from.

 

[honestbharani]

I suggested a hitman in the moderator subbie. If every member contributes some cash, we have this sorted.

Not good enough?

 

[honestbharani]

so i believe




is the best way forward for cricketweb. **** newbies. all new users must be recommended by an existing user. if the new user turns out to be a dick, the existing user also gets banned. Viva La Clique!

The users will then start recommending their own multis..

 

[Furball]

You were one of the few (perhaps the only one) to come forward with that argument though. Everyone else was far too busy calling him a multi in threads to actually organize a group of you to come forward and say "X is bad for the forum atmosphere and here are our reasons."

FWIW, there's a few members around right now that we would love to hear about with regards to forum atmosphere. In the past, we've only pulled it in extreme cases. I agree with the modus operandi, because I really don't like being the opinion/personality police. However, we do want to hear from our members and if enough of you contact us about posters we will take it into account.

I don't think it should be down to the members to effectively gang up on posters that way. If I'd posted what I emailed you guys then while I might have gotten a lot of agreement on the issue, I don't think it would have been helpful to have a witchunt on the ope forum. Which is why I emailed you guys in the first place, and my concerns were more or less brushed off.

Yes, perhaps the members could have grouped together with their concerns, however short of doing it on the open forum or getting the staff to do it then there's not really a lot we can do. I don't think the forum would be a healthy place if people were posting 'I think X is a drain on forum atmosphere, please ban him' with plenty of posters chipping in their tuppence worth. It is your guys' duty to monitor the forum atmosphere and with Bun you dropped the ball, big time. You're also using the fact people accused him of being a multi as an excuse for your inaction; multi or not, Bun was guilty of rubbing a lot of people up the wrong way and this should have been clamped down on. The fact that you had former and current staff, former mods and respected members of the site who all had absolutely no time for him should have been a pretty big clue as to how he was affecting the place.

 

[honestbharani]

I am not asking for double standards. His early posts were infraction worthy. I had no inkling that he was a multi, but he was clearly a troll. If his early infraction worthy posts had been appropriately infracted he would have been on much longer bans a lot earlier.

I take Phlegm's point that there was a lot of 'noise' around Bun's posting, but that happened much later and he could easily have copped a legitimate ban very early on in his posting career.

Did we have the infractions system in place before Bun became a member?

 

[four_or_six]

I reckon the line between banter and trolling is a pretty difficult one to police in general. I can think of any number of topics that if I posted a jokey post about, half the forum would think it funny and the other half trolling. For example, one person may post " Tendulkar out lbw for 99, wouldn't happen if BCCI weren't such ****'s and accepted DRS, made my day " and another may post "Meaker playing for England? South Africa A more like ". I bet you both posts would be reported for trolling, and if we infracted both posts the people who reported one would be upset about an infraction for the other.

If people wanted more action against Bun's posting, then my personal opinion is that they would have to also accept us being more strict in general about what we accept on the forum. Whether we should or not, well perhaps that's something that needs to be discussed, but I do think we are trying to be consistent.

 

[Hurricane]

I don't think it should be down to the members to effectively gang up on posters that way. If I'd posted what I emailed you guys then while I might have gotten a lot of agreement on the issue, I don't think it would have been helpful to have a witchunt on the ope forum. Which is why I emailed you guys in the first place, and my concerns were more or less brushed off.

Yes, perhaps the members could have grouped together with their concerns, however short of doing it on the open forum or getting the staff to do it then there's not really a lot we can do. I don't think the forum would be a healthy place if people were posting 'I think X is a drain on forum atmosphere, please ban him' with plenty of posters chipping in their tuppence worth. It is your guys' duty to monitor the forum atmosphere and with Bun you dropped the ball, big time. You're also using the fact people accused him of being a multi as an excuse for your inaction; multi or not, Bun was guilty of rubbing a lot of people up the wrong way and this should have been clamped down on. The fact that you had former and current staff, former mods and respected members of the site who all had absolutely no time for him should have been a pretty big clue as to how he was affecting the place.

Perfect.

 

[centurymaker]

Yes, perhaps the members could have grouped together with their concerns, however short of doing it on the open forum or getting the staff to do it then there's not really a lot we can do. I don't think the forum would be a healthy place if people were posting 'I think X is a drain on forum atmosphere, please ban him' with plenty of posters chipping in their tuppence worth. It is your guys' duty to monitor the forum atmosphere and with Bun you dropped the ball, big time. You're also using the fact people accused him of being a multi as an excuse for your inaction; multi or not, Bun was guilty of rubbing a lot of people up the wrong way and this should have been clamped down on. The fact that you had former and current staff, former mods and respected members of the site who all had absolutely no time for him should have been a pretty big clue as to how he was affecting the place.

.
agreed

 

[Hurricane]

I reckon the line between banter and trolling is a pretty difficult one to police in general. I can think of any number of topics that if I posted a jokey post about, half the forum would think it funny and the other half trolling. For example, one person may post " Tendulkar out lbw for 99, wouldn't happen if BCCI weren't such ****'s and accepted DRS, made my day " and another may post "Meaker playing for England? South Africa A more like ". I bet you both posts would be reported for trolling, and if we infracted both posts the people who reported one would be upset about an infraction for the other.

If people wanted more action against Bun's posting, then my personal opinion is that they would have to also accept us being more strict in general about what we accept on the forum. Whether we should or not, well perhaps that's something that needs to be discussed, but I do think we are trying to be consistent.

Again I appreciate your honesty.

What would I do if I were a mod. I would probably ignore the 1st reported post of this nature against the person. If they did it again or something similar then they are trolling and it isn't banter. Bun must have made 50-100 trolling posts in his time. Possibly more I limited my exposure to him.

 

[Cevno]

Don't have a problem with the Forum atmosphere Ban, as long as it applies to everyone including the people suggesting it themselves and consistently.

And don't agree that you should need staff members to decide how a certain poster is affecting the forum atmosphere vs another who they will then defend no matter what giving silly reasoning and comparing that with others. I.e it shouldn't come down to a popularity contest and then some will get away with everything and anything far more than certain others.

 

[Furball]

I reckon the line between banter and trolling is a pretty difficult one to police in general. I can think of any number of topics that if I posted a jokey post about, half the forum would think it funny and the other half trolling. For example, one person may post " Tendulkar out lbw for 99, wouldn't happen if BCCI weren't such ****'s and accepted DRS, made my day " and another may post "Meaker playing for England? South Africa A more like ". I bet you both posts would be reported for trolling, and if we infracted both posts the people who reported one would be upset about an infraction for the other.

Context matters. Swap the DRS bit for 'didn't tour the West Indies' and you've basically copied the last thousand posts Shivfan has made on the site. In isolation, nothing wrong.with that. When you're repeating that point across multiple threads and pissing everyone off with your presence, that's when you start handing out infractions and look at a possible ban for forum atmosphere. Just about the only thing that united England and India fans this summer was the collective annoyance at.shivfan continually posting drivel and trolling for a reaction - although he was probably suprised to find quite a few England fans telling him to stfu.

As for your specific examples, the Meaker one is worse for two reasons - firstly it's a 'joke' that's been made loads of times before - but more importantly it's borderline racism. People who said that Ravi Bopara or Usman Khawaja couldn't be English or Australian because of their brown skin (and Khawaja being born in Pakistan) would get themselves into trouble. Why shouldn't the same standard be applied to England playerd who happeb to have been born in South Africa but who either grew up in England or who have parental ties to the country?