Are the Motors>Motors mods too Lock happy?

rebel.ranter

This thread and/or sandwich about to bit the dust: vote quickly

This forum is closely monitored but the majority of the thread locks are vaild. I would agree with gyppo on the bans, an odd 2-5 day ban would be no harm to calm things where threads get personal.
However I do think that the thread locks for going off topic occasionally or reviving old threads should be reviewed.

On the whole though peasant, unkle, & kbannon take their duties seriously & you cannot fault them for that.

E92

No: not enough mod control : too many threads out of control

Max_Damage wrote: »

In my opinion, old threads shouldn't be locked. There is absolutely no reason to lock them in my opinion.

IMO 99% of the time what happens is that somebody who never bothered to read the rules of this forum, decides to make a post and the post could and should have been made in a brand new thread.

I think if some thread dies but is something of significance, like the imminent takeover by the Volkswagen Group of MDL and VW, Audi and Skoda being imported by the VW Group themselves, then if somebody posts on an ancient thread, as long as it's something relevant then it should be allowed to remain open.

Otherwise I agree 100% on this age old rule.

VH

No: not enough mod control : too many threads out of control

gyppo wrote: »

1 This forum is probably one of the best modded on boards, and I think the balance is right. Its a thankless job, and the mods here have a busy forum. Peasant see

between the 3 mods there almost is balance - peasant seems to be learning how to mod and p1ssing people off in the process - the other day he said to me "you either disagree or a trolling - either way consider this a warning" - it happened to be that I disagreed but didnt come out and state it in black and white and got a warning - that p1ssed me off personally with peasant

there is also the over eager thread locking by peasant (i'm not the 1st person to say this) which is p1ssing people off to the point they feel like not posting, cutting back, or going somewhere else - unkle over eagerly locks from time to time though not to the point where its a major irritation - and no im not going to provide proof - its there if people want to go look

kbannon seems to have the balance pretty much perfect imho

I voted that mods are lock happy because since peasant has arrived there has been a problem - i dont think this poll would have been created before he arrived

sorry if you dont like what i say - i'm telling it as i see it

pburns

No: not enough mod control : too many threads out of control

E92 wrote: »

I think if some thread dies but is something of significance, like the imminent takeover by the Volkswagen Group of MDL and VW, Audi and Skoda being imported by the VW Group themselves, then if somebody posts on an ancient thread, as long as it's something relevant then it should be allowed to remain open.

Otherwise I agree 100% on this age old rule.

I'm of the opinion that a new thread should be created in most instances because usually the context of an issue will have changed considerably over a period of time and the current debate ends up all the way down page 5,6 or whatever.

I used to use the Atlas F1 forum but it drives me nuts because there are very strict rules over there about creating new posts. You'd swear every new thread was a pollutant and added to global warming! For example they have an active thread there at the moment about the forthcoming Singapore night race. It was started in 2005:eek:! So you'd have to wade through a pile of ****e to get the context and then start reading the latest postings. They seem to be stuck on some arbitary rule dreamed up in 1998 or whenever when this world-wide-web thing was quite new. Boards doesn't have this problem thankfully.

I digress...

I had to sleep on things before contributing to the poll above. No matter what way I look at it though I have to conclude that there has been a bit too much nannying here lately. One of the mods made a point above that Boards is becoming more 'mainstream' and that they have to toe a more 'middle-of-the-road' line. That saddens me because I suspect there may be a desire for 'Boards' to become more corporate, conservative and 'family friendly'. Maybe the owners want to sell up to Disney and move to a villa in the South of France:D

I've had a slap on the wrist myself from peasant. I was pissed off at the time and thought it unwarranted seeing as how much worse things had been said and done before by myself and others. It was fair enough though. I only received a warning. Punishments meted out since then to others however have been utterly ludicrous and the general nannying as soon as there was even the merest hint of handbags appearing just laughable.

peasant

pburns wrote: »

One of the mods made a point above that Boards is becoming more 'mainstream' and that they have to toe a more 'middle-of-the-road' line. That saddens me because I suspect there may be a desire for 'Boards' to become more corporate, conservative and 'family friendly'.

There is no directive from "above" to become more family friendly.
But there have been users complaining (mainly about language) that look at this forum with their children.
Fact is ...boards already is a site for all the family, simply because all the family use it (or sections of it)

Really ...it isn't that hard to get a load off your chest without having to resort to "fcuks and cnuts"

ninty9er

peasant wrote: »

There is no directive from "above" to become more family friendly.
But there have been users complaining (mainly about language) that look at this forum with their children.
Fact is ...boards already is a site for all the family, simply because all the family use it (or sections of it)

Really ...it isn't that hard to get a load off your chest without having to resort to "fcuks and cnuts"

Realistically in an Irish context though, the same effect of the weight of feeling isn't carried without these. The internet is not something for kids to use alone unsupervised these days, if parents have a problem then just PG it themselves before allowing the "family" to read. Who reads the forum is not the posters problem, it is the readers'.

E92

No: not enough mod control : too many threads out of control

AudiChris wrote: »

I'm wondering if it's possibly your "tone of voice" that's drawing this flack?....

I know what you're talking about - and it's a case of not what peasant said but more how he said it.

It sounds a bit too thou shall not question my authorit-tay and "fight the pow-ah", as though he's on a bit of a power trip. I've noticed this several times before btw, but a bit like AudiChris, I didn't want to say it because I thought it was just me.

Now having seen the way peasant has handled our whinging and moaning(thus far), it's clear that this is far from the case, but that's the (false) impression that was given to me, and clearly I wasn't alone on it either.

Though I wouldn't be too complementary on the way Darragh29 handled peasant's warning either, so it works both ways.

peasant wrote: »

Just one point:

The reason why you see more moderation (good or bad) going on recently is because there is one more mod (me).

I happen to be online during the day more often than unkle or kbannon so -threads get moderated more often than they used to - and it's usually me that does it.

Well as promised last night, I finally have gotten around to answering your post.

I didn't even notice that you're on here more often than the other 2 - primarily because I'm working during those hours of the day and I don't have internet access at work.

peasant wrote: »

I don't think that I censor posts, I'd like to believe that I moderate them. The <SNIPS> that you hate so much are usually nothing but "fcuks and cnuts" removed that have no place in a civilised discussion anyway.

As for the snips, well fair enough, though if people make a little effort to disguise what they want to say e.g. spell it wrongly then I see no reason to go and change it. It gave me the impression that you've a net nanny style approach to moderating, and hence led me to say I believed things were being censored. Of course because I saw this and underneath it used to say 99% of the time "last edited by" your good self, I formed an opinion that you are censoring/interfering, even though it's only something minor.

I've often thought of saying something, but I felt(and clearly others did too) that it wouldn't meet your "approval" if you like and declined to post.

I know others have felt the same thing, because I got PMs from people agreeing with me on it(obviously I'm not going to say who).

peasant wrote: »

My "interference" in trying to control the direction of a thread or warnings to people are nothing else but the alternative to thread closure (or bans)

So what am I to do?
If I try to steer, I'm "interfering"..if I let it run to breaking point and lock it, then I'm "heavy handed".

I'll let others speak for themselves, but being heavy handed was more the threats/warnings etc(and there have been lots recently for things that just went unnoticed before). Goes back to what I said about one shall not question your authority in my previous post.

I've noticed though that you don't allow threads to take their own course, if it starts deviating from the OP you'll give the offending persons a slap on the wrist, or we'll see a post reminding us what was the title of the thread again. Until a few months ago, threads just flew naturally, unless the thread was going nowhere and people start spamming/pimping etc then and only then did we see moderation. Now we see moderation if it goes even a small bit off topic.

That's why I said that in my humble opinion, I believe that there is too much interfering going on.

One shouldn't feel on a forum that was always so laid-back, and on something which is bound to make us get a bit passionate, that one has to be very careful what one says, within reason obviously.

Almost certainly if I post something controversial, like my opinions on paraffin stoves amongst other things, I'll be told "don't say that again", even in new threads if somebody who doesn't post here that often and wants our opinions on something or other.

Now when I started off on Motors I was 10 times worse about hybrids(I still don't like them either FWIW) and no moderator ever said anything to me, and when I say nothing, I really mean it. I posted threads incessantly questioning their environmental credentials and nobody batted an eyelid.

I appreciate that it gets wearisome for some people(the regulars in particular), hearing the same thing over and over again, however I'm not the type of poster who posts things just to p!ss people off and to increase my post count(though if posting an alternate viewpoint on something causes people to be p!ssed off then I'm sorry but you'll just have to live with it).

Particularly when somebody is looking for advice I'd like them to know what I really think and make a judgement based on hearing the good and the bad about what they're interested in buying.

Other posters post broadcast their absolute like/dislike for other things on a regular basis(like groupb's hate of everything VAG) and I've never seen them get a slap on the wrist(well publicly anyway).

I admit I have a chip on my shoulder having been banned by yourself which clouds my judgement on these things though;)!

Having said that I'd hope that the calibre of my other posts is such that it doesn't look like I'm trolling every time I post something that doesn't "conform" to what people expect to be said if you like;)!

Now to be fair I should say that you don't generally tend to take s*!t from trollers, and you generally stay as level headed as possible whilst often posting the kind of information that pleases an anorak like myself. Keep posting that kind of stuff, I wouldn't miss it for the world!

You see, there is good in everyone if you look for it;)!

peasant wrote: »

I'm not saying that I'm getting it right all the time ...but I'm trying my best.

Most of my decisions are made within a few seconds ...because I'm working as well as moderating ...and sometimes I do get it wrong.

Fair enough, I completely understand where you're coming from, and like I've said already I'm very pleased that you haven't just dismissed our constructive advice. I know modding is a thankless task, when you have people like RubberMammy who has IMO done some amount of trolling already(please don't give out to me:D), I see where ye're coming from.

I always am impressed when I see somebody is man enough to admit they may be doing something wrong, so I'm looking forward to seeing motors get back up there as one of the best forums for petrolheads to frequent.

I look forward to resuming posting again, but I really hope we see more enthusiasts back here, and that a lot of the crap is cut from the forum(though since boards.ie is so widely known at this stage I'm sure the enthusiasts will come back when the crap is cut out).

After all, Motors is supposed to be about "what you drive, and what you want to drive", so it would be nice if we were to remain more faithful to this idea then we have been in recent times.

peasant

E92 wrote: »

As for the snips, well fair enough, though if people make a little effort to disguise what they want to say e.g. spell it wrongly then I see no reason to go and change it.

There is a reason;
Boards has a swear filter and people know that. So they deliberatly change the spelling in order to circumvent the filter because, for whatever reason, they think their post carries more weight with "fcuk" or "cnut" in it instead of ****
Well ...I disagree
Some swear words are more or less part of Irish culture...but some posters really do go all out and that's what I <SNIP> and will continue to do so when I see it. I'm still hoping for a bit of a learning effect there ...because the other alternative is a ban (it's in the **** charter , after all ) ...and that would be much worse than the occassional <SNIP>

E92 wrote: »

I'll let others speak for themselves, but being heavy handed was more the threats/warnings etc(and there have been lots recently for things that just went unnoticed before). Goes back to what I said about one shall not question your authority in my previous post.

I've noticed though that you don't allow threads to take their own course, if it starts deviating from the OP you'll give the offending persons a slap on the wrist, or we'll see a post reminding us what was the title of the thread again. Until a few months ago, threads just flew naturally, unless the thread was going nowhere and people start spamming/pimping etc then and only then did we see moderation. Now we see moderation if it goes even a small bit off topic.

That's why I said that in my humble opinion, I believe that there is too much interfering going on.

I agree, actually

I've learned that lesson already. It is simply impossible to try and steer a thread. Things happen to fast, people will always ask "why", I'll have to explain and as an end result the thread ends up even further off topic than had I not intervened.
So, I'm not doing that any more

E92 wrote: »

my opinions on paraffin stoves ...having been banned by yourself ...the calibre of my other posts is such that it doesn't look like I'm trolling every time ...

No, you're not a troll...definetly not. However your tirade against diesels WAS getting a bit much and in my opinion you started to loose the run of yourself on that particular issue. There's a difference between having an opinion & voicing it and being on a mission
What earned you your three day ban (for those that don't remember) was an anti diesel post in a thread where somebody wanted to know how to treat their new diesel that they just bought. I thought telling them that they basically just commited the biggest possible sin in motoring wasn't particularly helpfur or nice.

Anyhow ...water under the bridge, ban long since lifted issue forgotten, as far as I'm concerned. Your free to voice your opinion on diesels, just keep it in context.

E92 wrote: »

I look forward to resuming posting again, but I really hope we see more enthusiasts back here, and that a lot of the crap is cut from the forum(though since boards.ie is so widely known at this stage I'm sure the enthusiasts will come back when the crap is cut out).

After all Motors is supposed to be about "what you drive, and what you want to drive" it would be nice if we were to remain more faithful to this idea then we have been in recent times.

Other than the issues about interference already addressed above, unfortunatley there is not much that we as moderators can do about attracting (or dissuading) a certain group of users. The forum content is what its users make it. All we do is keep order.

At least the users have the advantage that they don't have to read everything, if it doesn't interest them ...we mods do (or at least we have to keep a semi-open eye on it)

ninty9er

peasant wrote: »

There is a reason;
Boards has a swear filter and people know that. So they deliberatly change the spelling in order to circumvent the filter because, for whatever reason, they think their post carries more weight with "fcuk" or "cnut" in it instead of ****
Well ...I disagree
Some swear words are more or less part of Irish culture...but some posters really do go all out and that's what I <SNIP> and will continue to do so when I see it. I'm still hoping for a bit of a learning effect there ...because the other alternative is a ban (it's in the **** charter , after all ) ...and that would be much worse than the occassional <SNIP>

I do go all out really:D:D:D, but fu<k and cvnt or variations thereon are not filtered and it is not a mods place to go snipping these.

peasant

ninty9er wrote: »

I do go all out really:D:D:D, but fu<k and cvnt or variations thereon are not filtered and it is not a mods place to go snipping these.

Whatever about "fcuk" (that really is part of standard Irish vocabulary), the c-word is just crude.

And it certainly IS a mods place to snip them when, for example, members of the gardai are being called c's. You wouldn't get away with that on television or in a newspaper ...why should you here?

VH

No: not enough mod control : too many threads out of control

ninty9er wrote: »

I do go all out really:D:D:D, but fu<k and cvnt or variations thereon are not filtered and it is not a mods place to go snipping these.

oddly the mods are well able to come up with their own variations when they feel the need

Stevie Dakota

This thread and/or sandwich about to bit the dust: vote quickly

Just catching up on this thread, as I was not really interested in it. Having read the last few pages it's good that these views are being aired and I'm happy to see E92 back. I know that moderating is a thankless task, mistakes will be made and lesson learnt, but the intention is to be fair and I think the three lads do a good job overall and the forum is a better place for their efforts.

crosstownk

This thread and/or sandwich about to bit the dust: vote quickly

peasant wrote: »

And it certainly IS a mods place to snip them when, for example, members of the gardai are being called c's. You wouldn't get away with that on television or in a newspaper ...why should you here?

In the instance quoted above, I think editing of the posts by mods is acceptable. But I do think that replacing it with the (now famous) <snip> is probably no different to f*** or any other circumvention of the profanity filter - we all know what the poster is trying to say.

crosstownk

This thread and/or sandwich about to bit the dust: vote quickly

Stevie Dakota wrote: »

...... I think the three lads do a good job overall and the forum is a better place for their efforts.

I'd certainly agree with that.

copacetic

This thread and/or sandwich about to bit the dust: vote quickly

ninty9er wrote: »

I do go all out really:D:D:D, but fu<k and cvnt or variations thereon are not filtered and it is not a mods place to go snipping these.

it is actually, the originals are filtered for a reason. bypassing the swear filter put in place by the admins could easily be a bannable offence.

there are a milion and one ways to bypass swear filters (shit, fuck etc) hence why they aren't all covered.

Eoin

peasant wrote: »

Whatever about "fcuk" (that really is part of standard Irish vocabulary), the c-word is just crude.

And it certainly IS a mods place to snip them when, for example, members of the gardai are being called c's. You wouldn't get away with that on television or in a newspaper ...why should you here?

I agree with you in that particular example.

If someone says my fcuking car has broken down again, then I do not believe it's your place to <snip>. Personally, if I thought a post needed to be toned down, I would PM the user and ask them to do so first. Editing someone else's post is a last resort for me. I'd actually sooner delete a post then alter what someone else has said.

gyppo

This thread and/or sandwich about to bit the dust: vote quickly

I occasionally log onto a well known uk car forum, where swearing or any hint of same will result in a ban - end of.

I would have no objections to such a system being put in place here - it you can't get your point across without swearing, then maybe its above your intellectual capacities.

And yes, I have used various profanites on this forum, but if I knew they'd earn a penalty i would'nt use them.

Down with that sort of thing.:D

<edit> Must do something about my sig! </edit>

Sandwich

No: not enough mod control : too many threads out of control

First, a bit of open discussion now and again does no harm. I dont doubt the effort, time contribution and motivation of the mods, and by questioning the general modding policy, I didnt mean to personally criticise any of them. Only to see if we had lost our direction a bit lately, or was I the only one with that impression. If not, then maybe some general feedback could restore a more at-ease, informative, and entertaining Motors forum - the reason any of us loggin in in the first place.
Second, fair play to the mods for engaging fully in the discussion even with the implied criticism - the sign of a good mod.

A few observations:
1) With 40ish percent of voters feeling we have premature locking, long term contributors saying they dont post anymore etc, I think we would have to conclude that a very significant portion(though a minority) of Motors boardsies feel unhappy at the mod interference in threads. From the debate above, I hope the mods can find a way to move towrds them a little and have a lower proportion of readers feeling agrieved.
2) I am sure all are infavour of threads being locked which could have legal consequences, or are just gratuitous personal attacks between posters. But beyond that, opinions differ widely from 'anything else goes', to ' no old threads, no threads for non petrol heads, no bad language (even *!'**ited), no posts wich could be construed as anti motorist' etc. Hard to draw the line and be consistent I know, especially when the mods are plural, but it seems we have strayed a little too far to the over-modding side of the line.
3) The policy on old threads seems to create friction and contribute to the lock-happy feeling. Old thread resurection being an almost automatic lock seems to get on many peoples wick. Is it not better than starting a new one. If it adds at all(even minutely) to the thread then why should it be a lesser thread just because it was started yonks ago? Dont really mean to argue this topic but it seems there are differences of opinion which create friction.
4) Why is there not a greater tendency to go for treat the disease (suspend/ban the poster) rather than treating the symptom (locking the thread) so that it penalises everyone.
5) Some of the stress in boards lately seems to me to be due to its very popularity. It is no longer a cosy club of car people who have debated all the topics since year dot. Instead is is frequented by many who have a passing or even single event interest in motoring : 'foglight/VRT/penaltypoints/etc' threads are going to keep coming up again and again. Locking them out because many of us have heard it all before or plastering them with 'Yawn'/'Hear we go again'/'mods please lock'etc posts is only elitism. If its old hat to you then dont read it or even bother to post, but let those who want to get on with their discussion.
6) I will state an opinion here, that I think has been echoed or explicitly stated by others at various. And I am willing to accept that it is infact not at all true but more of an impression given by the manner of the modding rather than its motivation : mods are over interfering or willing to close threads especially if they disagree with it. Please dont take any offence on this point, but I believe it is nevertheless out there with many regulars.
7) Forum discussions are closer to pub chats than academic theses. Bad language/minor slights/robustly fought opinions being snipped or causing locks does leave a feeling of heavy handed censorship. If the general discussion is along the lines of the typical vernacular chat then I feel it sould be left unaltered.
8) Off topic thread being locked. OK, so the topic has changed from the title or first post. But if the original issue has been dealt with, and the topic is gone off in another, but worthwhile direction then why not let it go. In effect the thread is locked because the title is wrong. From a mods point of view, I can see a certain logic, but for the majority, its just a pain and sign of the too big for his boots mod.
9) Similar for threads' going round in circles'. Where the harm in those who want to keeping them spining?

I admit I know nothing of modding in general but, from the perspective of a forum user only, offer the following for your consideration and much of the ill feeling would probably disappear:
a) Avoid <snipping> unless libelous.
b) Dont lock resurected threads
c) 'Steer' threads on topic by all means. But dont lock them just because they have spun off at a tangent - especially if there is a lot of interest in it then surely peoply are showing their will by their very posting.
d) Suspend posters rather than locking the thread.
e) While there's no excuse for it, unfortunately the majority are not going to read forum rules or use feedback facilities. A little explanation for snipping or locking would ensure more know what was wrong and why the decision was taking rather than just seeing an almighty 'Lock' thunderbolt.
f) Is it possible for mods to avoid editing/locking a thread they are also posting in in a personal capacity? It leave you open to some of the allegations (even though quite unfounded Ill guess) you have been reading about.

E92

No: not enough mod control : too many threads out of control

peasant wrote: »

There is a reason;
Boards has a swear filter and people know that. So they deliberately change the spelling in order to circumvent the filter because, for whatever reason, they think their post carries more weight with "fcuk" or "cnut" in it instead of ****
Well ...I disagree
Some swear words are more or less part of Irish culture...but some posters really do go all out and that's what I <SNIP> and will continue to do so when I see it. I'm still hoping for a bit of a learning effect there ...because the other alternative is a ban (it's in the **** charter , after all ) ...and that would be much worse than the occasional <SNIP>

Well as long as it is someway disguised, then I see no reason for it to be sniped, so long as nobody's trolling or insulting other users by calling them profanities, or if every third word isn't a very nice one i.e. within reason.

I know it's not really a German thing (though ye do have a fair selection of them yerselves:D) to use profanities a lot, but it is very much a part of us Irish people, rightly or wrongly;)!

peasant wrote: »

I agree, actually

I've learned that lesson already. It is simply impossible to try and steer a thread. Things happen to fast, people will always ask "why", I'll have to explain and as an end result the thread ends up even further off topic than had I not intervened.
So, I'm not doing that any more

Great, and I'm sure a lot of others will welcome this as well:)!

peasant wrote: »

No, you're not a troll...definitely not. However your tirade against diesels WAS getting a bit much and in my opinion you started to lose the run of yourself on that particular issue. There's a difference between having an opinion & voicing it and being on a mission
What earned you your three day ban (for those that don't remember) was an anti diesel post in a thread where somebody wanted to know how to treat their new diesel that they just bought. I thought telling them that they basically just committed the biggest possible sin in motoring wasn't particularly helpful or nice.

Anyhow ...water under the bridge, ban long since lifted issue forgotten, as far as I'm concerned. Your free to voice your opinion on diesels, just keep it in context.

The only reason I brought it up in my previous post was because of the fact that certain people:rolleyes: could go on their high horses(speeding) and there wasn't even threats or anything, while I got banned for talking about cars(even if it wasn't something very complimentary I said:D:o).

Anyhoo, that's the end of it as far as I'm concerned too, I ain't changing my opinion on diesel unless I'm given a good reason to do so, but I will strive to be more tactful in future about what I say and how I say it. I'll try not to bang on about it as much, anyone who posts here often enough knows my views on it, though it may be difficult:D!

peasant wrote: »

Other than the issues about interference already addressed above, unfortunately there is not much that we as moderators can do about attracting (or dissuading) a certain group of users. The forum content is what its users make it. All we do is keep order.

At least the users have the advantage that they don't have to read everything, if it doesn't interest them ...we mods do (or at least we have to keep a semi-open eye on it)

Yup, nothing you guys can do about what people post, or who posts here, my only issue was the ones raised previously which was turning real enthusiasts away, though some of the posters that post here post the most random stuff. Like you say it's the users that make or break motors, I just hope that we see more petrolheads here, but that's completely out of my, and your hands.

I really think that motoring issues like speeding/speed limits etc. (particularly as we've covered them so often and certain people only show up to lecture us on how to drive shows to me that this type of discussion is not suited to a motors forum) would be best served in Commuting and Transport and/or Infrastructure, though it is of course inevitable that there is going to be some overlap.

I would prefer if we just stuck to cars and car related topics - after all on the main Rec page it says Motors is "what you drive, and what you want to drive".

That is merely a suggestion though, not a criticism of you or any mod here directly.

Seth Brundle

VH wrote: »

oddly the mods are well able to come up with their own variations when they feel the need

I can't speak for the other guys but if I edit a post for its language content, then I do so because of the context not because its just there. I love to curse and am quite good at it but in fairness, I can manage to post here without needing to resort to it except in relatively rare circumstances (I don't recall the last time).

VH

No: not enough mod control : too many threads out of control

In fairness to you there are mods - more senior mods - that side swipe the profanity filter regularly - you 3 don't do it really. i'd be in favour if banning people for use of bad language - full stop, and never mind context - fcuk etc included - more family friendly and less rant friendly

EDIT: bad language is a boards wide thing - nothing to stop ye from being pioneers in clearing it up tho

ninty9er

VH wrote: »

In fairness to you there are mods - more senior mods - that side swipe the profanity filter regularly - you 3 don't do it really. i'd be in favour if banning people for use of bad language - full stop, and never mind context - fcuk etc included - more family friendly and less rant friendly

EDIT: bad language is a boards wide thing - nothing to stop ye from being pioneers in clearing it up tho

Profanity is a part of everyday life in this country...not in others. We're a laid back nation that knows better than to take it too seriously and I hope our mods fit this national trend.

As previously pointed out, if you're going to allow your kids use the forum, thenscreen it first.

VH

No: not enough mod control : too many threads out of control

Profanity limits appeal - it's up to the powers that be to decide which is preferable

unkel

VH wrote: »

there are mods - more senior mods - that side swipe the profanity filter regularly - you 3 don't do it really

So why post about it here? Maybe you should take that up with those "more senior mods" either directly with them via PM or in the feedback forum

ninty9er

VH wrote: »

it's up to the powers that be to decide which is preferable

Damn this autocracy:D:D

Eoin

unkel wrote: »

So why post about it here? Maybe you should take that up with those "more senior mods" either directly with them via PM or in the feedback forum

Because it stems from the fact that posts are edited to have fcuking bad language and sh1t removed. I think it is more appropriate to ask a user to clean their posts first, rather than editing it first. As I said earlier, I don't think that altering what someone has said should be done lightly.

unkel

eoin_s wrote: »

I don't think that altering what someone has said should be done lightly.

I couldn't agree more. BTW the charter is very specific about swearing. For anybody not familiar with the charter - go and look it up!

Personally I'd like to leave bad language / swearing / personal abuse in place. I like to even quote it for use as "proof" for warning people not to resort to personal abuse, etc.

Steve

This thread and/or sandwich about to bit the dust: vote quickly

Sandwich wrote: »

First, .....

Well written post Sandwich, some good points there.
I know I'm not a mod here but I'd like to comment on your suggestions.

I admit I know nothing of modding in general but, from the perspective of a forum user only, offer the following for your consideration and much of the ill feeling would probably disappear:
a) Avoid <snipping> unless libelous.

libellous posts should be deleted rather than snipped - same goes for insulting ones. The problem is exasperated when they are quoted though.

b) Dont lock resurected threads

I disagree, they should be assesed individually - if people starting quoting 2 year old posts and rebutting them or start arguing about facts that are no longer relevant then lock em. My solution would be an autolock feature for threads over 6 months (or whatever) old that can be overridden by request.

c) 'Steer' threads on topic by all means. But dont lock them just because they have spun off at a tangent - especially if there is a lot of interest in it then surely peoply are showing their will by their very posting.

The problem (in general) with threads that have gone off topic is that unless you read the forum every day, then you may log in and see a hot thread titled "BMW releases controversial new brake discs" and think that's for you. After wading through 6 pages of a "speeding is bad" thread then you'll fell like you've been rickrolled.

d) Suspend posters rather than locking the thread.

This is a tough one and I don't envy the guy making the call on it. If you ban someone, however briefly, you risk losing a valued contributor altogether. I think E92 has said enough to justify my point.

e) While there's no excuse for it, unfortunately the majority are not going to read forum rules or use feedback facilities. A little explanation for snipping or locking would ensure more know what was wrong and why the decision was taking rather than just seeing an almighty 'Lock' thunderbolt.

In an ideal world, yes. The mods, however, volunteer their limited spare time to do this and that's not really something that's fair to ask. If you read (old) feedback, you will see that in busy forums, the mods generally don't have time to analyse 60 posts of bickering and can sometimes only work off reported posts and the accompanying comments.

I've said it before and will say it again now - I think Motors and Motoring need to be separated, It will give each faction somewhere to post in peace and not be constantly at each others throats. I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a 'purist' as I don't have the interest at that level - I do enjoy motoring topics though and that's where I will contribute. I would also love to see somewhere I could go to look for advice on the infrequent engine projects that I take on without being labelled a planet killing maniac for wanting to increase performance slightly.

/sorry for the long post.

Eoin

SteveC wrote: »

This is a tough one and I don't envy the guy making the call on it. If you ban someone, however briefly, you risk losing a valued contributor altogether. I think E92 has said enough to justify my point.

Tough titties really. Nobody should think they're above a ban (c-mods etc being the obvious exclusion). A good contributer may get one more warning than a n00b who signs up to flame, but that should be about it.

If they're not adult enough to accept a slap on the wrist and come back in a few days time, then they don't sound like a huge loss.

Edit - "titties" wasn't censored btw \o/

Steve

This thread and/or sandwich about to bit the dust: vote quickly

eoin_s wrote: »

Tough titties really. Nobody should think they're above a ban (c-mods etc being the obvious exclusion). A good contributer may get one more warning than a n00b who signs up to flame, but that should be about it.

If they're not adult enough to accept a slap on the wrist and come back in a few days time, then they don't sound like a huge loss.

I'm not saying anyone should be beyond banning, I'm saying that it's better all round to lock the thread before they get the opportunity to say something that warrants a ban.
The same goes for deleting posts - the mods delete the odd heated post as an alternative to a ban as they know that it's maybe not typical of the poster. If they re-post the same thing then they are punished for it.