Posting general statements about posters

Spiritoftheseventies

Okay was talking about this with one of the admins on the help desk who suggested I should post here.
I have been concerned with the behaviour of posters who make sweeping statements on posters without any real evidence to back it up.
As was noted on a thread here today, mud occassionally sticks. I would like to see posters refraining from such generalities and that posts of this nature be removed.

AckwelFoley

Changes in Human behaviour is not included within the bounds of feedforward.

General comments are made all the time. I think Dev is a decent sort of chap, that is a general statment that however is bound by my experience with him, his wife might think hes an asshole

General statments dont seem to cause a problem if they are complementary..

General statments are just that.. General. Unless they are going to cause boards.ie legal difficulties or infringe on the rules of the forums i dont think there is alot that can be done about it

Gordon

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Okay was talking about this with one of the admins on the help desk who suggested I should post here.
I have been concerned with the behaviour of posters who make sweeping statements on posters without any real evidence to back it up.

Have you got any examples, I'm not sure what you mean.

AckwelFoley

Gordon wrote: »

Have you got any examples, I'm not sure what you mean.

The OP wasnt being specific, he/she was just talking in "general" :pac:




..sorry OP only kidding

Spiritoftheseventies

Gordon wrote: »

Have you got any examples, I'm not sure what you mean.

For example poster might say something like "all you do is complete absolute tripe all the time" "or you shouldn't post on the internet". Statements like these that for most part are just blatant generalities.
I was encouraged to put this post up by another admin so assume its not a problem.

AckwelFoley

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

For example poster might say something like "all you do is complete absolute tripe all the time" "or you shouldn't post on the internet". Statements like these that for most part are just blatant generalities.
I was encouraged to put this post up by another admin so assume its not a problem.

Those statments are subjective, based on opinions

I understand what you are saying but you cant enforce manners. Granted sometimes depending on the forum, there are people that would be worthy of such comments, i being one of them when i have a high blood alochol level and access to the internet.

Spiritoftheseventies

snyper wrote: »

Those statments are subjective, based on opinions

I understand what you are saying but you cant enforce manners. Granted sometimes depending on the forum, there are people that would be worthy of such comments, i being one of them when i have a high blood alochol level and access to the internet.

Agree some posters can get a bit animated and thats understandable but my argument is that since there is actually no real foundation to their statement they should be removed.
Just annoys me how some posters (mods included) post such absolute statements and get away with it most of the time.

AckwelFoley

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Agree some posters can get a bit animated and thats understandable but my argument is that since there is actually no real foundation to their statement they should be removed.
Just annoys me how some posters (mods included) post such absolute statements and get away with it most of the time.

I avoid political discussion with people particularly on the internet. To hear things like "all politicians are corrupt" "developers and bankers ruined this country(including causing volcano eruptions)" irritates me greatly.

To be general is to make a statment without specifics, due to lack of knowledge, lack of understanding or misinterpretation.

The only solution to curbing generalisations is for the generalisations to be wholly innacurate, thereby making the person that made the statment look foolish.

If i said to you that this thread is stupid, i would be making a statment based on my opinion, i can be full sure that most people wouldnt think that this thread is stupid and therefore making myself look foolish whether i was aware of it or not.

Sweeping generalisation about things, situations or people can be annoying, particularly if the statment is not complemintary or is innacurate, but i think it is impossible to expect it to be regulated without pre modding every post.

I dont like it when people make generalisations about certain things either, but as i said earlier, unless it breaks a forum charter by attacking a poster, or perhaps being racist i think there is really nothing that can be done.

Steve

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

For example poster might say something like "all you do is complete absolute tripe all the time" "or you shouldn't post on the internet". Statements like these that for most part are just blatant generalities.
I was encouraged to put this post up by another admin so assume its not a problem.

Posts like that are pretty clearly directed at a poster and how they post, it's not an attempt to argue their point.

Worst case: IMO, that would be in breach of site guidelines (attack the post and not the poster).

Best case: it could be an innocent, understandable in some cases, response to someone deliberately trolling.

The local forum / site rules generally cover this type of behaviour and mods make calls based on their understanding of how the rules apply - I don't see how a blanket 'remove these posts' policy could realistically work for this.

Overheal

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

For example poster might say something like "all you do is complete absolute tripe all the time" "or you shouldn't post on the internet". Statements like these that for most part are just blatant generalities.
I was encouraged to put this post up by another admin so assume its not a problem.

For the most part those comments arent allowed by my understanding. You're saying you've seen instances where this was allowed, here?

Both examples you give are analogous to saying "You're an idiot" or "Go outside and play Hide and Go Fcuk Yourself"

Spiritoftheseventies

Overheal wrote: »

For the most part those comments arent allowed by my understanding. You're saying you've seen instances where this was allowed, here?

Both examples you give are analogous to saying "You're an idiot" or "Go outside and play Hide and Go Fcuk Yourself"

Didnt say in every case posters got away with it but some of the time they do. For instance this is most recent example that occurred tonight

Honestly, 90% of your posts have to wind ups

.

example of posters just coming out with sweeping statements like that. Incredibly annoying and just serves to bump a thread.

Steve

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

For instance this is most recent example that occurred tonight

Honestly, 90% of your posts have to wind ups

example of posters just coming out with sweeping statements like that. Incredibly annoying and just serves to bump a thread

I would think that it would depend on the local rules and the poster at whom it was directed and their history where it was posted as to whether that would be allowed.

I'm really trying to be non specific - as is the purpose here - in saying that and trying to think of it as a sitewide policy issue. Yes at some point it will become a sitewide issue if the recipient is being told the same thing across multiple forums.

Unless, of course, someone said it about Snyper in which case it would be perfectly valid :pac:

Spiritoftheseventies

Steve wrote: »

I would think that it would depend on the local rules and the poster at whom it was directed and their history where it was posted as to whether that would be allowed.

I'm really trying to be non specific - as is the purpose here - in saying that and trying to think of it as a sitewide policy issue. Yes at some point it will become a sitewide issue if the recipient is being told the same thing across multiple forums.

Unless, of course, someone said it about Snyper in which case it would be perfectly valid :pac:

To be fair it generally tends to happen on the one forum. You can report all you want but mods simply are not going to act on all of them. Merely trying to raise an issue where posters come out with statements which to me are a bit disingenious IMO

Steve

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

To be fair it generally tends to happen on the one forum. You can report all you want but mods simply are not going to act on all of them. Merely trying to raise an issue where posters come out with statements which to me are a bit disingenious IMO

Would that not make this more of a feedback issue then?

Actually, maybe not.. specifics are frowned upon there.. helpdesk then? no, you've tried that and were sent here. I'm confused now.

Overheal

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

To be fair it generally tends to happen on the one forum. You can report all you want but mods simply are not going to act on all of them. Merely trying to raise an issue where posters come out with statements which to me are a bit disingenious IMO

Well the Moderators are not omnipotent by a long stretch and they won't be able in many cases (especially high traffic fora) to act on each and every offense, nor do so in a consistent manner.

At some point, its the User's Responsibility to act appropriately with the privileges they have been given, to post/contribute. An example: If Tom posts an insult/snide offensive comment about Bork, Bork reports it. The Mod may or may not act on this. What does Bork do? He can (ideally) Ignore the comment, or engage the comment in a mature, upheld manner; or, Bork can sink to the level of the offense ("Well if the mods aren't doing anything it must be ok then right?!?!" [incorrect assumption]) and proceed to return a volley across the port bow of Tom. At this point a Mod notices a direct conflict brewing and steps in: you have a 50% chance at this point of being the one disciplined.

I guess what Im getting at is it is not the Directive of the Moderator to protect users from all forms of scrutiny. It's impractical to rise to the defense of every disagreement, or to demand citation on every personally held opinion. Especially I've noticed, a moderator is far, far less likely to step in if you try and get your digs in; they are more than happy to allow two users to settle their own differences like adults if it can be had. Its disingenuous in many cases, to report a user's post, and then still get embattled with that user, rather than stepping off.

Allowing for the limitations of the Moderators; its your Responsibility as a user to guard yourself a bit. For instance, if I worried about every snide remark or opinion that had been thrown out of my way ("In before Overheal"?) - well, I'd be a wreck. Eventually you just need to call a spade a spade; recognize that many of these statements are unfounded or misleading, (or have becoming in-jokes) and there's no point in worrying about them all that much. If you get into trouble doing this though, Report the post so a moderator can review it and step back.

Spiritoftheseventies

Overheal wrote: »

Well the Moderators are not omnipotent by a long stretch and they won't be able in many cases (especially high traffic fora) to act on each and every offense, nor do so in a consistent manner.

At some point, its the User's Responsibility to act appropriately with the privileges they have been given, to post/contribute. An example: If Tom posts an insult/snide offensive comment about Bork, Bork reports it. The Mod may or may not act on this. What does Bork do? He can (ideally) Ignore the comment, or engage the comment in a mature, upheld manner; or, Bork can sink to the level of the offense ("Well if the mods aren't doing anything it must be ok then right?!?!" [incorrect assumption]) and proceed to return a volley across the port bow of Tom. At this point a Mod notices a direct conflict brewing and steps in: you have a 50% chance at this point of being the one disciplined.

I guess what Im getting at is it is not the Directive of the Moderator to protect users from all forms of scrutiny. It's impractical to rise to the defense of every disagreement, or to demand citation on every personally held opinion. Especially I've noticed, a moderator is far, far less likely to step in if you try and get your digs in; they are more than happy to allow two users to settle their own differences like adults if it can be had. Its disingenuous in many cases, to report a user's post, and then still get embattled with that user, rather than stepping off.

Allowing for the limitations of the Moderators; its your Responsibility as a user to guard yourself a bit. For instance, if I worried about every snide remark or opinion that had been thrown out of my way ("In before Overheal"?) - well, I'd be a wreck. Eventually you just need to call a spade a spade; recognize that many of these statements are unfounded or misleading, (or have becoming in-jokes) and there's no point in worrying about them all that much. If you get into trouble doing this though, Report the post so a moderator can review it and step back.

I agree with this but again what Im going back to is the fact that posters get away lightly for the most part for comments.
Its the easiest thing in the world to come up a with a statement like "You always post crap" and then retreat into the background again as some posters tend to so.
These "hit and run" tactics seem to be deliberate tactics IMO. I had one poster (a mod on another forum by the way) who makes the odd contribution on a particular thread in forum come out with statement
"1,224 of those posts are complete bollocks, to be exact".
In reference to my post count on that thread.
No attempt was made by poster to back that up. Just another general sweeping statement aimed at getting a quick dig in.
This is what annoys me.

bonkey

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Didnt say in every case posters got away with it but some of the time they do. For instance this is most recent example that occurred tonight

.

example of posters just coming out with sweeping statements like that. Incredibly annoying and just serves to bump a thread.

Without going into specifics....do you check to see if those posts are covered by the charter of the forum and/or boards' sitewide guidelines?

(The example you give is out of context. It could be innoccuous, but it probably isn't....and probably falls foul of this or this part of the guidelines....even if there's nothing in the forum-specific charter to cover it.

Perhaps a more important question is whether or not you reported the posts. I'm not having a go at you, but over the years, I've been pretty-constantly amazed at how often people complain that something isn't acceptable but don't report it.

The reason that its important (to me) is because as a moderator, I rely on people reporting posts for two reasons. It draws my attention to the post...ensuring I don't miss it. In addition, it lets me know that someone finds it unacceptable, which can help make my mind up on "borderline" cases.

Its also important for another reason. We have a system and all-too-often people don't use the system, but also suggest that we need to change/fix it. Surely, the first step is to use the system, then see how it can be improved.

Now...maybe you did report these posts. If that's the case, then it could be that the moderator(s) in question or the forum(s) in question have a higher tolerance-level then you do....that their cut-off on what is acceptable is different to yours. In a case like this, its hard to say that there's a problem that can be fixed...because no matter where we draw th elines, someone will want them drawn elsewhere.

tl;dr We have a system which should already cover these cases. If its not being used, the question we need to ask is why, and not what to change. If it is being used, the question we need to ask is whether or not there's really a problem.

Spiritoftheseventies

bonkey wrote: »

Without going into specifics....do you check to see if those posts are covered by the charter of the forum and/or boards' sitewide guidelines?

(The example you give is out of context. It could be innoccuous, but it probably isn't....and probably falls foul of this or this part of the guidelines....even if there's nothing in the forum-specific charter to cover it.

Perhaps a more important question is whether or not you reported the posts. I'm not having a go at you, but over the years, I've been pretty-constantly amazed at how often people complain that something isn't acceptable but don't report it.

The reason that its important (to me) is because as a moderator, I rely on people reporting posts for two reasons. It draws my attention to the post...ensuring I don't miss it. In addition, it lets me know that someone finds it unacceptable, which can help make my mind up on "borderline" cases.

Its also important for another reason. We have a system and all-too-often people don't use the system, but also suggest that we need to change/fix it. Surely, the first step is to use the system, then see how it can be improved.

Now...maybe you did report these posts. If that's the case, then it could be that the moderator(s) in question or the forum(s) in question have a higher tolerance-level then you do....that their cut-off on what is acceptable is different to yours. In a case like this, its hard to say that there's a problem that can be fixed...because no matter where we draw th elines, someone will want them drawn elsewhere.

tl;dr We have a system which should already cover these cases. If its not being used, the question we need to ask is why, and not what to change. If it is being used, the question we need to ask is whether or not there's really a problem.

Yeah reported one of the posts and nothing seems to have been done about it. This was two days ago. I could take on this poster online but Im pretty sure I wouldnt be allowed because it would derail thread and its something I dont want to do.

Nevyn

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Yeah reported one of the posts and nothing seems to have been done about it. This was two days ago. I could take on this poster online but Im pretty sure I wouldnt be allowed because it would derail thread and its something I dont want to do.

That my friend is why the thunderdrome was invented so you could call someone out and have it out with them.

LuckyLloyd

Spiritoftheseventies, at a certain point surely you should conclude that it's you, not them that are the issue? Here is some genuine and well meaning advice: you need a much thicker skin mate. You post high volume, on a wide variety of football subjects, and sometimes make points that are controversial / out of left field. That is your prerogative. But if you decide to venture forth the idea that Mourinho may move to Newcastle, you have to accept that there is likely to be a few dismissive / snide comments heading your way as a result.

In terms of broader stroke policy for this or any website, I would suggest that it is right and fair that everyone is entitled to hold and voice their opinion. But very incorrect to assume that every such opinion should be free of challenge and treated as equally valid / useful.

So just let it slide off you a bit more, you know what I mean? If I had a euro for every time a post of mine was ignored / shredded / ridiculed or illicited negative or niggly comments...

Spiritoftheseventies

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Spiritoftheseventies, at a certain point surely you should conclude that it's you, not them that are the issue? Here is some genuine and well meaning advice: you need a much thicker skin mate. You post high volume, on a wide variety of football subjects, and sometimes make points that are controversial / out of left field. That is your prerogative. But if you decide to venture forth the idea that Mourinho may move to Newcastle, you have to accept that there is likely to be a few dismissive / snide comments heading your way as a result.

In terms of broader stroke policy for this or any website, I would suggest that it is right and fair that everyone is entitled to hold and voice their opinion. But very incorrect to assume that every such opinion should be free of challenge and treated as equally valid / useful.

So just let it slide off you a bit more, you know what I mean? If I had a euro for every time a post of mine was ignored / shredded / ridiculed or illicited negative or niggly comments...

I appreciate the post LL but again its the absoluteness of their statements that annoys me.
I have nothing about people debating a certain post and I do it myself with others. But when others come out with stuff I have highlighted above it just really gets under my skin.
Again why is it always the same forum as well.

Nevyn

Spiritoftheseventies why not just add them to your ignore list?

Spiritoftheseventies

Thaedydal wrote: »

Spiritoftheseventies why not just add them to your ignore list?

If only it was that simple. Dont see that being the issue. If one of the founding principles of the charter is to debate the poster not the poster I just wonder why that is not being adhered to. Yeah the SF operates under slightly different rules in terms of how posts post but still think its far easier for mods and posters to tell poster to grow a thicker skin than for mods to occassionally enforce a rule that is set in stone.
And to refer to another point made by LL it isnt just me. Saw another poster who was pretty ganged up in another thread a few weeks back. Yeah poster didnt take a very popular view but again I think there needs to be a bit more leeway given by posters some of whom r'aison d'etre seems to be to focus in on the negative of one poster without ever giving them credit for any good posts they have made.

Overheal

Well, why do you allow it to get under your skin? Comments made by anonymous pseudonyms on an internet forum?

Also in my experience, I am not above forming a negative opinion of users, or making statements about them. What usually happens is a user will try an state an observation or opinion as an immutable fact. Then what happens is other people come along and poke at that. Several things can happen. Usually, a poster when under scrutiny of his words will renege or withdraw a comment, or at the very least openly admit they could be mistaken. In other cases a poster will continue to insist they are correct. And its that user who often draws the most pressure.

If you're constantly drawing negative attention, you need to check yourself. Are you making intractible arguments? Are you giving yourself room to admit that you may be wrong? Are you speaking in Absolutes? Those are things you need to look out for. If you leave no breathing space in your arguing style for people to disagree with you or counter your argument; well, they're just going to knock you down when left without a direct alternative.

Spiritoftheseventies

Overheal wrote: »

Well, why do you allow it to get under your skin? Comments made by anonymous pseudonyms on an internet forum?

Also in my experience, I am not above forming a negative opinion of users, or making statements about them. What usually happens is a user will try an state an observation or opinion as an immutable fact. Then what happens is other people come along and poke at that. Several things can happen. Usually, a poster when under scrutiny of his words will renege or withdraw a comment, or at the very least openly admit they could be mistaken. In other cases a poster will continue to insist they are correct. And its that user who often draws the most pressure.

If you're constantly drawing negative attention, you need to check yourself. Are you making intractible arguments? Are you giving yourself room to admit that you may be wrong? Are you speaking in Absolutes? Those are things you need to look out for. If you leave no breathing space in your arguing style for people to disagree with you or counter your argument; well, they're just going to knock you down when left without a direct alternative.

Never said I was constantly drawing negative attention. I said I get a bit of grief on that forum but use other forums as well without any bother.
This is what Im talking about. I bring up problems on one forum and all of a sudden its about my posting problems on all forums.
Again annoying.

Overheal

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Never said I was constantly drawing negative attention. I said I get a bit of grief on that forum but use other forums as well without any bother.
This is what Im talking about. I bring up problems on one forum and all of a sudden its about my posting problems on all forums.
Again annoying.

Well Im sorry if I've gotten the wrong impression, then.

Spiritoftheseventies

Basically Overheal Im saying its not relevant to bring up a posters previous posts. You debate the post. That should be the bottom line.

Overheal

Well, thats already existing site policy. With that said, Im not sure what Feedforward can do here, or what you are looking for.

If you are saying, as you are, that this is specific to one forum, then this belongs in Feedback.

Nevyn

If this is a specific complaint in one forum then report posts, report, report and if you think the mods are not taking action contact the cat mods on it.

Spiritoftheseventies

Thaedydal wrote: »

If this is a specific complaint in one forum then report posts, report, report and if you think the mods are not taking action contact the cat mods on it.

Really im blue in the face taking it to the various mods, c mods. Its an ongoing problem and not just with me as was illustrated in previous posts.
Would be great if something was done about it in the long term. Dont see what the big problem in what I am bringing up here.
Maybe the rules need to be stricter on this. Like i said no reason to bring up a posters past posting history.
The post is being debated not the poster. Its straight forward enough but some just dont seem to be able to grasp with what is a simple enought concept

tbh

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Really im blue in the face taking it to the various mods, c mods.

if you've brought it to mods and cmods and they've done nothing about it, maybe it's just something you're going to have to deal with. Maybe it's just you who thinks it's a problem.