Joined: Feb 07 2005 Posts: 8642 Location: Home sweet home
Latchford Wolvesfan wrote:Keep up the work tho, i count on you to keep these threads going with me or we will be sucked in by the gambling hating mods.
try again next week...those gamble hating mods will have to put up with more of the same for next week...and the next week and the next week and so on
Wires71 wrote:Just a bit of fun, but contrary to the mods, I do like yours and others tip advice on here.
i'll just clarify this point, i don't have a problem with the gambling threads, the point i was making the other day was that these threads aren't exactly sprawling monsters of conversation topic and usually drop off the front page quickly, certainly following any wire games.
However,
Latchford Wolvesfan wrote:Keep up the work tho, i count on you to keep these threads going with me or we will be sucked in by the gambling hating mods.
Les Boyd Is God wrote:try again next week...those gamble hating mods will have to put up with more of the same for next week...and the next week and the next week and so on
Mard booty comments like these may encourage me to change my mind.
Joined: Jun 25 2006 Posts: 14174 Location: Forum21
Rictoria Catpiss wrote:Mard booty comments like these may encourage me to change my mind.
It's comments like this which give moderators a bad name in my view. Moderation is supposed to be an objective process based on content and rules not subjective based on mood, antipathy, favoritism or time of the month. I often see threads removed or locked because it seems either the poster's face or topic doesnt fit, yet I scour the AUP and wonder why.
I fully understand the need to moderate thread content which contains bad language or potentially litigious views, but I would rather the "market" decide which threads should stay or go. Afterall, there are four moderators and hundreds of active posters whom make this forum a forum afterall.
In relation to the bet threads, there is enough guff on here and abosolute meaningless posting, of which the aforequoted is not impervious to critique, such that one thread on betting would not seem excessive.
Joined: Feb 18 2007 Posts: 4056 Location: On his way to living a happy life.
Wires71 wrote:It's comments like this which give moderators a bad name in my view. Moderation is supposed to be an objective process based on content and rules not subjective based on mood, antipathy, favoritism or time of the month. I often see threads removed or locked because it seems either the poster's face or topic doesn't fit, yet I scour the AUP and wonder why.
I fully understand the need to moderate thread content which contains bad language or potentially litigious views, but I would rather the "market" decide which threads should stay or go. Afterall, there are four moderators and hundreds of active posters whom make this forum a forum after all.
In relation to the bet threads, there is enough guff on here and absolute meaningless posting, of which the aforequoted is not impervious to critique, such that one thread on betting would not seem excessive.
No he didn't. Moderating a public forum is a matter of judgement. If his let it all hang out policy was allowed to run, we'd find it even harder to get proper debate. We'd still be hearing about Chicago Rock and nasty immigrants (from different posters, I hasten to add).
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
) tips get shared on here..
