A Discussion of the Rules (July 14th 2008)

GuanYin · 15-07-2008 12:04am

Aquos76 wrote: »

But then we would have Villa and spurs fans claiming that they should be part of the big four ahead of Liverpool;)

If you hadn't have used a smiley, I might have gone for the very rarely used "kill user" button, located just under the "ban user" button.

Villain · 15-07-2008 12:05am

GuanYin wrote: »

The rules are lacking in detail and clarity so we can see what suits the forum best.

If we'd laid out strict rigid rules everyone would be up in arms about that. We set out hazy general rules so we could tease out what suits the forum, now people are just making stuff up and claiming we're out to ban anyone who talks about matches (did I say that anywhere?).

Sometimes I wonder.

Well if thats the way it is then thats fair enough, but I think you could have made that clearer, the post above should be included in the new rules thread. If the rules are lacking detail to see what works and people won't get banned for posts about matches (not including big incidents) after the matches in super threads thats fair enough, it just the line "NO MATCH DISCUSSION WILL BE TOLERATED IN SUPERTHREADS." is very restrictive and I can see people not knowing what is and what isn't allowed.

Mr Alan · 15-07-2008 12:05am

Aquos76 wrote: »

But then we would have Villa and spurs fans claiming that they should be part of the big four ahead of Liverpool;)

excellent point, you're on a roll tonight :rolleyes:

(i said big four, not top 4 intentionally, to avoid stupid comments like yours)

GuanYin · 15-07-2008 12:09am

Villain wrote: »

it just the line "NO MATCH DISCUSSION WILL BE TOLERATED IN SUPERTHREADS." is very restrictive and I can see people not knowing what is and what isn't allowed.

point taken, edited.

Skud · 15-07-2008 12:09am

so it begins... I think the sub forum for the teams' threads is a very good idea. You can easily access the team thread you want without having to shift through all the other threads and vice-versa. Everything else seems a bit strange - different... but if it works, great

leninbenjamin · 15-07-2008 12:13am

pffft. everyone knows that Arsenal are going to be the team to crash and burn this year. in fact they wont even qualify for Europe at all, Cesc will probably get a chest infection that develops into pneumonia and die, Arsene will die in a car crash en route to the funeral and the sky will fall on our heads.

just like last year.

oh and i think this should be added to the charter.

Villain · 15-07-2008 12:14am

GuanYin wrote: »

point taken, edited.

Cool. I think that will help

PS. while I have you any chance of letting me post again on a certain forum that you also mod

Aquos76 · 15-07-2008 12:15am

leninbenjamin wrote: »

pffft. everyone knows that Arsenal are going to be the team to crash and burn this year. in fact they wont even qualify for Europe at all, Cesc will probably get a chest infection that develops into pneumonia and die, Arsene will die in a car crash en route to the funeral and the sky will fall on our heads.

just like last year.

oh and i think this should be added to the charter.

shouldn't this be in the arsenal forum

Mr Alan · 15-07-2008 12:17am

http://www.videojug.com/film/how-to-behave-on-an-internet-forum

hahahaha that is quality

oobydooby · 15-07-2008 12:40am

leninbenjamin wrote: »

pffft. everyone knows that Arsenal are going to be the team to crash and burn this year. in fact they wont even qualify for Europe at all, Cesc will probably get a chest infection that develops into pneumonia and die, Arsene will die in a car crash en route to the funeral and the sky will fall on our heads.

just like last year.

oh and i think this should be added to the charter.

Thumbs up for that (except for the Arsenal bit). Maybe one of the keywords on the soccer access requests could come from that clip?

Xavi6 · 15-07-2008 1:44am

+1 to the new rules. Let's see how it goes before the pitchforks come out.

MementoMori · 15-07-2008 2:13am

[QUOTE=Xavi6;56565999 Let's see how it goes before the pitchforks come out.[/QUOTE]

Nonsense. utter nonsense. Roll out the pitchforks at the merest hint of a change I say. Immediate pitchforking for everyone. If this forum was run properly the pitchforks should have been unleashed months ago. Down with rational responses and up with pitchforks.:mad:

Jazzy · 15-07-2008 2:18am

new stuff is grand except for not talking about matches in the superthread. i understand why it was done but it is annoying in a way.

PHB · 15-07-2008 2:27am

It's important though too.
Aside from the multiple discussions problem, it leads to people posting in respective superthreads and the inevitable bitching about get out of my thread etc.

In terms of the matches, a bit of common sense is all that's needed here.

Realistically the situation will occur that every single United, Arsenal, and Liverpool game is going to probably get a thread of its own. Then some other games probably will, and the rest will go into the weekend thread.

Also as for sub-forums, it's likely that tagging is going to be brought in before the start of the season, so that should solve the problem of clutter a lot.

_blank_ · 15-07-2008 8:48am

Villain wrote: »

If you only have one thread a week for matches it will get far too messy,

I agree with this.

But the new rules should be given a chance before everyone starts naysaying.

There is MUCH more moderation needed, will more mods be added, or inactive mods removed and replaced?

Xavi6 · 15-07-2008 8:52am

+1 to the idea of a couple more mods. The guys (and gal) at the moment do a fantastic job and I have the utmost respect for the work they do but I think the load should be lightened a bit and distributed amongst a couple of others, especially with the new season on the horizon.

Looking at the soccer access requests forum this is probably going to be the forum's biggest year ever as regards members and there will be a lot to keep on top of for 24 hours of the day.

IrishMike · 15-07-2008 9:00am

Xavi6 wrote: »

Looking at the soccer access requests forum this is probably going to be the forum's biggest year ever as regards members and there will be a lot to keep on top of for 24 hours of the day.

Due to the fact that you are in OZ Xavi are you throwing your hat into the ring for the graveyard shift?

_blank_ · 15-07-2008 9:05am

IrishMike wrote: »

Due to the fact that you are in OZ Xavi are you throwing your hat into the ring for the graveyard shift?

Rule #1 of becoming a Moderator : Never ASK to be a moderator.

Xavi6 · 15-07-2008 9:06am

IrishMike wrote: »

Due to the fact that you are in OZ Xavi are you throwing your hat into the ring for the graveyard shift?

Hadn't actually thought of it like that. And as Des said -

Des wrote: »

Rule #1 of becoming a Moderator : Never ASK to be a moderator.

There will be a lot of overnight posting come the season though, just like last year. GuanYin is on around then anyway so it could already be covered.

_blank_ · 15-07-2008 9:09am

Xavi6 wrote: »

Hadn't actually thought of it like that.

lol

Xavi6 wrote: »

GuanYin is on around then anyway so it could already be covered.

Yep, she'll have it covered alright, hard luck man, hard luck.

Me, on the other hand, has been banned from soccer, so won't have a chance of being a mod of it.

:(

Xavi6 · 15-07-2008 9:15am

Des wrote: »

lol

I'm happy just browsing at that hour.

Des wrote: »

Me, on the other hand, has been banned from soccer, so won't have a chance of being a mod of it.

:(

Same as, however aren't all bans in the past as of yesterday? Clean slate and all that. Great news seeing as I was on two strikes.

_blank_ · 15-07-2008 9:17am

Xavi6 wrote: »

Same as, however aren't all bans in the past as of yesterday? Clean slate and all that. Great news seeing as I was on two strikes.

Are they, linky.

Are perm-banned people back in?

Perm-banned, Kevin Keegan should have been Perm-banned.

pvt.joker · 15-07-2008 9:19am

+1 great news, I think i was on 2 myself.

Lets go with the changes and give them a chance.

5starpool · 15-07-2008 10:47am

I don't like these changes, but since I am hardly a regular contributor to this forum my opinion won't carry much weight. However, I think this is making the soccer forum a much harder place to navigate and use, and will just mean mods have to do far more work and give out petty warnings for someone who mentions something like 'great performance at the weekend there, good to see us play that well in a big game' in a superthread.

If match discussions are in seperate threads with several matches being talked about surely this is hardly going to seperate the headbutting that takes place between people who aren't mature enough to hold a proper conversation in the first place it seems, and whose actions have presumably largely contributed to these new ridiculously strict rules. If there is a Man U game and a Liverpool game being discussed in the same thread and someone (Rooney/Gerrard for example) dives or some other controversial thing then it would kick off more easily there between posters of the different teams, whereas I think than in the middle of a normal super thread a lot of that wouldn't happen as a lot of fans of the other teams might not read it (I know I never read the Man U thread for example).

It seems like a lot of extra work for works sake and too many petty infractions will be given out I think. Forums are for users first and foremost, and as long as a system is in place where discussion can take place without much abuse, then why all this regulation needed? I personally don't think this new system is user friendly at all, and will push other threads off the front page which will be clogged up with too many match related threads.

As mentioned above, I think a sub forum for team/league threads with match discussions allowed, or match only threads would be good.

Also, what is the obsession with closing these big threads on a regular basis? It is hardly breaking anything having a 25,000 post thread around is it?

_blank_ · 15-07-2008 10:50am

5starpool wrote: »

Also, what is the obsession with closing these big threads on a regular basis? It is hardly breaking anything having a 25,000 post thread around is it?

According to a post in this thread, the admin have said that the larger threads are having an adverse affect on the server load.

mike65 · 15-07-2008 10:55am

Love to know how as only the last few pages would be viewed and by maybe a few dozen at any one time (at most).

Mike.

_blank_ · 15-07-2008 10:56am

And there is one very active 62k+ post thread on this site, which has been going since March '07.

leninbenjamin · 15-07-2008 11:49am

Des wrote: »

And there is one very active 62k+ post thread on this site, which has been going since March '07.

there are a few others, but none are accessed as frequently as as the superthreads.

5starpool · 15-07-2008 1:13pm

Des wrote: »

According to a post in this thread, the admin have said that the larger threads are having an adverse affect on the server load.

Didn't see this. If this is the case why is it only the soccer forum that has been closing these threads? Should there not have been a thread in the mods forum about it and directives given?

leninbenjamin wrote: »

there are a few others, but none are accessed as frequently as as the superthreads.

Well apart from the monster thread in BGRH, the poker forum has one 27k post thread with 720k views. If these threads were causing harm surely threads like these would be requested to be closed and restarted etc?

Mr Magnolia · 15-07-2008 1:25pm

Great work to all involved. I think it'll work out well when all settles down.

Hobart · 15-07-2008 1:31pm

Des wrote: »

Yep, she'll have it covered alright, hard luck man, hard luck.

Me, on the other hand, has been banned from soccer, so won't have a chance of being a mod of it.

:(

Being banned is obviously not a show stopper from being a mod on this board. Wasn't PHB banned in the past?

All in all I think the changes are good. I like the "softly softly" approach to the moderation.

One issue I think may raise it's head, as has in this thread, is the clarity with which the "no discussion of matches in super threads" . It's only natural to discuss the current form of players in these threads and relate to matches. the same goes for upcoming games (e.g. CL games etc...) and the making separate threads could actually fragment the discussion as opposed to actually making discussions easier to moderate.

_blank_ · 15-07-2008 1:33pm

Hobart wrote: »

One issue I think may raise it's head, as has in this thread, is the clarity with which the "no discussion of matches in super threads" . It's only natural to discuss the current form of players in these threads and relate to matches. the same goes for upcoming games (e.g. CL games etc...) and the making separate threads could actually fragment the discussion as opposed to actually making discussions easier to moderate.

Yeah, I don't really understand why match talk is banned from the team threads at all tbh.

mike65 · 15-07-2008 1:34pm

QFT. Lots of potential for fuzzy logic (er this is okay, but that is not etc) and conflict.

Mike.

IrishMike · 15-07-2008 1:43pm

Any chance of a reason why these rules changes have taken place?
The BS about server load is a joke to be honest so why are the big threads constantly closed in soccer?
Also dont like the fact that we cant talk about games in threads, defeats half the purpose of a Liverpool thread.

_blank_ · 15-07-2008 1:45pm

Yeah, it was real like a "here's your new rules, now stick to them" without any explanation as to why the changes were being made.

The server load thing doesn't really hold any water.

Mr Magnolia · 15-07-2008 1:48pm

Whatever about your other gripes. Large threads would/do cause loading problems.

pvt.joker · 15-07-2008 1:48pm

I say give the new format a few weeks. Sure there are bound to be some issues, but the mods can fix them / adjust the rules as we go.
Good to see changes being made anyway, good work mods.
Although I do agree that we could probably do with another couple of soccer mods.

IrishMike · 15-07-2008 1:50pm

Mr Magnolia wrote: »

Whatever about your other gripes. Large threads would/do cause loading problems.

May i ask how?
You are only displaying 15 or 30 posts depending on your settings.
You are not displaying the entire thread repeatedly.
It should have the exact same server load as if you were viewing any other 30
posts in another thread.

Mr Magnolia · 15-07-2008 1:55pm

IrishMike wrote: »

May i ask how?
You are only displaying 15 or 30 posts depending on your settings.
You are not displaying the entire thread repeatedly.
It should have the exact same server load as if you were viewing any other 30
posts in another thread.

Don't know Mike. Vexorg was telling me about it recently. I didn't get into it with him though. I'd imagine it's about where the data is stored, I can't imagine it would have anything to do with your posts displayed.

IrishMike · 15-07-2008 1:56pm

Maybe something to do with indexing in the database or something like that.
Just doesnt make sense to me when only some threads are closed

Mr Magnolia · 15-07-2008 2:03pm

IrishMike wrote: »

Just doesnt make sense to me when only some threads are closed

That's a different matter altogether. I don't know why some are closed and some aren't. Perhaps it's to do with soccer being seasonal - makes it easier to draw the line. Probably a discussion for another thread though

leninbenjamin · 15-07-2008 2:06pm

5starpool wrote: »

Well apart from the monster thread in BGRH, the poker forum has one 27k post thread with 720k views. If these threads were causing harm surely threads like these would be requested to be closed and restarted etc?

the thread you are referring to is three years old. 10k posts in a year isn't much, compared to the superthreads. The previous generation of United and Pool threads averaged about 2k posts and over 50k views in a month in the close season!

IrishMike wrote: »

May i ask how?
You are only displaying 15 or 30 posts depending on your settings.
You are not displaying the entire thread repeatedly.
It should have the exact same server load as if you were viewing any other 30
posts in another thread.

twould be more to do with the MySQL server i'd imagine. this is one for CuLT anyway, not the mods.

Necronomicon · 15-07-2008 2:14pm

I don't understand why there are so many complaints about match discussion in team threads. It was frustrating going into a superthread on a saturday evening and having to trawl back through pages of running commentary to find the last place where something was discussed.

Nalz · 15-07-2008 2:19pm

Necronomicon wrote: »

I don't understand why there are so many complaints about match discussion in team threads. It was frustrating going into a superthread on a saturday evening and having to trawl back through pages of running commentary to find the last place where something was discussed.

I agree. I also love the way warnings were given out and then the points were noted when others explained them. This is major overkill as elRabitos metioned earlier. I suggest in future that these new rules should be described better with more detail and more defined...and less of the dictatorship tone.

5starpool · 15-07-2008 2:20pm

leninbenjamin wrote: »

the thread you are referring to is three years old. 10k posts in a year isn't much, compared to the superthreads. The previous generation of United and Pool threads averaged about 2k posts and over 50k views in a month in the close season!

The arguments here are for thread size/number of views, not per month. It still gets ~20k views per month, not insignificant either, and more I would imagine than all but the Liverpool/Man U threads.

leninbenjamin wrote: »

twould be more to do with the MySQL server i'd imagine. this is one for CuLT anyway, not the mods.

Seems like the mods just decided though in this case, unless of course they got a PM about the matter advising them which I would find a little odd.

IrishMike · 15-07-2008 2:22pm

leninbenjamin wrote: »

twould be more to do with the MySQL server i'd imagine. this is one for CuLT anyway, not the mods.

No its a question for the mods who decided on these new rules.
They make no sense if its not a serious server load issue which i doubt that it is.

Necronomicon · 15-07-2008 2:23pm

Trilla wrote:

I agree. I also love the way warnings were given out and then the points were noted when others explained them. This is major overkill as elRabitos metioned earlier. I suggest in future that these new rules should be described better with more detail and more defined...and less of the dictatorship tone.

Sorry, I think I may not have been clear in my post. I meant I don't understand why there are complaints about no longer being able to talk about matches in team threads. I think it diluted the old superthreads and made them less interesting to read.

_blank_ · 15-07-2008 2:23pm

Some mod input would be nice, tbh.

IrishMike · 15-07-2008 2:24pm

Des wrote: »

Some mod input would be nice, tbh.

True, Xavi explain the rules to me please

Hobart · 15-07-2008 2:28pm

Necronomicon wrote: »

Sorry, I think I may not have been clear in my post. I meant I don't understand why there are complaints about no longer being able to talk about matches in team threads. I think it diluted the old superthreads and made them less interesting to read.

It's more a question of how it works. Talking about a players form would, in most cases, require some reference to a game. Talking about the teams formation past present or future, would lead to discussion and reference to a game. Talking about a result and how it's leaves us in the league, would require reference to a game. Talking about the CL group, would require reference to games. When is a game deemed not to have started?

For example, if I talk about Liverpool's need to sign a striker and bed him him because of the tough start to the season, am I talking about the matches? If a poster retorts that in his opinion games against spurs, west brom and middlesborough are not that tough, are we talking about matches? And if we are not, when does that discussion begin?

A Discussion of the Rules (July 14th 2008)

Comments