Forum Feedback thread

sdoc13

Imhof Tank wrote: »

Would this kind of cr*p not sicken anyone?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=89268917&postcount=1682



This post was actually thanked by Urban Sea

While this is certainly very critical its not necessarily abusive and is really only 1 persons opinion. I ve seen alot worse on this forum not to talk of other forums. If you disagree post on it and discuss it like adults.

Beasty

kksaints wrote: »

Actually whats the policy for reporting suspected banned users reregs? I reported a user a few months ago whos post matched a notorious trouble maker on this forum. I was then told by a mod in a PM that they had no proof so couldn't actually deal with it.

Gavin shels wrote: »

This needs to be addressed badly, it was clear your man had about 4 re-regs going by his writing alone here!

Report suspected re-regs either by reporting posts or PM'ing the mods. Certainly never state suspicions in-thread

Mods (and CMods) tools in this area are very basic, so they will alert the Admins who have much more powerful resources to do checks

If Admins are satisfied it's a re-reg of a currently banned user then they will usually issue a site ban, and if that's not permanent local mods may impose additional sanctions at forum level

kksaints

Beasty wrote: »

Report suspected re-regs either by reporting posts or PM'ing the mods. Certainly never state suspicions in-thread

Mods (and CMods) tools in this area are very basic, so they will alert the Admins who have much more powerful resources to do checks

If Admins are satisfied it's a re-reg of a currently banned user then they will usually issue a site ban, and if that's not permanent local mods may impose additional sanctions at forum level

I reported the users post so it must have been a mod mistake.

Cheers for clearing it up

Beasty

On the "abuse" point - abuse towards other users is against site rules and perpetrators can expect appropriate sanction at forum and possibly site level.

Abuse against third parties, including sportspersons, is dealt with on a forum by forum basis. Some forums ban it outright, in others it may be considered trolling depending on the circumstances

Beasty

kksaints wrote: »

I reported the users post so it must have been a mod mistake.

Cheers for clearing it up

If it's the situation I'm thinking of, my recollection is the mods passed it onto the Admins who could not establish a link leaving the mods powerless to act

Not sure how this was eventually resolved but I'm pretty sure the user was eventually site-banned, probably because the Admins eventually found a link.

Either way I don't consider it a "mod mistake" as they did as much as they could after the initiual report(s)

Zaph

Just to clarify what happens when we have a suspected re-reg:

- The admins are alerted of the possible re-reg either in a dedicated thread in the mod forum, or quite often by PM from regular posters.

- We'll then have a look using a number of tools that we have available to us. It must be stressed that we do have limits as to what we can see and investigate, so on occasions even these tools are not enough to verify that someone is a re-reg. Sometimes the process just reaches a dead end at this point.

- If the technical evidence suggests a possible re-reg, but isn't quite enough to impose a ban we may look at other characteristics associated with the poster. Obviously I'm not going to divulge what they are here, but again this isn't 100% foolproof and the trail could also go cold at this point.

- If, through the technical evidence and/or the non-technical evidence it is established that the poster is a re-reg, then they're sitebanned. Depending on their past history, what they've just done to get banned, etc., they may be able to appeal in Prison. However repeat offenders may find that this option eventually is removed for them.

- If enough doubt remains as to whether or not the poster is a re-reg, generally they are given the benefit of the doubt. The admin may still have a gut feeling that they're a re-reg and will often continue to keep an eye on them. Very often someone who escapes initial scrutiny may end up banned at a later stage when they've posted more and there's more evidence to examine.

sdoc13

Beasty wrote: »

OK, let me have my say on this as so many posters seem to place a lot of blame at my feet.

I have deliberately stayed out of this thread as I suspected any contribution I made would cause a reaction. This may still happen, but I would certainly prefer it if posters can remain calm and try and see this as my attempt to explain a bit of background to how we got to where we are.

I first became aware of certain problems with this forum perhaps just under a year ago. There was a sexist undertone with some posters and one certainly received a permanent siteban for posting porn that was particularly degrading to women

I had discussions with the mod team. One of our roles as CMods is to help out when required, and I then became aware of issues with certain posters re-regging to circumvent forum bans. Where the Admins could prove a link sitebans were applied. Where they could not all we could do was keep an eye on potential trouble posters. Unfortunately a number of posters took it upon themselves to try and "out" potential re-regs in the open forum. There was a tendency for posters to comment on modding matters and just over 6 months ago I posted a sticky asking posters to report their suspicions and leave the modding to the mods. Given the scale of issues I had witnessed and following discussion with the mod team I stated that I would be sticking around the forum, and since then I have basically done so.

Unfortunately despite the best efforts of the mod team the forum continued to suffer from a tendency of posters to take things into their own hands and I stepped in again

Now turning to the World Cup. I initially noticed a thread dedicated to the World Cup. I closed that thread stating that this was essentially off-topic for the Horse Racing forum. Imagine the outrage if someone started a Horse Racing thread in the Soccer forum. Again though someone thought rather than PM'ing me to discuss the matter they would make comments about the modding in the off topic thread, and I dealt with that post

The soccer talk then migrated to the Off topic thread. I had no fundamental issue with a few comments being made but did have a concern that soccer talk would take over the thread. So basically I asked posters not to allow this to happen. To be absolutely clear though I never banned any World Cup or other soccer talk from that thread (although I acknowledge I did threaten it if the excessive World Cup talk continued). UrbanSea made a post which included a comment about Brazil. In other circumstances it was a completely innocuous post, but I felt it was contradicting the message I was trying to convey so I deleted it. Before I even had chance to discuss this with UrbanSea I received a PM from another user which mentioned he had closed his account, which was a complete surprise to me. That though meant I was going to be even more active in the forum to support the one other mod still in place

The off-topic thread did become dominated by World Cup talk for a while. However I did not take action against anyone as it was typically posters commenting on who they were betting on. However I did comment when the thread became almost a running commentry of the first match and given my prior warnings issued 2 yellow cards (since revoked). Unfortunately though there were further in-thread comments about the modding which resulted in bans being issued.

Now to be absolutely clear despite my (and convert's) repeated warnings over the past 6 months, only one poster had at that stage approached me to discuss the whole matter.

By the time I got up the following morning I had another PM, and a Feedback thread in the Feedback forum had commenced. Tom PM'd me and we agreed between us and convert to allow a dedicated thread as well as this feedback thread for the forum

Now in an ideal world things would not have blown up like this. Unfortunately the world is not ideal, and sometimes we don't have the time to respond to comments, or something else crops up. I will hold up my hands and acknowledge things could have been done differently and for the better certainly in the short term. Would this then have blown up? Possibly not now, but I suspect based on what I have seen in the forum over the past year there was every chance there would be another trigger point at some time, as there certainly were, and in some cases still are, a small number of posters that simply want the forum run "their way" which is not in line with what happens elsewhere on the site

Beasty,

First of all I agree with the majority of what you have stated above.

I can only speak for myself but I hope for the forums sake that most people would agree with me that in general there have been no huge issues with the moding on the forum.

That is up to urbans departure and how the issues around the WC were handled.

I don't think deleting a cmods post was necessary and if you had an issue should you at least have given him your fellow mod the courtesy of a heads up through PM or whatever. At that point WC posts were not banned you had asked for it not to get out of hand. I have seen as many posts on a normal premier league week about the fixtures bets etc.

I hope that Urban and Aidan return to the forum as the contributions are fantastic and they are two of the most knowledgeable posters and who for the most part seemed to play by the rules. (not sure why Aidan was banned)

Any effort that can be made to get these two back should be made.

paddy no 11

If aidankk has been banned then someone has made a serious error, he's one of the 2 best tipsters here and his posts are always insightful, he doesnt post in the off topic thread so i dont know what the problem is there.

Have to agree that the off topic thread was crass and pretty misoyginistic.

however handing out bans for making world cup posts was a joke and all bans should be rescinded for that. The mod took it upon himself to make up a rule for no apparent reason. To compare it to opening a horse racing thread in the soccer forum was ridiculous, it was in the off topic thread and about 75% of posts in there are about football anyway. Heli rectified the situation alright but the damage was done then.

There's fault on both sides and everyone should acknowledge that.

qwabercd

Sparks wrote: »

It's occurred to me that it's a tremendously bad sign that it was necessary.
If it was just me, you might have had a point; but so far, it's the regular mod, several category mods and an admin, all of whom have been looking after lots of forums for lots of years without having to do this kind of thing very often, if at all.

At some stage, you're going to have to ask if maybe the problem might be those five or six posters. This'd go a lot faster if for the sake of argument, in private, you just -- purely for fits and giggles -- took a look at the forum from that viewpoint to see what we're saying. You don't have to agree, you don't have to post about it. Just look.

I must say, I am looking at this thread and forum from a similiar standpoint to yourself but from an undoubtedly better position. I've followed this forum for about 4 months and have about 4 posts so would like to see myself as a neutral.

Firstly it's a bad sign when a mod like urbansea leaves. Paint it how ye like, but he was decent poster and mod. But more importantly he was decent guy. It wasnt because of the forum or the posters that he left. It was because of these cmods (whatever they are) on a power trip. Everything was ok, remember that. There was no chaos that ye are retrospectively trying to generate. Simply a few posts about the world cup in an off topic thread. Big wow.

For me, the nail in the coffin was a lad like aidankkk leaving. Truly a lad who loved posting about horses, value and discussing bets. Never got in an argument, a nice guy. He left because of your tactics (and ye deleted said post).

There is no clique that ye speak of. I am a neutral and this is a bullsh!t argument that ye have plucked from the air as a defense mechanism. I frequent the soccer forum ad often as here and there is far more cliques and bull posting over there.

But ye dont care. Because ye dont post here and that's the crux of the problem. Masquerade a feedback thread and ban/delete as ye wish.

Remember this. Nothing was ever actually wrong. Please quote the posts from this forum that were any different to the soccer forum. There are none.

And remember, i am genuinenly a random neutral here so please respect my opinion. Somehow i doubt ye will. Ye (3 or 4 powertripping mods) are the problem. Not the forum. Alas ye have too many posts and too much of a reputation on a bloody internet forum to ever admit so.

sdoc13

qwabercd wrote: »

I must say, I am looking at this thread and forum from a similiar standpoint to yourself but from an undoubtedly better position. I've followed this forum for about 4 months and have about 4 posts so would like to see myself as a neutral.

Firstly it's a bad sign when a mod like urbansea leaves. Paint it how ye like, but he was decent poster and mod. But more importantly he was decent guy. It wasnt because of the forum or the posters that he left. It was because of these cmods (whatever they are) on a power trip. Everything was ok, remember that. There was no chaos that ye are retrospectively trying to generate. Simply a few posts about the world cup in an off topic thread. Big wow.

For me, the nail in the coffin was a lad like aidankkk leaving. Truly a lad who loved posting about horses, value and discussing bets. Never got in an argument, a nice guy. He left because of your tactics (and ye deleted said post).

There is no clique that ye speak of. I am a neutral and this is a bullsh!t argument that ye have plucked from the air as a defense mechanism. I frequent the soccer forum ad often as here and there is far more cliques and bull posting over there.

But ye dont care. Because ye dont post here and that's the crux of the problem. Masquerade a feedback thread and ban/delete as ye wish.

Remember this. Nothing was ever actually wrong. Please quote the posts from this forum that were any different to the soccer forum. There are none.

And remember, i am genuinenly a random neutral here so please respect my opinion. Somehow i doubt ye will. Ye (3 or 4 powertripping mods) are the problem. Not the forum. Alas ye have too many posts and too much of a reputation on a bloody internet forum to ever admit so.

There were definitely issues with the forum. Tipsters thread, re regs and sometimes lads got carried away in the off topic thread. Even though I thought that had improved since the new thread was set up.
The biggest issue seems to be the discussing of mod decisions in thread. This could and should have been sorted earlier by the opening of a feedback thread. Could have prevented all this if this had been set up when originally suggested.

qwabercd

sdoc13 wrote: »

There were definitely issues with the forum. Tipsters thread, re regs and sometimes lads got carried away in the off topic thread. Even though I thought that had improved since the new thread was set up.
The biggest issue seems to be the discussing of mod decisions in thread. This could and should have been sorted earlier by the opening of a feedback thread. Could have prevented all this if this had been set up when originally suggested.

To be fair the re-regs were probably just as I was starting to look here, and did seem like a real problem.

As for the tips thread, I can't see the issue, I genuinely can't. Don't forget the thread was on fire. The only problem I could find is if people were abusing lads for giving bad tips, that never really happened. Discussing winners/losers happens, but that's what a thread is for. Yes there are lads (quite clearly one who struck lucky with a few early winners) who are posting what are clearly not tips/inside info. But there's no way of proving it so you can't just ban lads, it's effectively impossible to moderate/prevent (I've seen mentions of minimum 500 posts but do not agree with that myself).

sdoc13

qwabercd wrote: »

To be fair the re-regs were probably just as I was starting to look here, and did seem like a real problem.

As for the tips thread, I can't see the issue, I genuinely can't. Don't forget the thread was on fire. The only problem I could find is if people were abusing lads for giving bad tips, that never really happened. Discussing winners/losers happens, but that's what a thread is for. Yes there are lads (quite clearly one who struck lucky with a few early winners) who are posting what are clearly not tips/inside info. But there's no way of proving it so you can't just ban lads, it's effectively impossible to moderate/prevent (I've seen mentions of minimum 500 posts but do not agree with that myself).

The problem in the tips thread was the disagreement about how it could/should operate. Everyone had an opinion. No commonality between posters or mods. Too much noise and the genuine tips get lost. Impossible to mod the way it was.

I agree about the guy's posting so called tips. Nothing can be done. Ignore button only option.

Backstreet Moyes

Am i missing something?

New mods come in on a powertrip = a few of the best posters over the last few years leaving.

hucklebuck

This thread typifies the forum issues of the last 12 months or so.

Mods are trying to do their jobs in line with the charter and posters slating them for it. I have to say I was happy to see Beasty come in and clean house, the place has been in **** for 8 months or more.

I have no issues with convert, she didnt post much but when she did she always knew what she was on about.

I was not aware of an invite only thread so this is why I suggested a minimum number of posts before you can read/ post. Invite only off topic and maybe tips (have a vote) could sort lots of problems.

As I see the forum used to be discussions but has descended into pissing competitions between posters and I have no issues with mods addressing this aggresively.

Locking off topic to invited members will also solve issues as Convert had to infract/ ban due to topics being complained about, this was clearly from non regulars and this was causing problems in the forum.

At the end of the day people have different opinions and views and that is fine but it has to be conveyed respectfully and measured or you end up with tension and sniping and this is the reason a lot of people have backed away from the forum.

Some posters spout crap about not being here to "make friends" or "clique", that is fine most of us arent but its being used as an excuse to post aggressively.

Frankly if you are here not to discuss racing but try force your own opinion on others in an aggressive manner then, frankly, you can **** off.

If anyone is aggressive to me to my face I would not think twice about knocking out their teeth, this bull**** about doing it from a keyboard with a username isnt big and the mods should have a zero tolerance.

That is how to fix the forum.

Slattsy

+1 HuckleB
Good job.

andyman

I think people need to build a bridge regarding the UrbanSea situation.

Yes, it's a huge shame he closed up and yes, that affair was handled badly, however Beasty has now said that it could have been handled better, therefore owning up to a mistake he made. We can all agree that it shouldn't have happened but fact of the matter is it has happened and it's not going to change now. He has said he'll be back under a new alias and I believe Tom Dunne said he has been in contact and doesn't seem to hold ill-feelings.

If he doesn't hold I'll-feelings on his situation, then what place are we in to hold them?

One of the things that pissed me off about that situation was not the mods, but some of the posters. After a World Cup thread was made, it became a pissing contest for some posters because a mod had made a mistake. Heavens above would somebody think of the children? These people aren't robots, they're human and they tried to resolve it as best as possible and they still get stick.

The mods got a few things wrong, however the members have got a ****load more wrong. This thread was opened to allow us to work WITH the mods and Admin, not slate them. Some people don't know what a feedback thread actually means.

People seemed to misinterpret what Tom Dunne meant when he said "you're either with us or against us". This did not mean "you do what we say or we ban you". What it actually means is "you can either work with us to improve the forum or piss into the wind". Some people were doing the latter.

I think the only way this will work if we discuss one issue at a time, as humans, and recognising our own mistakes. Posters and mods have made mistakes in this thread for starters and neither side seem willing to admit to them.

tomaussie

helimachoptor wrote: »

So



Defintely on the lighter end of the scale


not so much on the lighter end of the scale for beast and the comment re convert and the one below is clearly intimating that she cant mod because she's a woman






The posts about the place being ****e have been deleted and posters banned so im not dragging them up.

Well its nice to see somebody read my comments but I've received no feedback.

On the one comment I've made that you've highlighted - What is your problem with it ?

I'd like to know if in future the sexist card will only be used if the comment is sexist as opposed to somebodies interpretation of a sexist comment. It would allow normal conversation to continue without needless interruption.

Tom Dunne

Ok, we seem to be making some progress here, so I'll read back over the thread and summarize what I see are the issues and take it from there.

I appreciate the constructive feedback.

jimjamcos

Imhof Tank wrote: »

Here’s two feedback suggestions in before the lock (which I’d say will be soon) –

Open a horse racing sub forum on the gambling forum for all punting talk. As someone else put it recently, regular posters such as Colonel Sanders were really just punters with an interest in racing as a gambling medium. That is not a criticism, Colonel was clearly a disciplined and skilled punter and form student, not a betting shop bore or compulsive case.

Then amalgamate what’s left in relation to breeding, the price of national hunt stores, syndication etc into the equestrian forum. The vast majority of the posters on this forum have no meaningful input on non-punting subjects anyway.

I haven’t been posting at all much on the site recently due mainly to being sickened by the atmosphere in the racing forum – specifically the vitriol directed at jockeys, owners, trainers, bookies, racecourse managers and TV pundits. People claiming Irish jump racing is a total joke because of small fields at Punchestown or conspiracy theories about Ballydoyle’s early season running plans. The abuse Shark Hanlon took from the keyboard warrior trainers in the Hidden Cyclone thread was really low. All this is coming nearly exclusively from posters who openly admit they have no first-hand knowledge of the subject, never ridden a horse, never even thrown on a head collar. Yet they can tell Mick Fitz he is a clueless yokel.

The other thing is the misogyny. The points being made recently about how this is a male dominated forum and how covert is unsuitable to mod the lads smacks of the betting shop scenario with the exclusively male clientele. I would guess punters are at least 90% male while people working in the racing industry would be about 60/40 male female. If this forum is 99% male that just proves this is basically a gambling forum.

In relation to the “humour”, if Rebecca Curtis came on to post on this forum to talk about her yard, would she be told about her “brown doors” or whatever? No, because its cringe worthy.

I understand your theory behind the above and agree with parts of it. However, moving things to the Gambling forum is not going to solve anything and your reasoning, to move "gamblers" on and leave genuine horse racing punters behind, is fundamentally flawed. Whether you like it or not the majority of horse racing enthusiasts gain their interest through gambling, at whatever age that may be. The problems will still remain.

The main issue I see with this forum is the needless spread of hypersensitivity.

Firstly, with regards to jockeys, trainers and pundits, this is a public forum and everyone has a right to comment on such figures as long as they do so in a mannered way. They acknowledge that they're in the public domain as part of their high profile roles (and success) with criticism a natural part of that status (no different than newspapers/broadcasters commenting on them). Also, how experienced a poster is with regards to handling horses themselves should not prohibit them from commenting on Mick Fitz's flat knowledge, for example. Again, manners is key.

Secondly, there has to be a place for humour on this forum. If not, what is the point in a community if people cannot enjoy themselves and show their character? They may as well just post robotic comments and show little or no emotion, with the quality of discussion and forum community suffering as result. The key, and great, thing with humour is that no two people have the same sense of humour. Some highbrow, some lowbrow but it is of the highest importance that a mod can effectively recognise this. There was many times when Urban facilitated stupid, immature, jokes on the Off-Topic Thread because he recognized that they were exactly that - jokes. He could however recognise the line and whenever that line was crossed, he could reign posters back in because, crucially, he went about it tactfully and was respected. Jokes about Rebecca Curtis being hot are harmless and yes, posters, myself included, can go to far when lad banter gets going, but again that has to be recognized and taken in context. I'm pretty sure I've seen the boys on the box make comments about Rebecca's good-looks in the past and similar to Mick, as a pubic figure, that's to be expected.

A mod with a true understanding of the type of characters involved in this forum is necessary, a mod who can distinguish between humour and abuse and a mod who knows his public enough to earn their respect. Only then will we see a mod with the natural authority to enforce change and maintain it.

bohsman

Beasty wrote: »

Now turning to the World Cup. I initially noticed a thread dedicated to the World Cup. I closed that thread stating that this was essentially off-topic for the Horse Racing forum. Imagine the outrage if someone started a Horse Racing thread in the Soccer forum. Again though someone thought rather than PM'ing me to discuss the matter they would make comments about the modding in the off topic thread, and I dealt with that post

The soccer talk then migrated to the Off topic thread. I had no fundamental issue with a few comments being made but did have a concern that soccer talk would take over the thread. So basically I asked posters not to allow this to happen. To be absolutely clear though I never banned any World Cup or other soccer talk from that thread (although I acknowledge I did threaten it if the excessive World Cup talk continued). UrbanSea made a post which included a comment about Brazil. In other circumstances it was a completely innocuous post, but I felt it was contradicting the message I was trying to convey so I deleted it. Before I even had chance to discuss this with UrbanSea I received a PM from another user which mentioned he had closed his account, which was a complete surprise to me. That though meant I was going to be even more active in the forum to support the one other mod still in place

The off-topic thread did become dominated by World Cup talk for a while. However I did not take action against anyone as it was typically posters commenting on who they were betting on. However I did comment when the thread became almost a running commentry of the first match and given my prior warnings issued 2 yellow cards (since revoked). Unfortunately though there were further in-thread comments about the modding which resulted in bans being issued.

This is the bit that I really don't get, it's creating an issue where there really isn't one. Community discussion will always be dominated by current events, people will be more/less active when it's a certain topic dominating, the same as any conversations down the pub or at the dinner table or whatever. Obviously if it was leading to numerous reported posts daily it could be an issue but as far as I can see the only issue is that 50 out of 200 posts one day were about football??? There are plenty of quiet days in horseracing where off topic will dominate.

Harry Angstrom

bohsman wrote: »

There are plenty of quiet days in horseracing where off topic will dominate.

Proof that a mod who knows about horse racing is needed to mod the forum. The complaint was made that on the opening day of the WC, there were too many WC posts in the horse racing forum off-topic thread, when the fact is that it was a quiet racing day, and a mod who's knowledgeable about horse racing would've realised this.

BumperD

Imhof Tank wrote: »

Thin end of the wedge.

It creates an aggressive atmosphere with posters feeling able to go absolutely nuclear with the abuse the next time a ride or a piece of analysis doesn't measure up to their own high standards

I agree with this. Criticism of jockeys/trainers etc ok but sometimes it goes a bit over the top. Regarding urban thanking the post, a little unfair to single out one thank you out of his 20,000 odd posts, I look forward to seeing urban back on here in whatever guise. The sooner the better.

BumperD

Just read through all that. My goodness. From my singular point of view, I'm a little saddened to see a few of the more knowledgable posters go. Hope they come back. Re posting style etc, fair enough. Some of the posts/banter etc were edgy and if the mods want to rid the place of that type of stuff, doesn't bother me in the slightest as long as we can still crack jokes etc without anything being blatantly offensive. Re 13yr old kids on here, well guess what, every child out there has access to everything on their phones these days and parents should know what their kids are viewing online, not sure it's the job of boards to police that. I have seen lots of stuff posted and discussed on boards, far worse than in the horse racing forum so not sure how we have been singled out here as the most henious group assembled. Anyway, getting rid of the edgy posts etc, I won't miss that in the slightest and can live without it so hopefully we will be back on track soon. I learnt a shed load about racing since stumbling across this forum on the net 4yrs ago. Bit of a shame to see a bit of turmoil but its an opportunity to improve things IMO. Onwards and upwards.

Tom Dunne

Right, so here's my summary of what I see as the issues. Please feel free to correct as deemed appropriate:

1: The World Cup/Off Topic thread

2: Moderation - The lack of a moderator who posts frequently and who is knowledgeable about racing/betting

<EDIT> overzealous moderation and / or mod comments and instructions ignored </EDIT>

3: The tips thread - need to agree on what is/is not acceptable and how it functions

<EDIT> suggestion on tips thread - restrict low post count posters from posting (it makes sense ... say it again) </EDIT>

4: the general tone of abuse directed at those in Horse Racing

5: misogyny

Here's my thoughts on the above:

1: For the most part, rectified with the sticky, however we need to clarify what the Off Topic thread is for and what is/is not acceptable

2: Working on it. I have gone through the top 10 posters on this forum and looked at your posts, history, etc. We are actively discussing this in the mods forum, watch this space

3: The tips thread - can't really comment on this as I am still trying to get my head around it. Just throwing it out there - a sub-forum off this forum is an option, if that helps.

4: the general tone of abuse directed at those in Horse Racing - an easy fix. Report the post, walk away from it. With new mods on board, and your help, we should be able to stamp this out.

Gavin "shels"

Tom Dunne wrote: »

3: The tips thread - can't really comment on this as I am still trying to get my head around it. Just throwing it out there - a sub-forum off this forum is an option, if that helps.

Think a template should be used and we keep the Tips Thread:

Race Meeting/Time/Horse Name
Source

e.g.

4.50 Curragh - Frankel The 2nd
Lad from work told me blah blah blah....

Imhof Tank

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Right, so here's my summary of what I see as the issues. Please feel free to correct as deemed appropriate:

1: The World Cup/Off Topic thread

2: Moderation - The lack of a moderator who posts frequently and who is knowledgeable about racing/betting

3: The tips thread - need to agree on what is/is not acceptable and how it functions

4: the general tone of abuse directed at those in Horse Racing

Here's my thoughts on the above:

1: For the most part, rectified with the sticky, however we need to clarify what the Off Topic thread is for and what is/is not acceptable

2: Working on it. I have gone through the top 10 posters on this forum and looked at your posts, history, etc. We are actively discussing this in the mods forum, watch this space

3: The tips thread - can't really comment on this as I am still trying to get my head around it. Just throwing it out there - a sub-forum off this forum is an option, if that helps.

4: the general tone of abuse directed at those in Horse Racing - an easy fix. Report the post, walk away from it. With new mods on board, and your help, we should be able to stamp this out.

The elephant in the room is that a CMod came in over the top of Urban Sea and he walked as a direct result of that. Whether you might feel he misinterpreted the situation or threw a hissy fit or whatever, you have to address what happened there if you want a volunteer for mod from the regular posters here.

Also, surprised by no mention of the war on misogyny on your summary list?

Tom Dunne

Imhof Tank wrote: »

The elephant in the room is that a CMod came in over the top of Urban Sea and he walked as a direct result of that. Whether you might feel he misinterpreted the situation or threw a hissy fit or whatever, you have to address what happened there if you want a volunteer for mod from the regular posters here.

Standard etiquette - the guy isn't one the site anymore and therefore cannot give his side of the story. As such, it is unfair to him to have the issue discussed without his input. This is why, as a general (unwritten) rule, we do not discuss users who are no longer on the site. No conspiracy, no hidden agenda, just a courtesy afforded to former members.

As I have said, he is most welcome to sign back up onto the site and join the forum.

Imhof Tank wrote: »

Also, surprised by no mention of the war on misogyny on your summary list?

I'll add it now.

Francie Barrett

Life is too short for me to read everything in this thread, but can we not just ask Urban Sea to come back? He was a regular, he was always involved, he was knowledgeable about racing and he was fair.

Thought this place was going alright until people started getting their knickers in a twist over very little.

Imhof Tank

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Standard etiquette - the guy isn't one the site anymore and therefore cannot give his side of the story. As such, it is unfair to him to have the issue discussed without his input. This is why, as a general (unwritten) rule, we do not discuss users who are no longer on the site. No conspiracy, no hidden agenda, just a courtesy afforded to former members.

.

OK point taken.

Do you not think though that if you want to recruit a mod from the regular posters, you will have to make it clear that he isn't going to have posts deleted unilaterally in the future by a higher up who wouldn't be as familiar with the ethos of the forum?

Getting that assurance would surely be a huge issue for any new local mod?

CH3OH

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Life is too short for me to read everything in this thread, but can we not just ask Urban Sea to come back? He was a regular, he was always involved, he was knowledgeable about racing and he was fair.

Thought this place was going alright until people started getting their knickers in a twist over very little.

This sums up the real issue

The root cause of the current problems was over zealous modding
I don't see this addressed in the list