When you are barred from a thread....
Discussion
Black can man said:
The crime = time comment was tongue in cheek & i did get banned for the feet up comment & as you rightly say it is hard to believe , but it is true.
I'm not that bothered what you think tbh but it is nice to hear comments by some on here that also feel i have been treated pretty harshly .
Call it cringe if you wish but for me it's pretty good to hear,
Hi BCM god to see its not a forum wide ban! I'm not that bothered what you think tbh but it is nice to hear comments by some on here that also feel i have been treated pretty harshly .
Call it cringe if you wish but for me it's pretty good to hear,
There's no doubt in my mind you were specifically targeted i dont think it takes a genius to work out who by either, i can see how the odd post of yours might have been annoying but everyone is guilty of that particularly on the football forums. There was never anything sinister or any malice to any of your posts.
El stovey said:
Mods never had mod by their name (I don’t think), but there was usually more information about who had removed a post and why. Maybe now PHs has just become too big and polarised to do it anymore.
The problem is that the old school PHs mod are firstly PHers who want to join in the threads but are also willing to help moderate. If they’re posting and discussing something, all they get now are people saying “but you’re a mod” etc and it’s got to be a bit rubbish for them when they post.
I see it with one mod on the NPandE, often when he posts about politics some posters that have been banned or had posts removed keep bringing him being a mod up, making out they can’t argue with him or he’ll ban them, which is obviously nonsense. There’s even other forums with people complaining about them. Who’d want that?
The new agency mods do seem to have quite different standards or interpretation of the rules of moderation though. It definitely seems to be a numbers game in some threads where one side reports more and then the opposition all get banned and it becomes an echo chamber. This also makes it look like the mods or the site are pro or anti certain issues or posters when it’s actually just simply possibly about numbers of reports.
I agree that If a post is removed, it might be worth having “removed” where the post was so people can see that A) there’s moderation going on and B) what’s acceptable. It’s not really fair to say who actually removed it though. Maybe with an (anonymous) “calm it down” post etc now and then might work also.
As we can see from this thread, it’s a pretty thankless task and all done in an environment where the owners are spending less time and effort and money on the actual forums. What was once a forum with a sales section is now a sales site with a forum remaining. If it or we attract a bad image or too much strife for the owners they’ll just get rid of it, and us.
So er thanks, for doing it mods.
There has always been a process for temporary and long terms bans and there's a long list of people who have been on the receiving end of it. Back in the day the label "binned" used to be applied and the sin-bin was open for business to allow people to reflect on their deeds. No doubt that drives a significant volume of work on a forum this size.The problem is that the old school PHs mod are firstly PHers who want to join in the threads but are also willing to help moderate. If they’re posting and discussing something, all they get now are people saying “but you’re a mod” etc and it’s got to be a bit rubbish for them when they post.
I see it with one mod on the NPandE, often when he posts about politics some posters that have been banned or had posts removed keep bringing him being a mod up, making out they can’t argue with him or he’ll ban them, which is obviously nonsense. There’s even other forums with people complaining about them. Who’d want that?
The new agency mods do seem to have quite different standards or interpretation of the rules of moderation though. It definitely seems to be a numbers game in some threads where one side reports more and then the opposition all get banned and it becomes an echo chamber. This also makes it look like the mods or the site are pro or anti certain issues or posters when it’s actually just simply possibly about numbers of reports.
I agree that If a post is removed, it might be worth having “removed” where the post was so people can see that A) there’s moderation going on and B) what’s acceptable. It’s not really fair to say who actually removed it though. Maybe with an (anonymous) “calm it down” post etc now and then might work also.
As we can see from this thread, it’s a pretty thankless task and all done in an environment where the owners are spending less time and effort and money on the actual forums. What was once a forum with a sales section is now a sales site with a forum remaining. If it or we attract a bad image or too much strife for the owners they’ll just get rid of it, and us.
So er thanks, for doing it mods.
Edited by El stovey on Wednesday 27th November 07:00
PH's latest transition was highlighted by many as being a commercial venture which wouldn't be focused on the forums, which are a legacy issue and whilst having allowed the site to grow they now represent a significant burden. The forums themselves are massive now, having grown from a base around cars.
People bringing the brand into disrepute by association, spamming, wumming, creating work for mods, already thinly spread, in whatever manner are going to get sanctioned. At the point at which it becomes too much of a burden, or there's ample justification, then the forum is likely to get pulled. Given there's a matrix of bans, and a group of people banned, there's likely a means of reviewing which forums cause the most grief. You'd think those would be the ones at risk first.
I don't think that's a difficult concept for most people to grasp. These forums must be a nightmare to manage and some people go out of their way to make it more difficult. They then have a tendency to bleat about it, which creates more work for the mods.
Many long term posters, and mods, have binned PH off as the influx of new members meant it evolved into something different and less appealing. There's a point at which that won't be a choice as the owners will just bin the whole thing at the point its negatives outweigh the positives. There are already sub forums where it's very easy to make that case. Personally I think if some of those face the chop to prolong the life of the rest then so be it. And that applies to posters, too.
The forums should self moderate to an extent. I don't think it's the mods' job to spell this out to people and if the owners ever feel the need to issue a missive to the masses to play nicely then you know the game is up.
Ascayman said:
There's no doubt in my mind you were specifically targeted i dont think it takes a genius to work out who by either, i can see how the odd post of yours might have been annoying but everyone is guilty of that particularly on the football forums. There was never anything sinister or any malice to any of your posts.
It is not helpful to throw around accusations and conspiracies. Even BCM would admit his posting style caused annoyance on the rival footy forums. I am pretty mild mannered but even I got tired of his one line supposedly-jokey but subtly-irritating posts, he rarely adds to the debate in a productive way. He was never rude or offensive just irritating.
He knew and he continued. And eventually some people had had enough.
Personally I would have preferred a final warning rather than an outright ban, but as others have eloquently explained above mods simply don’t have the time and resources.
So I hope he is allowed back in and changes his posting style in the rival threads.
Adam B said:
It is not helpful to throw around accusations and conspiracies. Even BCM would admit his posting style caused annoyance on the rival footy forums.
I am pretty mild mannered but even I got tired of his one line supposedly-jokey but subtly-irritating posts, he rarely adds to the debate in a productive way. He was never rude or offensive just irritating.
He knew and he continued. And eventually some people had had enough.
Personally I would have preferred a final warning rather than an outright ban, but as others have eloquently explained above mods simply don’t have the time and resources.
So I hope he is allowed back in and changes his posting style in the rival threads.
I disagree it's turning a blind eye that's not helpful, it just leads to more of the same and an escalation of the problem. I am pretty mild mannered but even I got tired of his one line supposedly-jokey but subtly-irritating posts, he rarely adds to the debate in a productive way. He was never rude or offensive just irritating.
He knew and he continued. And eventually some people had had enough.
Personally I would have preferred a final warning rather than an outright ban, but as others have eloquently explained above mods simply don’t have the time and resources.
So I hope he is allowed back in and changes his posting style in the rival threads.
Re BCM we're on the same page I think, his posts can be irritating but that's not a banable offense otherwise let's face it you couldn't post I couldn't post the whole of the internet couldn't post
we can all be irritating at times. I think a little bit more self awareness from everyone and non tolerating of the few bad seeds (and they come from all sides) would lead to a much better forum for the fast majority of people who just want to talk football.
Would it ever be possible and feasible to have the option to filter out posts from specific forum members? i.e. if I find member 'X' annoying then I could have the option to filter out their posts and any quoting / replies to their posts so that member 'X' doesn't actually exist from my perspective yet other users could see their posts.
I think it would be useful whereby a particular member is annoying but doesn't post anything offensive which is worthy of a ban.
CellarDoor said:
Would it ever be possible and feasible to have the option to filter out posts from specific forum members? i.e. if I find member 'X' annoying then I could have the option to filter out their posts and any quoting / replies to their posts so that member 'X' doesn't actually exist from my perspective yet other users could see their posts.
I think it would be useful whereby a particular member is annoying but doesn't post anything offensive which is worthy of a ban.
Not on the horizon anytime soon.I think it would be useful whereby a particular member is annoying but doesn't post anything offensive which is worthy of a ban.
chow pan toon said:
Just give thread bans to anyone who pops into another team's thread just to post a wind-up, it's obvious the genuine posts after a different perspective compared to the wumming. Easy.
one persons wind-up is another's "bantz", usually the 2nd person is an idiot though 
Ascayman said:
Black can man said:
The crime = time comment was tongue in cheek & i did get banned for the feet up comment & as you rightly say it is hard to believe , but it is true.
I'm not that bothered what you think tbh but it is nice to hear comments by some on here that also feel i have been treated pretty harshly .
Call it cringe if you wish but for me it's pretty good to hear,
Hi BCM god to see its not a forum wide ban! I'm not that bothered what you think tbh but it is nice to hear comments by some on here that also feel i have been treated pretty harshly .
Call it cringe if you wish but for me it's pretty good to hear,
There's no doubt in my mind you were specifically targeted i dont think it takes a genius to work out who by either, i can see how the odd post of yours might have been annoying but everyone is guilty of that particularly on the football forums. There was never anything sinister or any malice to any of your posts.
Big Al. said:
CellarDoor said:
Would it ever be possible and feasible to have the option to filter out posts from specific forum members? i.e. if I find member 'X' annoying then I could have the option to filter out their posts and any quoting / replies to their posts so that member 'X' doesn't actually exist from my perspective yet other users could see their posts.
I think it would be useful whereby a particular member is annoying but doesn't post anything offensive which is worthy of a ban.
Not on the horizon anytime soon.I think it would be useful whereby a particular member is annoying but doesn't post anything offensive which is worthy of a ban.
Gassing Station | Website Feedback | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff