When you are barred from a thread....

[Adam B]

Black can man said:

I've been here for 10 years and I've posted over 31,000 times. Each and every post has been erudite, insightful and on point.

BCM is a right pain in the arse but I’ve never read any of his garbage nonsense that ever constituted a banning offence

We miss him

[GloverMart]

Adam B said:

Black can man said:

I've been here for 10 years and I've posted over 31,000 times. Each and every post has been erudite, insightful and on point.

BCM is a right pain in the arse but I’ve never read any of his garbage nonsense that ever constituted a banning offence

We miss him

I'd sooner have BCM than the Man U weirdo that gets a kick out of posting rude words on his posts.....

[Black can man]

Adam B said:

Black can man said:

I've been here for 10 years and I've posted over 31,000 times. Each and every post has been erudite, insightful and on point.

BCM is a right pain in the arse but I’ve never read any of his garbage nonsense that ever constituted a banning offence

We miss him

Cheers Adam, Greatly appreciated,

[Black can man]

GloverMart said:

Adam B said:

Black can man said:

I've been here for 10 years and I've posted over 31,000 times. Each and every post has been erudite, insightful and on point.

BCM is a right pain in the arse but I’ve never read any of his garbage nonsense that ever constituted a banning offence

We miss him

I'd sooner have BCM than the Man U weirdo that gets a kick out of posting rude words on his posts.....

Cheers Martin

[Leithen]

[redacted]

[Blib]

Black can man said:

Adam B said:

Black can man said:

I've been here for 10 years and I've posted over 31,000 times. Each and every post has been erudite, insightful and on point.

BCM is a right pain in the arse but I’ve never read any of his garbage nonsense that ever constituted a banning offence

We miss him

Cheers Adam, Greatly appreciated,

He does nick parts of other people's posts though!

[NRS]

I reckon we should do a poll about who should be next mod. Could do it on the Liverpool thread as we are so welcoming there. Everyone post who they want to be mod on it in the next 24 hours. Although we might have to limit the total number of votes from a horse owner...

(P.S. BCM and I have had our differences some of the time, but also no idea why he got banned for the posts that he did get banned for - way worse most days).

[Black can man]

Blib said:

He does nick parts of other people's posts though!

I tried to keep as much as i could bur it really didn't much of my predicament

[Black can man]

NRS said:

I reckon we should do a poll about who should be next mod. Could do it on the Liverpool thread as we are so welcoming there. Everyone post who they want to be mod on it in the next 24 hours. Although we might have to limit the total number of votes from a horse owner...

(P.S. BCM and I have had our differences some of the time, but also no idea why he got banned for the posts that he did get banned for - way worse most days).

Cheers NRS

[ferrisbueller]

Black can man said:

ferrisbueller said:

Black can man said:

Shaw Tarse said:

Black can man said:

The football forum is a bit wobbly.

I've been here for 10 years and I've posted over 31,000 times. Each and every post has been erudite, insightful and on point.



However, last month , I got a football forum ban for saying " i'm surprised you didn't know this as i thought you were itk" Previously i was banned from the Liverpool thread for saying " Let the first team put their feet up, We have bigger fish to fry ,& prior to that i was banned from the spurs thread for saying " next season we could be playing Batty boys of Borislov.'

I think Bullying was the reason. I'm not sure, as the email informing me of the susprnsion did not mention the reason.


Any chance big Al ?

Don't blame Al for everything

I'm not blaming, i'm just asking

As Julia Roberts once said standing in front of Hugh Grant " I'm just a boy asking a moderator to be re-instated to the football forum"

Well it was something like that i think

Black can man said:

I got banned for saying " Let the first team put their feet up, we have bigger fish to fry " on the Liverpool thread.

I've never been rude or sworn at anyone on here .

I guess i done the crime & should accept the fine .

Was i ever rude to you ?

Several times. And consistently and persistently tedious as you lived out your "professional WUM" role.

To go from "crime = time" to "woe is me" in the course of this thread is beyond cringe, too.

I find it highly unlikely you got banned for the "feet up" quote above.

[Gadgetmac]

Another vote to let BCM back in.

Always loved his cheeky humour.

[LaurasOtherHalf]

I reckon when a post is reported and deleted we should get a;


<This post has been deleted following a report from >


At least I'd find out who didn't find a picture of Jimmy Saville with Prince Andrew's face superimposed on it funny (yes I know it'll of been BV).

[Superleg48]

Big Al. said:

Kinky
Big Al.
dazren
FourWheelDrift
Plotloss
Ballistic Banana
Bonce
Bill
BO55 VXR
David Godfrey
DennisTheMenace
domster
ehasler
ErnestM
Gazboy
Graham
Hughesie
Jeremyc
Meeja
neil_bolton
missdiane
Mrs Fish
Mrs Trackside
Narcisus
nick heppinstall
Nubbin
Stig
TonyHetherington
Tuscan Rat
Mechsympathy
GlenMH
Matt172
ThatPhilBrettGuy

+
Shaw Tarse
Scrump

+ CG employees
Jack Mansfield
Ben Lowden

+ Agency Mods
Any member with a username ending in .Mod i.e
Soc.mod
Andy.mod
Frank.mod
Tank.mod Etc.

HTH

Thank you, at least we can see now. I still think that is quite a list to remember and having Moderator under the user name would keep things simple. I would imagine, that if people could instantly tell when a mod posts in a thread, especially if it is just a “steady on folks” type message, it will help so much more to keep any person or persons wavering dangerously close to “the line” to steer a less controversial path.

Also, I think of you are banned, you should be given the reason for the ban. Taking it to the extreme, you would never be arrested and not know why. (although you may not agree with reason, at least you are given one). i do understand that it is hard to monitor all the different threads, but when an action is taken a reason should be provided.

[ChocolateFrog]

ferrisbueller said:

Several times. And consistently and persistently tedious as you lived out your "professional WUM" role.

To go from "crime = time" to "woe is me" in the course of this thread is beyond cringe, too.

I find it highly unlikely you got banned for the "feet up" quote above.

I'd forgotten he existed.

And if we're voting, then stick my name in the mods did good box.

[Big Al.]

Superleg48 said:

Thank you, at least we can see now. I still think that is quite a list to remember and having Moderator under the user name would keep things simple. I would imagine, that if people could instantly tell when a mod posts in a thread, especially if it is just a “steady on folks” type message, it will help so much more to keep any person or persons wavering dangerously close to “the line” to steer a less controversial path.

Also, I think of you are banned, you should be given the reason for the ban. Taking it to the extreme, you would never be arrested and not know why. (although you may not agree with reason, at least you are given one). i do understand that it is hard to monitor all the different threads, but when an action is taken a reason should be provided.

To answer your first point, Thanks for the idea it has been discussed numerous times over the years and No thanks we don't want them.

Second point, I've already explained in one of my posts previously that it will hopefully be addressed in the New year.

[Black can man]

ferrisbueller said:

Several times. And consistently and persistently tedious as you lived out your "professional WUM" role.

To go from "crime = time" to "woe is me" in the course of this thread is beyond cringe, too.

I find it highly unlikely you got banned for the "feet up" quote above.

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,

[Sheepshanks]

I think some people take this place far too seriously.

[Adam B]

LaurasOtherHalf said:

I reckon when a post is reported and deleted we should get a;


<This post has been deleted following a report from >
.

Interesting whistleblower policy, do you work at Barclays?

[LaurasOtherHalf]

Adam B said:

LaurasOtherHalf said:

I reckon when a post is reported and deleted we should get a;


<This post has been deleted following a report from >
.

Interesting whistleblower policy, do you work at Barclays?

How about a red “reported” on each post that gets reports?

[anonymous-user]

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.

Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 27th November 07:00