New Rules

[Neil Down]

Just now, Gladys said:

I assume you mean the multiple posts above,  which have been deleted.☺

That could have been awkward...and painful...

[Neil Down]

5 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

You can do it yourself as a subscriber can't you? 

Indeed I can, I forgot about that option...

[finlo]

17 minutes ago, Gladys said:

That is simply not the case, and your comment on the Juan thread that there has been an inequality of treatment of Juan and Rob is just the usual accusation that the mods are politically motivated - another aspect that is hacking the mods right off.  The Rob thread was full of crap,  and the Juan thread had been way down until very recently. The Juan thread has now been locked.

My comment on the Juan thread implied maybe Rob had had a hissy fit, as to the shill comment i've long suspected some targeted thread derailment agenda by certain individuals.

[Gladys]

This new regime is inspired solely by the mods and admin.  Try not to read conspiracy theories where there aren't any -  the truth is often stranger than fiction and Ans and John have spelt out what has been going on. 

[quilp]

Do the mods not regret acting sooner? 

[Gladys]

Well, that is an interesting point Quilp.  Traditionally, we have taken a light touch approach but that seems not to be appropriate now as some posters have no understanding of their responsibilities.  If there is a regret, it is that there are people who think their "human rights" far exceed others'. 

[ans]

Lets not get drawn into a toxic debate about specific posters, this is a general "things need to change" issue and quite honestly, while a lot of the issues originate from a very low number of posters, they're perpetuated by the way a much bigger part of the membership reacts to them. 

Just one theme I'd like to pick up on though - there's been a couple of people suggesting a subscription driven or "real name" registration process would make a difference.

Mandatory subscription isn't a route we want to go down, with so many free to use platforms out there you'd have to ask what value we'd be delivering over them and I can't think of anything myself. Charging people also brings about different responsibilities and different expectations. The voluntary donation is a better model. 

The real names is more interesting. We could transfer the login mechanism to Facebook/Google relatively simply. It's not a panacea as setting up a fake Facebook account is pretty trivial so I'm not sure it solves much and one of the big advantages we have over a Facebook group is the relative anonymity. Obviously that comes with almost as many cons as it does pros but I suspect it would badly damage the variety of opinions people would feel comfortable sharing. Having a username often gets associated with keyboard warriors and that kind of activity but for a lot of people, having the freedom to present their views on controversial subjects avoids awkward conversations with family or workmates. This also carries the risk that some people are unwilling to accept where you end up being accosted in a pub by someone offended by your view on abortion, or someone turning up on your doorstep because you said they were wrong about something. 

I also think we'd lose that "edge" and when all you've got left is topics about knitting, as someone said before, you might as well just be on Facebook.  

 

[ans]

8 minutes ago, quilp said:

Do the mods not regret acting sooner? 

It's a fine balance we've always tried to straddle. Believe it or not, banning someone is usually a last resort and used to be a process where the mods had to get a consensus that it was the right thing to do so we weren't open to accusations of personal bias. You honestly wouldn't believe the amount of personal abuse and vitriol that would be directed at us sometimes because we banned someone for flagrantly breaching not only the rules of the forum, but probably a few libel and public order laws. Last year we were trying to bolster the mod team after a couple left and I described it to someone who was interested as "a thankless job that you get no end of shit for". They said I probably needed to work on my sales pitch and politely declined. They might be right, but I wasn't going to lie to them. 

The "Sockpuppet Rule" we tried earlier this year made us a bit looser in that we all agreed we'd try and be more aggressive with it and see if lowering the tolerance would help. It did, for a while, but then the same toxic behaviour started again and we are where we are. 

[ans]

Actually, to answer your question directly, yes, personally I do regret not taking a harder line earlier. 

[TheTeapot]

I used to use Facebook under a fake name, but it wasn't a fake account, it was me and everyone I wanted to know knew it was me. But I got banned after a strong discussion and someone complained. As a result under my own name I post far far less on debating sites. Admittedly I did used to play devils advocate and even troll a little, but I'll do that in the pub with strangers sometimes. Everyone knows employers etc now check social media and so I feel a lot more conscious of what I would post on there, to the extent that I generally don't post at all. I like the anonymity provided here, although I don't mind if regular users know who I am. It's the people I don't know that I don't want to know who I am.

On the subject of moderation I think your predominantly hands off approach is a massive feature of this site, and wouldn't want it to change too much. Hopefully people will heed your words (myself included even) and try a little harder to keep it real.

It is really bad that someone is giving you guys shit outside of the forum, I feel bad for John if he's had to put up with probably abusive phone calls, that's awful.

Please don't give up on us, we aren't all bad.

[pongo]

23 minutes ago, ans said:

Mandatory subscription isn't a route we want to go down, with so many free to use platforms out there you'd have to ask what value we'd be delivering

One argument in favour of a nominal registration fee (it could even be just 50p) is that setting up multiple PayPal or credit card accounts is relatively difficult compared with setting up multiple email accounts. And therefore much easier to see if the same genuinely difficult person comes back over and over.

And, perhaps as an alternative, the ability to create invites.

[The Bastard]

Difficult times. A couple of suggestions :

1) The majority of regular posters (Amadeus and GD4ELI aside) are based on the IOM. If you'd prefer a smaller number of regular posters and a better quality of postings, restricting allowable IP ranges to IOM addresses (with a few exceptions) will reduce the amount of tor/proxy registrations, and thus the amount of problematic fly-by-night accounts springing up from the same posters. Posters are more easily bannable from IOM addresses, rather than the current free-for-all. OK, they can still change addresses, but in the long term it will involve some expense and difficulty to do so.

2) It's too easy to register new accounts just to disrupt threads through the whole forum. If new posters were effectively "on probation" and couldn't post in the "members" area, regulars would have a "safe space" from the multiple registrations. New posters could still register, and post in a general area, but regulars would be protected from the usual suspects.

 

 

[Neil Down]

All the suggestions have merit but they also increasing the workload of the mods. Considering they do this unpaid, it’s not asking much for us all to basically behave ourselves and not increase work. Just a thought. 

[quilp]

44 minutes ago, ans said:

Actually, to answer your question directly, yes, personally I do regret not taking a harder line earlier. 

Thanks for that. My question wasn't meant as a criticism as such; as the Teapot said, the mods' general hands-off approach is what gives the forum a little edge over others. I wasn't aware of the extent of all the bollocks going on in the background either. Or for how long. Worse for JW too, being in person.

It would be a sad day if the site was closed-down. I've learned lots of things I didn't know, had some long-established views challenged and changed, and a daily guffaw or three. I would miss that.

[Manximus Aururaneus]

 As a (genuine) newbie may I make a couple of comments intended as positive contribution rather than criticism. I hope that they are taken in the spirit intended.

1. I have read these forums since 2012 without registering or contributing (you have no idea how difficult that was!).

2. This forum has been a great source of information and formed a major part of our decision to move to the Island, get to know it, and decide to make it our 'final resting place' - thank you, it would be a great loss to see it go.

3. Ans you are correct, some people use alias's because of 'family' situations - I am in such a position, not for me personally, but for my other half,  I have no issue with identifying myself, but I know that some people on here would abuse the situation - that is the reason that I held off registering for nearly 6 years. It's sad that it has to be that way, but I agree with doc.Fixit - the modern world is no longer as some of us would wish.

4. I'm still getting used to the general layout of the forum, but I didn't even realise that one could 'contribute' voluntarily until I read it on this thread - I have now found it under 'Store' (Which I thought was a T-shirt shop and did not visit) - might I suggest a more prominent 'Support' icon? I'll sort out a donation now that I know it exists.

5. Finally, having been a Mod elsewhere, I do recall that we had a software option whereby we had the ability to look at 'Location flags' of IP addresses to quickly identify multiple-username abusers - would that help?