Jump to content

Forum Rules


J*B

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I find JAL's total disregard for any and all insults in his direction quite funny to be honest. He's like a robot programmed to sporadically post criticism of Nyambe and scouse agents, with no conside

I would ask that the ban on swearing stays put. Not because I’m a prude, but because banning the use of swear words encourages posters to assemble more readable, better structured arguments. plus

I say no, but, if someone votes me down, it will be tough not to abuse my powers.....?

Posted Images

14 minutes ago, Stuart said:

So I notice. We seem to be going from one extreme to the other.

The only other solution here is to remove emoji reactions completely - which I fear will cause more arguments. If the laughing emoji is here then the downvote has to be here too - otherwise, as proven, people will treat laughter as an unofficial downvote. 

Happy to have any other solutions you may think will work. It's not easy.

Link to post
34 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Because 1 person complains you've removed the rep for the whole board?

This forum has gone to shit.

This is because a small number of people can’t help but use the downvote to have a pop at posters they simply don’t like.

Surely that’s not what it’s for.

We seem to have got from a debate about whether we can trust people to using a single emoji - laughter vs sarcasm - into delivering extremes of all or nothing.

The request was only ever for one additional emoji and now all the toys have been packed away. I don’t agree with it but let’s see how things go now that there is no credit or discredit for anyone. At least it will stop the pack of cartoon characters giving each other credit for criticising others. It’s like some crap high school movie at times on here with the clique-y back-slapping.

The aim here surely has to be raising the standards of debate or at least encouraging it. FFS, I got three negative clicks for having a view on a potential offside. Shouldn’t that stimulate discussion rather than lazy minuses? These click counts embolden people to call others “a negative tit” knowing they get a pat on the back from others. Seriously, that’s primary school behaviour! Is it any wonder the ‘punishment’ is in kind?

Link to post
12 minutes ago, Stuart said:

I don’t agree with it but let’s see how things go now that there is no credit or discredit for anyone.

People will just quotes posts and respond with a laughing emoji. It's already happening in the Nyambe thread. But I remember you defending that particular 'elder' poster. 

No forum is perfect. Posters will always troll. It's up to the mods and owners to weed out. Removing rep, changing emoji's or any of that stuff is just pointless.

Link to post
2 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

People will just quotes posts and respond with a laughing emoji. It's already happening in the Nyambe thread. But I remember you defending that particular 'elder' poster. 

No forum is perfect. Posters will always troll. It's up to the mods and owners to weed out. Removing rep, changing emoji's or any of that stuff is just pointless.

JAL is getting an absolute roasting for having an opinion. Chances are he’s hamming up to it at this point. The Nyambe Appreciation thread is in itself an unsubtle pop at JAL.

I’m with you to an extent though but how do you weed out trolls when they are being patted on the back by others? It’s subjective and it gets worse the longer it’s allowed to go on (negative tit for positive tat).

This forum used to be a virtual antithesis of the official site board. Since that closed many migrated here and have set about making this a place where only ‘club worship’ and ‘Mowbray is God’ posts are allowed. The departure of SteB and Glenn, and Paul now being de facto head mod have accelerated that - and here we are. It’s a microcosm of the rest of social media though and it seems now that only certain views and opinions are ‘allowed’.

Disagreement is a good thing. Forums demand it to survive. Imaging having a huge debate in real life and there were two or three antagonists sat to one side pressing a Family Fortunes style buzzer every time one or two people said something they didn’t agree with and didn’t put up a counter argument. It would get very annoying very quickly.

Link to post
Just now, Stuart said:

JAL is getting an absolute roasting for having an opinion. Chances are he’s hamming up to it at this point. The Nyambe Appreciation thread is in itself an unsubtle pop at JAL.

Nonsense. JAL is a troll. He only ever posts to insult a certain player. Perhaps the people down voting you are just 'hamming it up'. Who cares. The Nyambe thread was started by me to appreciate a good player who has got some ridiculous criticism on here. It's ludicrous to think it's a pop at JAL. Get over yourself?.

 

Edited by blueboy3333
Link to post
  • Moderation Lead

Just FYI- Paul isn’t a mod any more. 

Plus, personally, I’ve literallly been criticised several times for criticising the more positive posters and even accused of bias where this is concerned. So the line about certain types of posts being allowed simply isn’t true.

Link to post

I personally thought bringing back the down votes, laughter, puzzled face icons was a daft move, no real clamour for them, so why bother? Just causes issues.

However, why on earth get rid of the ‘Like’ and ‘Thanks’? They worked well on the whole in fulfilling their purpose - for recognising quality posts.

There’s some bizarre decision making going on on this board these days...

Edited by Mattyblue
Link to post
7 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Just FYI- Paul isn’t a mod any more. 

Plus, personally, I’ve literallly been criticised several times for criticising the more positive posters and even accused of bias where this is concerned. So the line about certain types of posts being allowed simply isn’t true.

Paul is (or has been) mentor but if that offends I take it back.

By the type of posting ‘allowed’ I mean the current culture of the board. Currently it’s a board offence to criticise Mowbray’s in game decision making, for example, by playing the “after everything he’s done for this club card”.

The whole negative rep button was used exactly as I feared it would be when it was reinstated.

The like, thanks and laugh button are all positive responses which cut down posts like ‘This’ and ?? and :lol:.

The adding of the downvote and confused (which one poster in particular finds as irresistible as a cat licking its own balls) was unnecessary and creates a negative environment - especially when it’s used ad hominem style by those with historic grievances. Despite my annoyance at certain individuals I’ve deliver not used these as it’s just childish.

What happened to people discussing topics and both supportive and more critical posts being allowed? Mods should only be stepping in when posting is aimed at the man not the ball.

Link to post

Some posters deserve downposts. Removing them is tantamount to censorship and probably only a problem to those who rightly get them. If you don't want downposts don't make the sort of posts that attract them.

Link to post
37 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Nonsense. JAL is a troll. He only ever posts to insult a certain player. Perhaps the people down voting you are just 'hamming it up'. Who cares. The Nyambe thread was started by me to appreciate a good player who has got some ridiculous criticism on here. It's ludicrous to think it's a pop at JAL. Get over yourself?.

C’mon. You don’t need to tell porkies. The title is so conspicuously obvious as to be a dig at JAL. The timing of it too. You and I both post on this forum far too much to be healthy (I presume you are a mobile user as well) and these things are noticed so don’t try to kid a kidder.

Link to post
Just now, Al said:

Some posters deserve downposts. Removing them is tantamount to censorship and probably only a problem to those who rightly get them. If you don't want downposts don't make the sort of posts that attract them.

Look at my screenshot above Al. You tell me why that should attract downvotes? The two posters were Bigdogsteel and RVBlue. Both of whom I previously had on ignore for long periods due to their poor quality of posting. You telling me that wasn’t just personal?

Even if it is just a coincidence, should “I disagree” be the same as “that’s a bad post/poster”. By the same token, should “I agree” automatically mean “that’s a good post”.

Not that it would be much better but delinking likes and dislikes from poster rep would be better as that would make everything about the post, not the poster.

The trouble is there are too many grudges between posters on here and some people aren’t mature enough to be objective.

This all started with a simple suggestion and has gone to extremes. But even in this thread the rhetoric is “just because of one complaint...”. It’s actually a little more deep rooted than that.

Link to post
Just now, Stuart said:

C’mon. You don’t need to tell porkies. The title is so conspicuously obvious as to be a dig at JAL. The timing of it too. You and I both post on this forum far too much to be healthy (I presume you are a mobile user as well) and these things are noticed so don’t try to kid a kidder.

An appreciation of a player is not a dig at JAL. Why would it be?

Link to post
3 hours ago, J*B said:

The only other solution here is to remove emoji reactions completely - which I fear will cause more arguments. If the laughing emoji is here then the downvote has to be here too - otherwise, as proven, people will treat laughter as an unofficial downvote. 

Happy to have any other solutions you may think will work. It's not easy.

My original suggestion was keep ‘like’ and ‘thanks’ and add the ‘laugh’ because it was functional. Your concern about ‘laugh’ being misused was countered by the fact that it still gives a positive rep score.

And now here we are.

Link to post
Just now, blueboy3333 said:

An appreciation of a player is not a dig at JAL. Why would it be?

How many other threads are titled “The Player X appreciation thread” it’s sarcastic before even reading the OP?

Look I’m not here to police what anyone decides to title a thread but let’s not play games. You and I both know why it was done and that’s that.

Moving on... my suggestion is just go back to “like” and “thanks” and leave rep scores hidden.

Link to post
Just now, Stuart said:

You and I both know why it was done and that’s that.

I know why I did it. Don't presume you can read my intentions. I also did one for Charlie Mulgrew. I'll dig it out for you?

 

Just now, Stuart said:

Moving on... my suggestion is just go back to “like” and “thanks” and leave rep scores hidden.

I'd bring it all back bar the downvote. I find some posts funny and would like to acknowledge that. The 'downvote' seems a bit pointless.

Edited by blueboy3333
Link to post
11 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Look at my screenshot above Al. You tell me why that should attract downvotes? The two posters were Bigdogsteel and RVBlue. Both of whom I previously had on ignore for long periods due to their poor quality of posting. You telling me that wasn’t just personal?

Even if it is just a coincidence, should “I disagree” be the same as “that’s a bad post/poster”. By the same token, should “I agree” automatically mean “that’s a good post”.

Not that it would be much better but delinking likes and dislikes from poster rep would be better as that would make everything about the post, not the poster.

The trouble is there are too many grudges between posters on here and some people aren’t mature enough to be objective.

This all started with a simple suggestion and has gone to extremes. But even in this thread the rhetoric is “just because of one complaint...”. It’s actually a little more deep rooted than that.

Don't agree. If you can't defend yourself from the press of a button it's a poor do.

Link to post
3 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

I know why I did it. Don't presume you can read my intentions. I also did one for Charlie Mulgrew. I'll dig it out for you?

 

I'd bring it all back bar the downvote. I find some posts funny and would like to acknowledge that. The 'downvote' seems a bit pointless.

We’ll have to agree to disagree about your motives.

I also think that ‘confused’ is pointless. Surely if one is confused then you seek clarity by asking questions? Rather than twirling your finger by your ear and rubbing your nostrils.

Link to post
Just now, OnePhilT said:

I suppose the issue with downvotes is that it isn't really constructive as to why the poster disagrees with you.

? 

Or why they are confused.

1 minute ago, Al said:

Don't agree. If you can't defend yourself from the press of a button it's a poor do.

How can you defend yourself? You can’t reply to a button press on someone else’s post. That’s my point!

Link to post
41 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Paul is (or has been) mentor but if that offends I take it back.

I'm not offended Stuart but this is totally and utterly inaccurate. I offered to hang around a bit when J*B took on running the MB. This I did. I expressed no opinions on how the MB should be run in the future. I think I may have suggested it would be better to take things slowly in terms of change rather than rush them and odd comments such as that. I can't recall. I did make observations about the rule changes. J*B after consideration, I presume, implemented the new approach. My advice was not to change anything _ I was wrong on that one. Since J*B took over the MB it has been his baby and I have never been asked to or acted as a mentor in any manner whatsoever.

Some months ago I told J*B and the rest of the team I wanted to be removed from Admin completely and I would be reducing my posting very significantly. I  explained my reasons for this. Primarily these being that, in my opinion, positive and objective views of the club are not welcomed by the more frequent contributors as is evidenced by the absence of many who support the clubs significant improvement over the last 18 months. I have become very tired of reading the subjective, negative views of those unable to find anything positive to say about the club without adding heavy caveats to their posts. Damning with faint praise would be another way of putting it. I find this especially difficult to stomach from those who could but do not attend games - the only real way to form an opinion of the club.

By dragging me in to the discussion you have confirmed, again, opinions I have held for a very long time. I would appreciate it if you left me out of this childish discussion about emojis, reputations, etc. What on earth does it matter? Likes were fun, the rest is nonsense, childish nonsense.

Edited by Paul
Link to post
40 minutes ago, Al said:

Some posters deserve downposts. Removing them is tantamount to censorship and probably only a problem to those who rightly get them. If you don't want downposts don't make the sort of posts that attract them.

Sadly the like button is missing Al. 

Link to post
3 minutes ago, Paul said:

Some months ago I told J*B and the rest of the team I wanted to be removed from Admin completely and I would be reducing my posting very significantly. I  explained my reasons for this. Primarily these being that, in my opinion, positive and objective views of the club are not welcomed by the more frequent contributors as is exampled by the absence of many who support the clubs significant improvement over the last 18 months. I have become very tired of reading the subjective, negative views of those unable to find anything positive to say about the club without adding heavy caveats to their posts. Damning with faint praise would be another way of putting it. I find this especially difficult to stomach from those who could but do not attend games - the only real way to form an opinion of the club.

I apologise for name checking you and having you waste part of your Sunday afternoon with a defensive post. As soon as I posted it I thought I probably shouldn’t have.

That said...

You used two phrases that I’m unhappy with and I think sum up most of the problems between those posters most likely to contribute to problems (including problems with misuse of emojis):

”positive and objective”

”negative and subjective”

I would see it diametrically opposite to you with those phrases.

”positivity in spite of actual events”

”negativity based evidence and outcomes”

You do not own the objective view, and it is not positive by default.

My so-called negative posts are based on facts, like high matchday prices [pricing out walk-on fans] and poor tactics [which result in predictable outcomes]. I have largely similar views to Mattyblue but have the unfortunate tendency to use emotive language.

Also the fact you only see this as a silly debate about emojis is also quite troubling.

 

Link to post
6 minutes ago, Stuart said:

I apologise for name checking you and having you waste part of your Sunday afternoon with a defensive post. As soon as I posted it I thought I probably shouldn’t have.

That said...

You used two phrases that I’m unhappy with and I think sum up most of the problems between those posters most likely to contribute to problems (including problems with misuse of emojis):

”positive and objective”

”negative and subjective”

I would see it diametrically opposite to you with those phrases.

”positivity in spite of actual events”

”negativity based evidence and outcomes”

You do not own the objective view, and it is not positive by default.

My so-called negative posts are based on facts, like high matchday prices [pricing out walk-on fans] and poor tactics [which result in predictable outcomes]. I have largely similar views to Mattyblue but have the unfortunate tendency to use emotive language.

Also the fact you only see this as a silly debate about emojis is also quite troubling.

 

You're not wasting my time at all Stuart. I have all the time in the world, the joy of retirement.

We all know you feel you own the MB. You don't. As for the above I don't have the time, or the interest, to decipher it. I've no interest in your opinions and whether or not you're unhappy with my phrases. I responded to your post because you were factually incorrect and I saw it as an opportunity to mention why I don't post these days. In all seriousness you need to take a break from this place, it's doing you no good at all.

Link to post
11 minutes ago, OnePhilT said:

Sorry to see you packed in the volunteering, @Paul. I believe we met once at a backroom meeting when it was @Wen Y Hu's baby. Seems like years ago. Was it? ?

 

Yes, we did at Wen's place. That was a fun evening and a few years have passed by.

Edited by Paul
Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.