Genuine Question to the Mods

[Lord Bracknell]

This is the sole reason I did not ban the poster in question from that thread. Much as I've been tempted, I would never ban one of our resident right-wingers when they jump in to push their anti-muslim agenda on any thread about an incident - the Orlando one a perfect example. If I did, it would rightly be decried as censorship - of using ones position as a moderator, to unfairly steer debate. The thread in question here - much as the poster's comments were out of place, it was not my / our place to intervene.



Putting the dullard on permanent ignore is an attractive option open to all (except us mods).

I agree. Sometimes it can be a bit of a challenge to be reading stuff that is written on NSC. I don't see my role as a moderator to involve reducing that challenge.

One of the things I like about this place is the fact that it is full of opinions that can be very annoying. Long may it REMAIN so.

 

[8ace]

By not clicking on them?

The other day there were 4 stickys, 4 euro ref threads, the infinite jukebox shite and a thread or two by serial dullards gregbrighton/leekbrookgull/tomandjerry/theotherone at the very top of the board. So I had to scroll about half way down the page before I found something I wanted to read - it would be nice not to see them at all.

 

[looney]

I agree. Sometimes it can be a bit of a challenge to be reading stuff that is written on NSC. I don't see my role as a moderator to involve reducing that challenge.

One of the things I like about this place is the fact that it is full of opinions that can be very annoying. Long may it REMAIN so.

Yea LEAVE the poster alone. I dont know who it is but can guess, the way to take them down is argument not turning into a sensitive snowflake going crying to mods.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

It's a shame there's not a way to ignore whole threads.

A thread zap function would be absolutely great.

NSC has subscribed thread functionality which I quite like - a subset of all threads showing the ones I am particularly interested in.

What it is missing is the other part of the mix. A view showing all threads minus the ones I designate as those I particularly don't wish to see on my main view.


A personal thread zap in other words.

I've wanted this functionality for years.

 

[SK1NT]

As much as i may disagree with the views of this poster, i do think censorship and banning due to a political view is not the way forward. Where would you draw the line.

It is these people that i feel need to be educated and less hate filled. This can't be done if they are banned.

 

[Seagull58]

I've read through that thread and I've seen posts by 2 posters of the "right wing Brexiter scaremongering" variety, one of the posters is more erudite and takes time to explain his opinion so I guess it's the other poster who has caused particular offence to some people. I really can't see that there's any justification for banning him from posting though, based on what I read. It's not as if he was personally vitriolic and abusive to anyone. It is pretty much what I would expect from a poster who goes on to virtually every rock/pop star RIP thread to post that he never much cared for them or their music.

 

[Justice]

No one likes a grass.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

The other day there were 4 stickys, 4 euro ref threads, the infinite jukebox shite and a thread or two by serial dullards gregbrighton/leekbrookgull/tomandjerry/theotherone at the very top of the board. So I had to scroll about half way down the page before I found something I wanted to read - it would be nice not to see them at all.

The ones you mention are the ones that irritate me as well, clogging up the main view.

 

[Seagull58]

No one likes a grass.

Grass, on the other hand, can be quite relaxing.

 

[Bold Seagull]

The other day there were 4 stickys, 4 euro ref threads, the infinite jukebox shite and a thread or two by serial dullards gregbrighton/leekbrookgull/tomandjerry/theotherone at the very top of the board. So I had to scroll about half way down the page before I found something I wanted to read - it would be nice not to see them at all.

Cycling Geeks?

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Cycling Geeks?

That would also be on my zap list as well.

 

[Bold Seagull]

That would also be on my zap list as well.

Yeah but think about the positives, rather than endless threads of 'which bike should I buy', 'what is the best route to the Amex', 'Tour Of Switzerland - official race thread', it's all held in this one joyously filled vibrant single bulging thread. You all know it's there and it don't need no ignore button not to click it!

 

[NooBHA]

This is the sole reason I did not ban the poster in question from that thread. Much as I've been tempted, I would never ban one of our resident right-wingers when they jump in to push their anti-muslim agenda on any thread about an incident - the Orlando one a perfect example. If I did, it would rightly be decried as censorship - of using ones position as a moderator, to unfairly steer debate. The thread in question here - much as the poster's comments were out of place, it was not my / our place to intervene.





I agree that you cant be seen to intervene at the slightest little disagreement but surely there has to be a threshold when crossed warrants such censorship. Otherwise whats the point of having Moderators at all..

I think the debates can be healthy and I don't even know who or what is referred to at the start of this thread so I wouldn't comment on it one way or another but in some instances I have seen some things get quite personal and if there isn't some level of censorship and things get out of hand the whole site could eventually get reported to the authorities who in turn might take action on it .

Consequently I don't think you can say NEVER on any topic or issue. There was an issue on a Norwich City forum when CH was manager and racist comments were made about him. The person involved got reported to the police by the club and the person involved got a police caution and the forum was threatened with closure if it did not monitor such comments.

 

[8ace]

Cycling Geeks?

No I never read that either. I don't think it's shite but it's of no interest to me. The NAPs thread I like but I could understand why many others would be happy not to see it.

 

[Hillian1]

A thread zap function would be absolutely great.

NSC has subscribed thread functionality which I quite like - a subset of all threads showing the ones I am particularly interested in.

What it is missing is the other part of the mix. A view showing all threads minus the ones I designate as those I particularly don't wish to see on my main view.


A personal thread zap in other words.

I've wanted this functionality for years.

This would please me greatly.

 

[Triggaaar]

I dont know who it is but can guess, the way to take them down is argument

You can't tale a troll down with argument, they don't care that their wrong, they're trolling.

 

[The Clamp]

While the poster in question is annoying and inappropriate, getting so wound up about some comments on an Internet forum that you have to start a thread about it, whatever the topic, is thin skinned poncery of the highest order.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

A thread zap function would be absolutely great.

NSC has subscribed thread functionality which I quite like - a subset of all threads showing the ones I am particularly interested in.

What it is missing is the other part of the mix. A view showing all threads minus the ones I designate as those I particularly don't wish to see on my main view.


A personal thread zap in other words.

I've wanted this functionality for years.

Just had a thought.

If all new threads are automatically added to the subscribed thread view, then all I'd have to do is desubscribe from the ones which bore or irritate me.

All I'd then have to do is use the Subscribed Thread view all the time.


Please can we have this option for configuring subscribed threads - 'Subscribe to all new threads as default' ?

 

[wellquickwoody]

While the poster in question is annoying and inappropriate, getting so wound up about some comments on an Internet forum that you have to start a thread about it, whatever the topic, is thin skinned poncery of the highest order.

Poncery?

 

[Guinness Boy]

Let's face it, we all know who we're talking about and the bloke's a first class, left wing WUM dullard of the highest order. For someone who joined a football forum I don't think I've actually seen one post from him about football or our club. Odds on some student troll who shows his mates how clever he is in the Refectory on the iPhone mummy bought him. Stick him on ignore.