[Offers] Improving posting standards on NSC - some suggestions

[jcdenton08]

In light of the declining quality of posts on the forum, I’ve come up with some suggestions for @Bozza to consider.

1. Autocorrection of misspelt names. Does the forum have a function to change “Connelly” and “Encisco” into “Connolly” and “Enciso” automatically? Such as The Complete and Utter Shyster/Mike Dean phenomenon?

2. Those returning from forum suspensions not being able to create new threads until after, say, six months of regular posting with no reports or warnings about conduct?

3. Flounce threads moved immediately to Bear Pit - anyone found doing this given an immediate forum and IP ban?

4. Source tier lists being required for posting of rumours from Twitter, or caveat of anecdotal information clearly labelled at start of rumour/ITK posting. This is extremely common on most club’s forums. Reposting of identical Twitter stories results in a short thread ban, to allow the user time to read the thread and catch up.

5. The requirement, per other forums, to declare which team users support upon signing up. All being welcome, but it will prevent obvious poseur trolls joining and starting immediate new negative threads in an attempt to get a rise from genuine users


I have a few other ideas to improve the quality of the forum, but these are ones which could/should be looked at first and foremost.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Don't call us, we'll call you.

 

[vegster]

All this requires " work " by someone.. currently Bozza and the Mods are volunteers effectively...you want this, you will have to pay one way or another.

 

[Easy 10]

Basically VAR for NSC then ?

Naah. You're alright thanks.

 

[dazzer6666]

In light of the declining quality of posts on the forum, I’ve come up with some suggestions for @Bozza to consider.

1. Autocorrection of misspelt names. Does the forum have a function to change “Connelly” and “Encisco” into “Connolly” and “Enciso” automatically? Such as The Complete and Utter Shyster/Mike Dean phenomenon?

2. Those returning from forum suspensions not being able to create new threads until after, say, six months of regular posting with no reports or warnings about conduct?

3. Flounce threads moved immediately to Bear Pit - anyone found doing this given an immediate forum and IP ban?

4. Source tier lists being required for posting of rumours from Twitter, or caveat of anecdotal information clearly labelled at start of rumour/ITK posting. This is extremely common on most club’s forums. Reposting of identical Twitter stories results in a short thread ban, to allow the user time to read the thread and catch up.

5. The requirement, per other forums, to declare which team users support upon signing up. All being welcome, but it will prevent obvious poseur trolls joining and starting immediate new negative threads in an attempt to get a rise from genuine users


I have a few other ideas to improve the quality of the forum, but these are ones which could/should be looked at first and foremost.

No, no ?

 

[Bakero]

I've long thought that all posters should wear Panama hats on Tuesdays. What say you?

 

[jcdenton08]

I've long thought that all posters should wear Panama hats on Tuesdays. What say you?

Nothing I’ve suggested isn’t commonplace on other forums. As the club’s support grows, the number of posts rise and the quality of experience takes a hit. Instead of moaning in yet another shit thread, I’ve come up with ideas based on what works elsewhere.

 

[Bozza]

In light of the declining quality of posts on the forum, I’ve come up with some suggestions for @Bozza to consider.

1. Autocorrection of misspelt names. Does the forum have a function to change “Connelly” and “Encisco” into “Connolly” and “Enciso” automatically? Such as The Complete and Utter Shyster/Mike Dean phenomenon?

2. Those returning from forum suspensions not being able to create new threads until after, say, six months of regular posting with no reports or warnings about conduct?

3. Flounce threads moved immediately to Bear Pit - anyone found doing this given an immediate forum and IP ban?

4. Source tier lists being required for posting of rumours from Twitter, or caveat of anecdotal information clearly labelled at start of rumour/ITK posting. This is extremely common on most club’s forums. Reposting of identical Twitter stories results in a short thread ban, to allow the user time to read the thread and catch up.

5. The requirement, per other forums, to declare which team users support upon signing up. All being welcome, but it will prevent obvious poseur trolls joining and starting immediate new negative threads in an attempt to get a rise from genuine users


I have a few other ideas to improve the quality of the forum, but these are ones which could/should be looked at first and foremost.

1. Yes - that's easy enough to do.

2. Not sure that would change much. Those who are banned tend to be for anti-social behaviour - they rarely use new threads to do that. And bans are pretty rare anyway.

3. Flounces are what many enjoy the most.

4. I'm not sure I understand this - can you explain further.

5. I'm not sure a team declaration helps as some bad actors already pretend to support Albion and then just post negatively about the club. There's no real way we can verify someone supports who they say support, Albion or otherwise.

 

[phoenix]

Are you seriously concerned that someone is spelling Connerly incorrectly. 6 month ban from creating new threads after being suspended.

So you want all the fun taken out of NSC well done

 

[Brian Fantana]

In light of the declining quality of posts on the forum, I’ve come up with some suggestions for @Bozza to consider.

1. Autocorrection of misspelt names. Does the forum have a function to change “Connelly” and “Encisco” into “Connolly” and “Enciso” automatically? Such as The Complete and Utter Shyster/Mike Dean phenomenon?

2. Those returning from forum suspensions not being able to create new threads until after, say, six months of regular posting with no reports or warnings about conduct?

3. Flounce threads moved immediately to Bear Pit - anyone found doing this given an immediate forum and IP ban?

4. Source tier lists being required for posting of rumours from Twitter, or caveat of anecdotal information clearly labelled at start of rumour/ITK posting. This is extremely common on most club’s forums. Reposting of identical Twitter stories results in a short thread ban, to allow the user time to read the thread and catch up.

5. The requirement, per other forums, to declare which team users support upon signing up. All being welcome, but it will prevent obvious poseur trolls joining and starting immediate new negative threads in an attempt to get a rise from genuine users


I have a few other ideas to improve the quality of the forum, but these are ones which could/should be looked at first and foremost.

Number 3 is basically the best thing about NSC!

I agree broadly with the rest.

 

[jcdenton08]

1. Yes - that's easy enough to do.

2. Not sure that would change much. Those who are banned tend to be for anti-social behaviour - they rarely use new threads to do that. And bans are pretty rare anyway.

3. Flounces are what many enjoy the most.

4. I'm not sure I understand this - can you explain further.

5. I'm not sure a team declaration helps as some bad actors already pretend to support Albion and then just post negatively about the club. There's no real way we can verify someone supports who they say support, Albion or otherwise.

Re: point 4, many forums and the wider social media have tier lists when it comes to sources. This is based on the historical quality of their ITK stuff. E.g Tim Vickery or David Ornstein are a higher tier of journalist reporting on a transfer than the Delhi Sports Action Tribune or Cloughie420 with 17 followers.

Here is an example and further development of the idea; https://arsenal-mania.com/forum/threads/guide-to-sources.30385/

The reason this would be of benefit is that it would prevent two things;

- Posts from very poor sources on Twitter and the like getting undue attention and

- Constant reposts of the same story being reworded and embellished and re-tweeted from shit tier sources.

Example; the Dog and Duck Monthly Newsletter has an “Exclusive” that Robert De Zerbi is off to Palace. This is then copied by The Queen’s Legs Telegraph, who add in that it’s a swap deal for Zaha. Then the Daily Mail pick up the story and report that “De Zerbi to Palace swap for Zaha done deal”.

This is how “new media” journalism works and could be nipped in the bud by making it clear the tier of the source is dreadful and shouldn’t be posted in the first place

 

[Weststander]

6. No pyjama wearing after 9am. It’s dragged the forum down since Lockdown 1.

7. No f***ing swearing.

 

[dazzer6666]

Re: point 4, many forums and the wider social media have tier lists when it comes to sources. This is based on the historical quality of their ITK stuff. E.g Tim Vickery or David Ornstein are a higher tier of journalist reporting on a transfer than the Delhi Sports Action Tribune or Cloughie420 with 17 followers.

Here is an example and further development of the idea; https://arsenal-mania.com/forum/threads/guide-to-sources.30385/

The reason this would be of benefit is that it would prevent two things;

- Posts from very poor sources on Twitter and the like getting undue attention and

- Constant reposts of the same story being reworded and embellished and re-tweeted from shit tier sources.

Example; the Dog and Duck Monthly Newsletter has an “Exclusive” that Robert De Zerbi is off to Palace. This is then copied by The Queen’s Legs Telegraph, who add in that it’s a swap deal for Zaha. Then the Daily Mail pick up the story and report that “De Zerbi to Palace swap for Zaha done deal”.

This is how “new media” journalism works and could be nipped in the bud by making it clear the tier of the source is dreadful and shouldn’t be posted in the first place

A lot of these are posted so we can see them and take the piss, not because they’re thought to be genuine news. How do we differentiate?

 

[jcdenton08]

A lot of these are posted so we can see them and take the piss, not because they’re thought to be genuine news. How do we differentiate?

A simple requirement to choose a rumour “flair” when posting such stories would be one suggestion, but I am not familiar with the capabilities of the forum software, hence asking about the possibilities on hand rather than making a clear cut “do this” suggestion. More about finding a way to improve the “quality of life” experience.

 

[Questions]

Enpocypto

 

[Dave the OAP]

You invented VAR and I claim my 5 pound!

I said this board is filling up with eejits

bring back Watford O and Enrest

 

[Wozza]

Re: point 4, many forums and the wider social media have tier lists when it comes to sources. This is based on the historical quality of their ITK stuff. E.g Tim Vickery or David Ornstein are a higher tier of journalist reporting on a transfer than the Delhi Sports Action Tribune or Cloughie420 with 17 followers.

Here is an example and further development of the idea; https://arsenal-mania.com/forum/threads/guide-to-sources.30385/

[SNIP]

I see that forum notes the News of the World as an unreliable source.

I mean, they're not wrong but it hasn't been published for 12 years...

 

[schmunk]

1. Autocorrection of misspelt names. Does the forum have a function to change “Connelly” and “Encisco” into “Connolly” and “Enciso” automatically? Such as The Complete and Utter Shyster/Mike Dean phenomenon?

But what if we sign a player called Connelly or Encisco, both of which are real surnames...? Than there namesd' bee rongly coreccted

 

[jcdenton08]

But what if we sign a player called Connelly or Encisco, both of which are real surnames...? Than there namesd' bee rongly coreccted

This is unlikely, but in that case you’d simply revert the changes.

Oh I see, you were making a joke…

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Flounce threads are my favourites - witness this classic...

Desert Orchid has died

Peacefully in his stable, this morning

www.northstandchat.com