Locked threads ~ Can this forum survive controversey?

[BlackToffee]

I write this thread as someone who had a thread closed due to the responses of a few individuals. While there are many threads which I think should be closed, this was not one of them, with a bit of careful consideration. The topic was "controversal" but are we saying that no controversal topics whatsoever can be posted?

My suggestion is as follows;

1) The person who posts a thread such be the first port of call in policing that thread. This means if it goes dangerously off topic it is their duty (as well as the mods of course) to try and steer it back on.

2) The person who opened the thread should be given the option of officially requesting a thread be closed, the decision resting with the mods.

I believe that there are enough sensible people on this forum to ensure that threads don't descent into slugfests, that said, the Mout thread seems to have taken a strange turn. We don't always appreciate each others views, but my view is that we need to find a way of being able to be both controversial but responsible while not descending into other nameless forums.

What say you?

 

[chicoazul]

LOCK IT D/D.

 

[Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian]

 

[Sharpys top lip]

Lock this and ban him..!!!!

 

[GrandOldTeam]

I write this thread as someone who had a thread closed due to the responses of a few individuals. While there are many threads which I think should be closed, this was not one of them, with a bit of careful consideration. The topic was "controversal" but are we saying that no controversal topics whatsoever can be posted?

No. We're saying;

Contributions must not:
q) Be religious, racial or political. There are other forums on the Internet suited for exactly this type of discussion, and ask that you please conduct such discussions on those forums.

Clearly, there are obvious reasons why we discourage this type of debate. Your closed thread fell into this category. Some views are so ingrained, there's no room for debate.

My suggestion is as follows;

1) The person who posts a thread such be the first port of call in policing that thread. This means if it goes dangerously off topic it is their duty (as well as the mods of course) to try and steer it back on.

2) The person who opened the thread should be given the option of officially requesting a thread be closed, the decision resting with the mods.

So you're suggesting that a thread should be primarily 'policed' by the thread starter? So for instance, only closed after consulting the thread author? - Nice in theory, but it would never work.

That said, I'm always happy to listen to suggestions to preventing ways of closing threads. We don't want to close threads, we'd rather not prevent members from posting - but sometimes needs must.

Threads are typically closed because of going off-topic. Last week I included an infraction for Off-Topic. From August, we'll be clamping down in the Everton forum to hopefully avoid thread closures. Fact is, people come on here to browse the Everton forum for Everton discussion. If we don't take steps to ensure the Everton forum contains Everton topics, the entire point of an Everton forum becomes void...

As for controversial topics;

I believe that there are enough sensible people on this forum to ensure that threads don't descent into slugfests, that said, the Mout thread seems to have taken a strange turn. We don't always appreciate each others views, but my view is that we need to find a way of being able to be both controversial but responsible while not descending into other nameless forums.

What say you?

At the end of the day, we are a Football Forum - if you want to discuss 'controversial topics' on the internet that exhaust moderating time, then use other forums on the internet suited for exactly this type of discussion.

We do have an 'Upgraded Member Lounge' with the ideology that those who help sustain the forum will naturally appreciate the community and in turn, will not not 'take the piss' within a more relaxed forum where more controversial topics can be discussed. But our priority will always to provide a platform for Evertonians to discuss Everton, not religion, race or politics.

 

[best little spaniard]

AN OFF-TOPIC INFRACTION!!????


Some of us will be banned within days.

 

[Sharpys top lip]

I think BT should be a Mod in here. He'd sort things out.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

AN OFF-TOPIC INFRACTION!!????


Some of us will be banned within days.

Only in the Everton forum,

Saves my constant "Stay on topic lads..." and will give me my power fix.

 

[Goat]

AN OFF-TOPIC INFRACTION!!????


Some of us will be banned within days.

I reckon an hour.

 

[best little spaniard]

Gawd, I look forward to it.


So does this mean no discussing what type of pastry based snack Bilyaletdinov likes on a saturday afternoon?

 

[Goat]

At first I was afraid, I was petrified.

[video=youtube;ZBR2G-iI3-I]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBR2G-iI3-I[/video]

 

[Neiler]

I write this thread as someone who had a thread closed due to the responses of a few individuals. While there are many threads which I think should be closed, this was not one of them, with a bit of careful consideration. The topic was "controversal" but are we saying that no controversal topics whatsoever can be posted?

My suggestion is as follows;

1) The person who posts a thread such be the first port of call in policing that thread. This means if it goes dangerously off topic it is their duty (as well as the mods of course) to try and steer it back on.

2) The person who opened the thread should be given the option of officially requesting a thread be closed, the decision resting with the mods.

I believe that there are enough sensible people on this forum to ensure that threads don't descent into slugfests, that said, the Mout thread seems to have taken a strange turn. We don't always appreciate each others views, but my view is that we need to find a way of being able to be both controversial but responsible while not descending into other nameless forums.

What say you?

I closed the Mout thread not because someone posted a controversial opinion, but becaase both sides on the different sides of that oipinion went massively of topic and personal insults were being thrown - Bell, Kopite, Manc, Tit, Knob and comments were made about one members family. I could have easily infracted at least 6 memebers in that thread for:

j ) Be threatening, abuse or invade another’s privacy, or cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety

b ) Contain any material which is obscene, offensive, hateful or inflammatory;

k ) Be likely to harass, upset, embarrass, alarm or annoy any other person;

p) Poor, profane or obscene language of any type is not welcome - even in jest.

Instead i closed it, due to the above and warned that a repeat would lead to infractions. The thread turned all kipperesque and despite a warning to keep it clean it turned into a insult fest and went massively of topic.

One of the great things about this place is that people can post without the worry of being massively insulted (unlike other forums) no matter what their opinon - that thread being the contrary - which is why it was closed - in addition to the fact it got massively of topc.

 

[bluebastardo]

Threads would probably stay open a little longer if they weren't spammed out with off topic nonsense from the off.

 

[Goat]

Theres only so many posts that can say the same thing tho........

 

[bluebastardo]

Theres only so many posts that can say the same thing tho........

Members who've been on a forum for years have seen and read most subjects until they're blue in the face as you know, but every day new members join who might want to talk about something for the first time. If folks have discussed it before, the easy answer is surely to move onto the next thread isn't it?