Is that why it changed?

They didn't like people knowing they could get away with one or two comments, they want us fearful that any comment at any moment could lead to a ban? :laugh:

It's like Don't Wake Dad, that board game. :worry:

*creeps past Niamh to get to the fridge*

Apparently so!

No one ever replies to those messages :laugh: been trying since 2013. Pretty sure I posted Gl0rangu in the reply as a test one time but still no luck

All but one of mine have been fair... but I agree, I dont think we should see the points.

I would say that 'baiting' is the most hazy rulebreak. There are two members who basically only bait, yet its hard to believe they get pulled up on that.

:oh:

:joker:

what if you get infracted for baiting and the reason for the infraction is actually in a baiting tone?

:joker:

:joker: infract ha

Yes the mods remind me a lot of US law enforcement Officers

Especially Dezzy as I always see him dressed as Eric Estrada from CHIPS when he posts

You and your fantasys

Your quite good at fishing yourself tbh.

Reporting for baiting about baiting.

I know you were joking and I know people think I'm being flippant when I suggest this but these days I'm really not

Just...get rid of it? How about we all just learn to handle ourselves like adults rather than running off to the mods like kids to a teacher? I would much prefer - and think it's a lot healthier - for members to be able to address things and people they disagree with and say what they REALLY think if it gets heated rather than trying to reign it in, which just fosters ill feeling. Let's hash it out. This is the internet, text on a screen, does it really matter if someone is offended? Just give as good as you get.

The way I see it is, so long as threads don't go off-topic too much (which can make the forum messy), so long as people's personal information isn't being used against them, and so long as people aren't making any libellous comments that could get admin into legal trouble, then what other rules do we need?

'It cheapens/spoils the forum' is often used as justification for a lot of rules. Well, let me put it this way...there's a lot of spammy, repetitive, inane or just plain baiting threads that are posted here on a daily basis, and it's those that actually cheapen/spoil the forum and that need dealing with IMO. I'd much rather see two people going at it in a thread over racism than yet another three pager about someone's favourite changing or what Jeremy Corbyn put in the bin last night.

I am fairly sure your suggestion would never happen Jack. Also members may say they want that, but in reality what most people want is for them to be able to post what they like, and people they don't like be banned for random crap. So people would be all for no rules, but then someone would call them a twat and they would want that dealt with. I reckon thats how it would go anyway :laugh:

I could be persuaded to be on side for no rules (as such) in the serious debates forum though. We do tend to give a bit more leeway in that section due to the nature of the discussions anyway though.

Mods have actually seriously considered going on a complete strike for a day or so..a couple of years ago when everyone was moaning about moderation and how we either did nothing at all, or were biased against them and let everyone else away with everything (nothing changes :p ). To see how many members really like no rules and basically an unmoderated forum. Also obviously with no modding to allow the spambots that we get all the time to run wild, the multis, the really disgusting posts..all of it. Can't remember why we decided not to do this, I do remember talking about it and being up for it and thinking it would be a decent 'experiment' :laugh: We did a kind of version of this a while ago..when half the forum really hated the other half. We basically left a HUGE argument to run its course without intervening at all and no bans/infractions given. The amount of people who complained about 'the other side' getting away with it (ignoring that pretty much every member that night broke a rule) was insane .

I mean. This proves my point quite well. This is literally baiting, so where is the line?

you need a hook first..

Maggots Or worms ?

:clap1: The mods are unpaid and do a great job considering! The rules are fine as is and prevent users from taking advantage of misbehaving if they are aware of being a far way from a ban.

Nobody is forcing them to be mods, they can stop anytime.

But they love the power!

Kind of have to agree with this :laugh: if you don’t like people moaning at you, don’t do the job

It was changed so that the points are secret - it used to be that people saw the points level. People would just compare infractions points levels for infractions and complain even more.

It's impossible to be 100% consistent with moderating at that micro-level.

No, I look at most (I think) of them. 95% of the time no ever accepts they've done anything wrong - as was the case with the appeals forum - as some people are rude, so I generally it's not worth sharing them. There's not much point responding either, it would just be time-wasting, and going around in circles.

It's very easy to avoid infractions. :hehe: If I was just a member on here I wouldn't be getting infractions.

Experience on the forum has shown allowing arguments to go on, or allowing insults, doesn't work. Many people generally don't want to be personally insulted for supporting a housemate or whatever, and are likely to be put off the forum if they get insulted - and that isn't in this forum's best interests. You'll get some people thinking it is alright to insult as a forum weapon, and you'll only be left with those types of members.

Allowing arguments has the effect (in practise) of excluding people from debates.

Its not about Power
it is about members not being Rude to other members

I get warnings

TIBB staff are fair.

Well i have always found the mods to be helpful so no complaints from me.

I'm against the idea of discontinuing infractions/bans but what you're explaining I feel happens despite the warnings. Once the ban is over, or once the infraction runs out, it's back to the normal routine... We're heading for a forum with only those types of members regardless of whether or not you "allow" arguments and insults to occur.

Like somebody else has mentioned, certain members can go on insulting other members for years before they're banned indefinitely... just look at 'The Truth'.

hi welcome to Tibb :wavey:

I hope this forum lives up to your last one

:fc:

The Truth did not insult members?

If he did there were plenty of members with their fingers on the red triangle


his beef was women in general

Is he banned? I quite liked him didn't agree with some of his views but never saw him insult anyone, was his surname Widdecome? Not Tibb shutting down peoples opinions

Yes he was banned sine die

But do you not think an implementation of more clear rules would mean it would be easier to be consistent with moderating?
Is that something that could be implemented though? So that all mods receive a reply rather than just yourself?
You don’t post very often that’s why :smug:
TiBB shutting down, sexist, misogynistic, victim blaming (and after he was banned and decided to make multis) racist and homophonic trash more like

I'd say a lot, if not all of his threads were created with the intention of insulting members of the forum and to cause an argument. I think the countless accounts he's made since he was banned proves that he was only around to cause trouble.

Did people take the truth seriously :omgno:

how do you know what multis he has made

:suspect:

Well if he wasnt serious then he was trolling so justified either way

what if a male member wants to have a female multi like Shane J and Courtney, would not allowing that be a hate crimeophobia?

i am asking for a friend

:joker:

I'll be looking out for new member called LeatherStrumpet :suspect:

ElleT

Much more classy