Originally Posted by Alf (Post 9829892)

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

But they love the power!

Originally Posted by Smithy (Post 9827297)

On top of that, I’m not too sure why there is such secrecy around infractions, thinking about it more it seems that the less secrecy around it the less people can complain because it’s there for everyone to see, surely if everyone could see who got infracted for what and how many points were handed out, nobody could ever claim it was unfair because everyone could see it (this idea has only just come to me now it wasn’t an original part of the thread but yes let’s do an infraction list similar to a ban list), so for example if member A calls member B a twat and gets a one point infraction and then member C calls member B a silly billy and gets a 5 point infraction, everyone could see the blatant bias in the modding.

Originally Posted by Ashley. (Post 9827464)

I don't know, I've found it relatively easy to avoid receiving infractions. :shrug: If you think there's a chance you're going to be infracted for saying something then just don't say it. That's all I can say really.

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 9829127)

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.

Originally Posted by Alf (Post 9829892)

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

But they love the power!

Originally Posted by James (Post 9831964)

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.

Originally Posted by hijaxers (Post 9836630)

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

Originally Posted by Ashley. (Post 9836644)

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'.

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 9836654)

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

Originally Posted by Kazanne (Post 9836660)

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

Originally Posted by James (Post 9831926)

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.

Originally Posted by Kazanne (Post 9836660)

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

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 9836654)

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

Originally Posted by Ashley. (Post 9836681)

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.

Originally Posted by Cherie (Post 9836748)

Did people take the truth seriously :omgno:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 9836766)

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

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 9836766)

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

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 9836771)

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

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 9836785)

ElleT

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 9836766)

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

Originally Posted by Maru (Post 9836958)

Nah, leave the system as it is. People need to learn to stop responding to simple baits and just use ignore. It's difficult enough to mod a board as clique-y as TiBB... every deletion/mod I think offends one of each of those groups in one way or another and it always seems to come back to over-modding.

The thing I would suggest instead that would help everyone equally, that mods make it a point to post reminders where the discussion is going off-topic for those users to get back to the original OP. If it is a reasonable transition, either lock the thread or split those posts to another one entirely (usually lock first, split, reopen, etc). This will encourage new thread creation and will also make people feel safer about posting true comments, rather than being concerned they will be ****-posted five minutes later for simply having a discussion...

I'm sure quite a bit of it is on purpose, but TiBB threads almost never stay on-topic and this enables the same 6 people to come in with their same pet peeves to derail the discussion and take it a totally different direction. This is a vast majority of where the **** posts come from.

So it's no surprise that there's only the same 3-4 topics of conversation across the entire board, because this rule is not being upheld.

And you know, some threads are just meant for a humane death.. I think give it a page or two to fall apart and when it's getting stupid, lock dat sh*t tight.