Why do we have a Moderator in TFC again ?

[Raiderdave]

it stays

nothing wrong with it .... ******* is a perfect description of these **** south of the border ............

[NSWAFL]

It goes. 7 to 1 in the poll so far.

[cos789]

RD you cannot continue to use racist remarks like those in your last post.
It's not a case of what we think is or isn't acceptable.
It's a case of that being a racist term and there is a possible legal implication to this site if
continues to allow you make those racist remarks.
If you cannot be the tiniest bit sensible in this regard there will be repercussions.

[NSWAFL]

Sense and Dave are poles apart.

[ParraEelsNRL]

Racist

[NSWAFL]

How is THAT racist, princess?

[King-Eliagh]

He was laughing that the now banned term was called racist NSWAFL.

Well it seems as though this thread is fairly all over the shop with many calling for and getting the ban of a single term and others trying to have no abuse whatsoever, which I must suggest will be freakin hard to moderate in a forum titled "fightclub". It completely contradicts the very title so in effect folk like cos etc are contradicting themeselves on this one. What I think we clearly need is clearer guidelines. They state that discrimination and threats are not ok. This was my input to the guidelines and thus far its working ok with that racist AFL 'Warrior' finally being punished and threats non-existant or punished straight away. What needs to be clearer in our guidelines is that name calling and personal jibes are fine as long as they are in line with/in the same post as one's footy argument and that those who feel this may offend should not participate. If this is clearly stated I think Beaussie and Xman's jobs will be a lot easier.

Again no need to reinvent the wheel folks, to me it just needs to be clearcut.

[NSWAFL]

It is clear cut in my book.

[King-Eliagh]

Yes but your book is not the forum guidelines. The forum guidelines clearly say that discrimination and theats are not on. Thus the current topic of 'abuse' within the 'fight'club in the form of name calling is not addressed. We need the forum guidelines to be clearcut so we dont have all the discussion over the rules of this place rather than the footy.

[Xman]

Yes but your book is not the forum guidelines. The forum guidelines clearly say that discrimination and theats are not on. Thus the current topic of 'abuse' within the 'fight'club in the form of name calling is not addressed. We need the forum guidelines to be clearcut so we dont have all the discussion over the rules of this place rather than the footy.

The forms of abuse that I find unnacceptable are repeated inappropriate abusive targeting of individuals, which in reality is a form of bullying. The other is the word that is now banned.

[King-Eliagh]

Your first sentence is not in the guidelines Xman and is quite difficult to moderate. Innapropriate for example...highly subjective and therefore not clearcut. I agree that bullying is not on, which to my knowledge hasnt occurred in here, we fight it out about the codes and peoples opinions in the open for all to see. IMO if two members continually disagree and respond without threats or discrimination, this is not bullying.

I suggest that if you wish to be seen as a fair moderator you take care not to go moderating at your own whim and follow the appropriate protocols in place.

[NSWAFL]

That's backseat moderating that should be punished in my book. Xman's first sentence is part of his regime and I'm sure Beaussie will add it if Xman asks him to, just to verify the already existing policy. Get it yet? Or are you starting to whine as bad as Dave and Parra here?

[cos789]

0thers trying to have no abuse whatsoever, which I must suggest will be freakin hard to moderate in a forum titled "fightclub".

No, quite the contrary. Boxing is fighting and they have a clear set of rules.

It completely contradicts the very title so in effect folk like cos etc are contradicting themeselves on this one.

Thatis your opinion. You can quite easily fight without abuse.

What needs to be clearer in our guidelines is that ...

unambiguous and libellous threats or jibes or comments are unacceptable.
I don't care what the fuck you morons want or say there are legal implications and you can't fight without a website.

[King-Eliagh]

As a long time member I'm providing sound advice to Xman. I've seen the mistakes moderators can make.

Cos if one is to 'fight' there is inevitably abuse, do some research on the word and think a bit you silly silly sod. Or alternatively pm me and we can discuss the origins and meaning of the word further

We have rules to ensure the inevitable abuse which occurs in a 'fight'club is contained i.e. "extreme personal attacks and/ or dicrimination or threatening the personal security of others". The sticks and stones line comes to effect here. However we haven't made it really clear to members what is actually ok. For some, being called a baboon is the ultimate disgrace and hurtful. I suggest these folk need to walk away as this has always been allowed and encouraged by site admin.

As far as I can see no one is making extreme personal attacks, discriminating against or threatening others in this forum. So why all the complaints I ask? NSWAFL calls the league supporters whingers but they arent the ones calling for large scale changes and complaining about posts that are within the guidelines

[Xman]

Your first sentence is not in the guidelines Xman and is quite difficult to moderate. Innapropriate for example...highly subjective and therefore not clearcut. I agree that bullying is not on, which to my knowledge hasnt occurred in here, we fight it out about the codes and peoples opinions in the open for all to see. IMO if two members continually disagree and respond without threats or discrimination, this is not bullying.

I suggest that if you wish to be seen as a fair moderator you take care not to go moderating at your own whim and follow the appropriate protocols in place.

I would call repeatedly accusing someone of being a peeping Tom bullying.