Poll - Do you want all substantial claims to be backed up by

[Xman]

Do you want all substantial claims to be backed up by a legitimate source, otherwise deleted?

Vote now

[King-Eliagh]

So if I claim I play marngrook do I need to provide a link now? Or otherwise have my true statements deleted by a moderator?

[NRLCrap1]

Don't even say it at all, Eliagh, if you can't back it up!!

I say "YES!" and start the rule right now so we can call out Dave on his future inevitable bullshit!!

[King-Eliagh]

Oh dear cwapper'll cop it massively if this rule is installed and policed. Then he'll ave a big cwy when he cops it If installed I think Xman will have a very hard time moderating this rule unless he provides very clear parameters, which he has yet to do. I've called for clarity and consistency time and time again for the betterment of the site, but it often falls on deaf and dumb ears.

At present I'm undecided on this poll.

[Xman]

So if I claim I play marngrook do I need to provide a link now? Or otherwise have my true statements deleted by a moderator?

I'd like AFLc to clarify your query since he is the main advocate for this proposal. Personally I don't think backing up claims about yourself can be proven on a public forum. Neither are we compelled to believe you though.

[Xman]

Oh dear cwapper'll cop it massively if this rule is installed and policed. Then he'll ave a big cwy when he cops it If installed I think Xman will have a very hard time moderating this rule unless he provides very clear parameters, which he has yet to do. I've called for clarity and consistency time and time again for the betterment of the site, but it often falls on deaf and dumb ears.

At present I'm undecided on this poll.

Agree. This will be hard to police and clear parameters will need to be established.

Can people who want this change maybe suggest some?

[King-Eliagh]

Well I think aflcrap1 already suggested something along the lines of opinions are fine. Then there's also the matter of personal experiences, which also must be fine.

For example. If I say, "I played in an international match of marngrook in the netherlands". No need for links, it was my personal experience. Additionally if I say "I think/in my opinion Xman needs to pick up his moderating game by consistently banning members who post personal info", then that's my opinion and that's ok too :D

But if I state, "Cwapper is a deluded tool", this is a statement. Then a member has every right to ask me for a link or a quote. i.e. on this very ruling the deluded tool thinks that its best if we

Don't even say it at all...if you can't back it up!!

Clear? Or atleast clearer?

[Cracker]

I voted Yes, and I believe some parameters do need to be set. I disagree with NRLCrap1 that the rule should be set from now. It should be set retrospectively so it includes his yet to be proved claim about 69 countries playing Aussie Rules.

Personal experience should of course be allowed, but there are borders that should not be crossed - like using it as a shield for a substantive point that can otherwise be proven false (with links of course). However if two personal experiences clash, this could well be almost impossible to police - especially if the claims become so substantive that it threatens the privacy of all involved parties. For example I notice that NRLCrap1 is keen to use TLPG's website as a source, but he can't due to privacy issues that TLPG has confirmed exist. It would appear that TLPG may be able to substantiate some of his personal experience claims, but at the expense of his privacy. It's food for thought. The same would apply to King Eliagh although unlike TLPG he doesn't have a personal website - to my knowledge anyway.

Opinion should be clearly defined. That I think is a no brainer.

Edited to add - Wikipedia links should be banned as a part of this rule, and so should comments like "Google it" and so forth.

[cos789]

If you remove unstubstantiated crap what is there for rl fans to say ?

[King-Eliagh]

cos lettuce! Welcome back champ! A poor comment on ur return but we'll forgive ya hows the international marngrook scene going lately? Gangbusters?

[Xman]

Well I think aflcrap1 already suggested something along the lines of opinions are fine. Then there's also the matter of personal experiences, which also must be fine.

For example. If I say, "I played in an international match of marngrook in the netherlands". No need for links, it was my personal experience. Additionally if I say "I think/in my opinion Xman needs to pick up his moderating game by consistently banning members who post personal info", then that's my opinion and that's ok too :D

But if I state, "Cwapper is a deluded tool", this is a statement. Then a member has every right to ask me for a link or a quote. i.e. on this very ruling the deluded tool thinks that its best if we

Don't even say it at all...if you can't back it up!!

Clear? Or atleast clearer?

No, discussion about moderators or moderating is not fine, and you know it

[King-Eliagh]

Oh ok but you get my drift. It was just an example Xman.

But on that matter. Why cant members discuss moderation publicly? We each have a stake in the site and deserve to discuss issues at hand. The lack of transparency you're suggesting paves the way for corruption and lies to dominate, as apparently they have been prior to the members revolt.

Members should be able to discuss their concerns. If mods and admin have nothing to hide they would be happy with this.

[Xman]

Oh ok but you get my drift. It was just an example Xman.

But on that matter. Why cant members discuss moderation publicly? We each have a stake in the site and deserve to discuss issues at hand. The lack of transparency you're suggesting paves the way for corruption and lies to dominate, as apparently they have been prior to the members revolt.

Members should be able to discuss their concerns. If mods and admin have nothing to hide they would be happy with this.

You have a right to complain, but not to openly undermine people who are trying their best to ensure the site functions appropriately. It isnt tolerated on any forum I know, and rightly so. Keep your issues private between yourself and the mods

[MarkZZZ]

Oh ok but you get my drift. It was just an example Xman.

But on that matter. Why cant members discuss moderation publicly? We each have a stake in the site and deserve to discuss issues at hand. The lack of transparency you're suggesting paves the way for corruption and lies to dominate, as apparently they have been prior to the members revolt.

Members should be able to discuss their concerns. If mods and admin have nothing to hide they would be happy with this.

Agree with you K-E.

On another point. I went to reply to a request from Ncrapper for a link. BTW it was an excerpt from an email between Beau and myself, only to find that it had been locked for going off topic. It would be good if he wants to the topic to remain on topic that he does something about it sooner before statements (that are off topic) are made that need correction.

[King-Eliagh]

Oh ok but you get my drift. It was just an example Xman.

But on that matter. Why cant members discuss moderation publicly? We each have a stake in the site and deserve to discuss issues at hand. The lack of transparency you're suggesting paves the way for corruption and lies to dominate, as apparently they have been prior to the members revolt.

Members should be able to discuss their concerns. If mods and admin have nothing to hide they would be happy with this.

You have a right to complain, but not to openly undermine people who are trying their best to ensure the site functions appropriately. It isnt tolerated on any forum I know, and rightly so. Keep your issues private between yourself and the mods

I'm not trying to undermine anyone Xman, just stating inconsistencies and untruths that should be addressed for the betterment of the site. Unfortunately whenever I do make a "private" complaint I do not get any response.