It's not targetted.
The "I'm 7 feet tall" is a good example of that. Or, the Angelina one - although yes, arguably that's not so clearcut, Ms J may well be a forum member, who knows...
But if I said "I'm boffing Andy McGregor", that would be a breach of forum rules. Well, probably - if I said "I'm boffing Andy McGregor, and he's useless in bed", that's definitely a breach. So to speak.
So, to reiterate - this describes what we do at the moment.
If you want things to change, then there are two questions:
- do people think that, in general, the moderation team should get involved in Exposing Evil Lying Liars?
- Do people think that, in general, the moderation team should be more heavy-handed with recidivist offenders?
My personal view on this is:
- No.
- Mmm.... maybe.
But I'd be interested in hearing other people's impressions. And please remember, this is a discussion about a general mechanism, and not any individual cases.
So? The rule doesn't say anything about targetted. Given the wording, I'm somewhat boggled at your interpretation, to be honest. What's the point of telling people to read the rules if you're then going to say "oh, it doesn't actually mean what it says"?
[If I am having a momentary failure to understand plain English, explain it to me and I'll apologise].
Like so many things, it will depend on the situation - I don't think every lie needs exposing. But if moderation policy is "people can't rebut a lie by posting the truth if it names and shames", then I think there's no option but for the moderators to do the exposing, when necessary.Originally Posted by DavidJames
Imaginary scenario: I post saying "David James was banned from Ceroc for being a sleaze". From what I've experienced, If the moderators think I'm telling the truth, that post will get removed the moment it's reported ('naming and shaming'). But if they think I'm lying, it will take a lot longer, and it may never be removed at all. Am I wrong to think that's seriously screwed up?
I think a problem here is that we don't generally know what actions are taken. My perception is that it's very unusual for the moderators to take action against offenders, but I suspect that's as much because I wouldn't know about it if you did.
- Do people think that, in general, the moderation team should be more heavy-handed with recidivist offenders?
But overall, yeah, I think more heavy-handedness would not be a bad thing. Although I suspect it's too late, really.
If you tried to convince members of the forum that you were having carnal relations with Ms. Jolie, then you would be attempting deceive us.
I think that's abundantly clear. Nothing about "targetting" deception. Nothing about "insulting" deception. Deception is bad. It can get your account suspended. The end.Originally Posted by General Forum Rule 12
If you want the rules to say something else, feel free to change them.
Just thinking about the dancing aspect (If Barry really is an Orthodox Rabbi, I really don't mind) you do have Franck.
So when NZ Monkey and I start advocated surprise aerials and drops, it should be a simple matter for Franck to post, "Um you're nuts - this is wrong". His credentials are well known so it's a good reference point.
As I said earlier I think you have to treat what's posted here with a pinch of salt. Amir's suggested that the Forum is a good place to find questions, but you need to look elsewhere for answers.
Hopefully a person wanting to use ideas from here would have the sense to go and check the stuff with someone they know, or at least try it out carefully.
Likewise if the World Champion is posting one thing and a lot of people post another, that's a red flag to tread carefully with the advice.
I think where I'm going is that getting into arguements about credentials on the actual thread is counter-productive. It's better off in another thread, or done through moderators.
As to how heavy-handed you should be? I refer you to the movie "Roadhouse"
Have I missed the obvious ... but isn't there no such thing as a World Champion? We don't even have a European Champ yet. Come to think of it we don't EVEN have a single UK Champ ... wonder if we could have a 'dance off' between the Champs of all the federations to have a single 'unified' champion ... a la boxing?
OK ... totally off thread, I know ....
There's probably a few Ceroc world champions who are very miffed at this misconception
Or not...
Smoooth notes and queries: Various photos
Greg
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks