moderation poll

[Admin]

I am currently away at the July members meet and have another inbox full of complaints.

I have a passive approach to moderation of this website and try to be tolerant.
People can have bad days or too much alcohol and make mistakes. So it is a shame to ban people unless they are repeat offenders.
Currently we have a problem with some members fighting and bickering on the site, this does damage this website and it does make people not want to visit or post.

I do not want the actions of a few to ruin it for the others.

The poll is private so no one will know which way you have voted.

So here is a poll question....

Should the admin ban the members that keep starting arguments or abusing other members?

 

[n brown]

no,from what i've seen i wouldn't consider it abuse till it gets threatening,a bit of chest beating,tedious as i find it doesnt warrant a ban,,,,,,,,imo

 

[ian81]

....three strikes and you are OUT???

 

[n brown]

didn't notice the poll at the top,so much for secret,glad i didn't slag anyone off !

 

[John H]

I don't believe in bannings but maybe temporary suspensions after warnings?

 

[Firefox]

If people get banned, it can create a lot of problems for the forum when sometimes people come back to stir things up using other personas. If they are tech savvy it's impossible to stop.

Thus I think people should only be permanently banned in extreme cases. Otherwise a temp ban of a few days to a week or even two weeks may give the person more time to reflect and come back as a better poster.

 

[Techno100]

If the vote is to arrive at a policy decision then I would stick to the result of the pole Phil and not over complicate it. Well done

 

[ipcel]

Ban them

I used to enjoy this forum but got p***ed off with people turning informative discussions into slanging matches.
Ban them unless they have something usefull to say.

 

[mattiball]

Some people just use internet forums just to wind up.and have a go at other internet users, which is why I have little time for forums. Yes ban the anti social buggers nothing wrong with strongly expressing your own unique view.....but if you went into a pub and continued to upset other customers, the land lord would eventually ban you, I know this.isn't a pub, but its still a social setting I suppose, so same principle.

 

[Deezy]

Warning, then out

I am on a number of different forums and they seem to have a policy as above - the abusive person(s) are given a warning, if they continue to upset others then they are out.
Easy
Cheers
deezy

 

[kangooroo]

I don’t normally post or comment upon any of the more controversial threads so this is an uncharacteristic exception for me and follows several months of skimming through alienating heated arguments and occasional offensive postings.

I’m sure I am not the only member who visits this forum to learn more about a shared interest and does not want to read through squabbles, bickering, trading of insults and slanging matches on an otherwise informative, friendly and well-run forum. I also feel sorry for Phil in having to pick up the pieces when his forum is abused by a small but vocal minority. I’ve never met him personally but I’m quite sure he has far better things to do with his life than lock or remove offensive threads and/or those which have degenerated into confrontational arguments.

I feel that something has to change and if the persistently provocative won’t refrain from continuing to cause arguments and ill-feeling then there may be little alternative other than to issue a warning followed by a ban if the behaviour continues in the hope that the message sinks in. Earlier I felt Phil has taken the correct approach in stepping in to introduce some new and much-needed ground rules, although these were later withdrawn.

I’m a moderator on another motorhoming forum and the trouble-makers are dealt with via moderation so that each post is moderated before it appears and, if they persist in posting inappropriate messages, then their account is deleted. They may return under another username but aren't usually difficult to spot.

I hope that changes will be made and that from now on, the forum will revert to being a pleasant place to visit and continue to share our common interest.

 

[dave docwra]

I personally do not see why you get complaints but maybe I am the sort of person who just either ignores what is said or answers back !
I am afraid in life we meet many people some who we like and others that we do not it will be the same on a forum I guess .
Having read many threads and joined in many also I know on occasions I have overstepped what is good taste but have appologised when I feel I am in the wrong .
If you read most threads where people have become heated or upset the poster normally realises his or her mistake and offers an apology which in my world is more than acceptable and no more needs to be said .
You only have to be in a Public house or work enviroment or even listen to parliamentary debates to see that different people have not only opposing views on many topics but can also become very heated and passioate whilst discussing these subjects , I am sure that no offence is meant to anyone and that in fact the original poster would actually be appologetic ,
and maybe all that is needed is for people to either ignore what causes them offence or maybe even ask the poster to moderate his or hers postings !
After all we are all different and what an uninspiring world it would be if we all agreed .

Put perfectly, Thanks..

 

[Donk]

Its like any group or society where EVERYONE should obey the rules, but some see them there to be broken where the majority stick to them..

Perhaps a "3 strike and your out" policy could be adopted.

I don't mind if you publish my reply.

 

[jotwca]

Abusive immaturity.

I am currently away at the July members meet and have another inbox full of complaints.

I have a passive approach to moderation of this website and try to be tolerant.
People can have bad days or too much alcohol and make mistakes. So it is a shame to ban people unless they are repeat offenders.
Currently we have a problem with some members fighting and bickering on the site, this does damage this website and it does make people not want to visit or post.

I do not want the actions of a few to ruin it for the others.

The poll is private so no one will know which way you have voted.

So here is a poll question....

Should the admin ban the members that keep starting arguments or abusing other members?

Yes of course. People should have three warnings befor a suspension for say six months. This rule should be agreed by all members.

 

[Tco]

The membership of this forum has enormous experience, this allows advice which is (usually) given gladly to those seeking it. It has to be said the some members are very easily offended and others determined to have the last word, sometimes abusively so. The latter we will happily live without. The former should behave like adults. Phil is the owner of this forum and it is his to do with as he wishes. I would like to see a cull of those members who cannot assemble a logical argument without resorting to school playground abuse.

If someone breaks the rules, a warning on their future conduct should be followed by banishment if they do not amend their behaviour.

A major problem caused by the abusers is that it mean that someone (Phil) has to monitor the forum in order to police behavour. This will put a bigger strain on Phil, possibly to the point where he may well call "enough!".

Most forums like this have a team of moderators to help in this regard. This is something that Phil might have to consider.

 

[keeflester]

firm Moderation

I got fed up wading through pages and pages of nastyness and atrocious forum manners. I would be happier to see firm moderation, non-contributory threads deleted and posters warned, then banned. This would make for a more enjoyable forum and a more useful information resource. I would be more likely to post if I thought it would not get lost in a sea of back-biting and general abuse.

 

[locksmith]

Armitages Smart Car fire.

I had quite a lot of abuse from members because I kept people up to date with how my claim against Armitages was going and some of that was quite hurtful and aimed at my wife who as you know is in remission. I gave back as good as I got but this was not done in open forum. If somebody in open forum is abusive to the point others are offended those who are offended should privately message Phil and if there are over a certain number then Phil should be able to ban them, It will then be the members that have banned the member and not Phil. That should then be the end of it.

 

[SteveUK]

Shame you can't just "tag" their account so only they see their own posts and so don't realise they've been banned!

 

[jagmanx]

Glad to see the vote is in favour of banning !

Members abusing the system or other members should simply be banned.
The ONLY problem is what constitutes abuse.
I suggest
Offensive, Rude, overtly critical of others views.
Or simply calling people stupid or the like.
It is easy to promote your opinion which may well differ from others WITHOUT breaching basic "good manners" or worse !

 

[midasbram]

Agree A Policy

I think we should agree a policy around how we conduct our behaviour on this site. One of the benefits of the community is that if you have a problem and you see a wild camping sticker - you should feel confident to go and ask for help if you need it. If bickering and abuse become widespread on the site, then I think that trust will be diminished.