Topic: Thread Derailing, Persistent Negativity and Agenda Driven Spin

[Andy @ Allerton!]

If you don't want to hear what people have to say (In many cases match going fans that have been going for 20, 30, 40 years or longer) then ban them.

Objectivity isn't negativity. For instance - we won yesterday but only a fucking cretin could pretend that the Kop and the ground were enthralled by the result. Even at 5-0 it was obvious everyone just knew that we were a midtable club going through the motions. We'd leaped to 7th place and we knew that we'd lose a fair few more matches against sterner opposition.

If you don't want to hear honesty then just ban the honest fans. It's as easy as that.

[Liverbird 2010]

Fucking this.

This place used to be a real laugh, full of real 'characters'.

Feels far too sanistised these days.

Threads like this are exhibit A.

This is a great forum/community. In terms of actual engaging football debate...not so much these days. Its just too god damn big and too many idiots have broadband.

This used to be the best forum around i never come on here anymore some of the members that have joined over the last few years are absolutly clueless and they have replaced the real characters that used to frequent here.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

RAWK is not the Kop mate. You're deluding yourself if you think the multitude of LFC fans over the world represent what was/is the Kop.

Fans young and old would go on the Kop and learn first hand what it was to be a LFC supporter. RAWK (whilst a forum) should also be an extension of that attitude, whilst retaining it's essence of public debate.

If half the shit said on here was said on the Kop, plenty of people sitting behind their computers would be wondering exactly where the fuck that clip round the earhole came from.

If you were on the Kop yesterday mate then you and everyone around you were a fucking disgrace. 5-0 up and no bastard sang. It was embarrasing.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

The biggest concern for me (which the mods policy should help address) is the boy who cried wolf scenario, that if something sinister is going on that many of us (me included) ignore the signs and just think 'oh, its Al/Rossi/Walshy etc again, they've always hated FSG, lets just ignore them' and that with the amount of criticism FSG get (a lot of it unfair in my opinion) we become immune to it.

That is my biggest fear.  Some of the things that some posters have been spouting in the last week (ie John W Henry is skint) do nothing but destroy the credibility of those peddling the stories.  Which is a shame because their motives are good and when they actually discover something that does need our action there is a huge chance they will be ignored.

Being vigilant means keeping clear eyes on what they are doing, not running round screaming that the sky is falling in.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Fucking this.

This place used to be a real laugh, full of real 'characters'.

Feels far too sanistised these days.

Threads like this are exhibit A.

This is a great forum/community. In terms of actual engaging football debate...not so much these days. Its just too god damn big and too many idiots have broadband.

Agree with that. The only reason I tend to read RAWK is because of the characters. Because you'll hear honest stuff from real match going fans that don't do club spin, they don't do FA spin, they don't do media spin. They tell it like it is. Warts and all.

I'd rather read one post like that than 10,000 kissing Brendan Rodgers and Gerrards arse threads. Honesty, humour, imagination and love of the game are things you want to read. Not sanitised shite.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

If you don't want to hear what people have to say (In many cases match going fans that have been going for 20, 30, 40 years or longer) then ban them.

Objectivity isn't negativity. For instance - we won yesterday but only a fucking cretin could pretend that the Kop and the ground were enthralled by the result. Even at 5-0 it was obvious everyone just knew that we were a midtable club going through the motions. We'd leaped to 7th place and we knew that we'd lose a fair few more matches against sterner opposition.

If you don't want to hear honesty then just ban the honest fans. It's as easy as that.

It wasn't obvious to me mate.  I thought we looked like a team that was finding its feet.  A team where players who had been written off like Downing and Henderson were starting to show their true form. A team where we at last had a partner that Suarez would enjoy playing with and would score lots of goals. 

We are interested in everyone's opinion.  It's just when you become the pub bore and lecture people on the same thing over and over and over again that people start to get fed up.

[the 92A]

Reading through the thread, I think it needs emphasising that this certainly isn't about censoring views, it's trying to stop people who derail threads by constantly derailing threads with their personal agendas.  This is ruining RAWK to the point that people are so pissed off that both enjoyment and humour becomes lost as everyone becomes distracted by the posters trying to outshout each other with no concern for anyone else

[rednich85]

Agree with that. The only reason I tend to read RAWK is because of the characters. Because you'll hear honest stuff from real match going fans that don't do club spin, they don't do FA spin, they don't do media spin. They tell it like it is. Warts and all.

I'd rather read one post like that than 10,000 kissing Brendan Rodgers and Gerrards arse threads. Honesty, humour, imagination and love of the game are things you want to read. Not sanitised shite.

Andy, I think you might be derailing the thread with your negativity and spin.

Your comment will disappear with John Macs claim that Liverpool fans ARE the enemy.

[MiserableP15]

If you were on the Kop yesterday mate then you and everyone around you were a fucking disgrace. 5-0 up and no bastard sang. It was embarrasing.

My father-in-law went to this one and was in the main stand, so no, I wasn't at this game. I thought the atmosphere sounded alright though, obviously it wasn't.

[woof]

I support free speech but like in reality, we live in a better world when there is some sort of governance. It could be loose but there should still be some boundaries.

Over the years, I've only responded to threads where most of the people I admire posts their views. It also takes common sense to get this forum ticking healthily.

Is the technology advance enough to give a poster the yellow card or some time out if there are repeated negative comments instead of shutting down the thread?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

It wasn't obvious to me mate.  I thought we looked like a team that was finding its feet.  A team where players who had been written off like Downing and Henderson were starting to show their true form. A team where we at last had a partner that Suarez would enjoy playing with and would score lots of goals. 

We are interested in everyone's opinion.  It's just when you become the pub bore and lecture people on the same thing over and over and over again that people start to get fed up.

Is a very fair point. But the atmosphere at the ground yesterday mate was abysmal. 5-0 up and you could still hear the players shouting to each other.

The cold is certainly part of the answer, but we should have been better than that as fans.

It's a fine line. I can see what you're trying to do - but if you ban the 'characters' then you'll just end up like all the other boring LFC forums where everyone claps each other on the back, says how marvellous the club is and how fantastic we are.

RAWK is different because people can be honest. There is literally a forum for them to be honest in. I can accept you want to bin the whining bastards with one line shithouse comments. But negativity if reasoned sparks debate and discussion.

[SquirmyRooter]

One persons objectivity is another persons deranged conspiracy theory. I really don't think most people have agendas, they're just incapable of rational thought. It's the I want it all,  want it now, generation.

[Hinesy]

If you don't want to hear what people have to say (In many cases match going fans that have been going for 20, 30, 40 years or longer) then ban them.

Objectivity isn't negativity. For instance - we won yesterday but only a fucking cretin could pretend that the Kop and the ground were enthralled by the result. Even at 5-0 it was obvious everyone just knew that we were a midtable club going through the motions. We'd leaped to 7th place and we knew that we'd lose a fair few more matches against sterner opposition.

If you don't want to hear honesty then just ban the honest fans. It's as easy as that.

Andy:
No-one is saying that. We are saying if in every thread, the same arguments about the owners, other players being 'shithouses', two posters fighting with eachother over the same tiny point, ruining a perfectly good thread, then we're going to take action over that. At NO point has any of us said "Stop giving us your opinion".
Its not your opinion, its the same point made in a thousand threads without moving on, or accepting that thread might not be the place for it.

This used to be the best forum around i never come on here anymore some of the members that have joined over the last few years are absolutly clueless and they have replaced the real characters that used to frequent here.

and we're trying to change that. This is one small step.

All those of you who complain about the lack of humour, dive in and contribute. All those of you who want to argue, go ahead. Just not the latter in every thread on the same topic.

[Hinesy]

RAWK is different because people can be honest. There is literally a forum for them to be honest in. I can accept you want to bin the whining bastards with one line shithouse comments. But negativity if reasoned sparks debate and discussion.

I don't think any of us want that. I completely agree with you.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

From the recent mod responses - what you're saying sounds fair enough then. Moderating is a balancing game. I can accept that people repeating the same points can get tiresome (And I'm as guilty as anyone in certain threads)

[Yorkykopite]

If you were on the Kop yesterday mate then you and everyone around you were a fucking disgrace. 5-0 up and no bastard sang. It was embarrasing.

"Five Nil and you still won't smile, Five Nil and....."

[yes]

Only anecdotal this (as I obviously can't speak for why people are leaving RAWK in their droves as is suggested in the OP) but the few people I know in person who used to come on here and don't any longer is basically because the site and modding has eaten itself.

Major issues arise regarding OUR club i.e. Suarez's antics, rumoured transfers, who we should be going after, managerial/backroom staff changes and it seems that if you actually want to talk about them (as you would in the pub) you've got more chance of doing so on another team's site because those type of threads are invariably locked here.

It can be argued that it's due to thread derailing or whatever but most people have got the sense on who they decide to listen to, so in a lot of cases it seems like the mods are throwing out the baby with the bathwater when they just lock a thread altogether.

There was a time when the place had a bit of a buzz about it, and maybe that was linked to our fortunes on the pitch, but it's a pretty dull and over-policed place now IMO. You say you want pub type discussions yet at the same time are basically trying to suppress human nature of strong (and entrenched) views and pisstaking. You either shut up shop and become a 'high-brow'  blog or accept humanity for what it is with all its faults. You're fighting an unbeatable foe.

[b_joseph]

One persons objectivity is another persons deranged conspiracy theory. I really don't think most people have agendas, they're just incapable of rational thought. It's the I want it all,  want it now, generation.

Some of the older fans have been involved in it as well and they are not the ''want it now'' generation.

This is just how the Internet is. People, not all but a lot of people are extreme versions of themselves. Whether that is uber optimistic or trying to be a super fan. Ans the other side of saying that you are honest when in reality, you are just really negative.

I'm not a mod so I dont have much of an issue with what anyone talks about because I can just leave for a day or two. But it is annoying when you lose a game to the best team in the country and see the place littered in discussion which you would expect to see if we have just lost to the worst team in the league.

[the 92A]

Andy, I think you might be derailing the thread with your negativity and spin.

Your comment will disappear with John Macs claim that Liverpool fans ARE the enemy.

  It's hardly groundbreaking news we moderate. We always have we're human sometimes we get it right sometimes we make mistakes. There are sites out there where you can say anything there's no quality control anything goes  problem is they're totally shite as the loudest or the most extreme end up shouting one line obscenities to each other. We're never going to be like that which means moderation we try to be light handed but sometimes that's not easy

[woof]

Is a very fair point. But the atmosphere at the ground yesterday mate was abysmal. 5-0 up and you could still hear the players shouting to each other.

The cold is certainly part of the answer, but we should have been better than that as fans.

It's a fine line. I can see what you're trying to do - but if you ban the 'characters' then you'll just end up like all the other boring LFC forums where everyone claps each other on the back, says how marvellous the club is and how fantastic we are.

RAWK is different because people can be honest. There is literally a forum for them to be honest in. I can accept you want to bin the whining bastards with one line shithouse comments. But negativity if reasoned sparks debate and discussion.

Fair point as long as the debate is healthy and goes both ways. We have the right to our own opinions but it's not right to impose our opinions on anyone.

Always love a healthy banter mate.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

  It's hardly groundbreaking news we moderate. We always have we're human sometimes we get it right sometimes we make mistakes. There are sites out there where you can say anything there's no quality control anything goes  problem is they're totally shite as the loudest or the most extreme end up shouting one line obscenities to each other. We're never going to be like that which means moderation we try to be light handed but sometimes that's not easy

You do have the problem though where certain of your moderating team delete posts with no real reasons. Perhaps reviewing some of those people and their actions might be a good step as well as posters moderating themselves. I've seen several posts that seemed reasonable that have been deleted and you get the feeling it's not what's being said but the person saying it in some cases.

A site is as good as its moderators. I can accept that once someone is recruited it might be hard to revoke that without creating ill will, but moderators actions directly lead to the perception of a site.

[Crosby Nick]

It's a funny one, while the levels of negativity have grown, I think the quality of writing and features has been higher than I can remember for years. For me it's only certain types of threads (individual player threads and post match ones) that can end up unreadable, but all the new ideas and articles in the last few months have been great.

[woof]

Only anecdotal this (as I obviously can't speak for why people are leaving RAWK in their droves as is suggested in the OP) but the few people I know in person who used to come on here and don't any longer is basically because the site and modding has eaten itself.

Major issues arise regarding OUR club i.e. Suarez's antics, rumoured transfers, who we should be going after, managerial/backroom staff changes and it seems that if you actually want to talk about them (as you would in the pub) you've got more chance of doing so on another team's site because those type of threads are invariably locked here.

It can be argued that it's due to thread derailing or whatever but most people have got the sense on who they decide to listen to, so in a lot of cases it seems like the mods are throwing out the baby with the bathwater when they just lock a thread altogether.

There was a time when the place had a bit of a buzz about it, and maybe that was linked to our fortunes on the pitch, but it's a pretty dull and over-policed place now IMO. You say you want pub type discussions yet at the same time are basically trying to suppress human nature of strong (and entrenched) views and pisstaking. You either shut up shop and become a 'high-brow'  blog or accept humanity for what it is with all its faults. You're fighting an unbeatable foe.

I concur.
Mods, is it possible to issue 'warnings' for repeated 'offenders' instead of shutting the thread down?

[rednich85]

  It's hardly groundbreaking news we moderate. We always have we're human sometimes we get it right sometimes we make mistakes. There are sites out there where you can say anything there's no quality control anything goes  problem is they're totally shite as the loudest or the most extreme end up shouting one line obscenities to each other. We're never going to be like that which means moderation we try to be light handed but sometimes that's not easy

I'm all for moderation as long as we're all moderated the same and for the benefit of the forum.

There's an 'old pals act' element to this place. Some posters get more leniency that others. Say they dont, but its a lie.

[the 92A]

None of us delete posts for no reason. We might get it wrong at times but non of us are infallible. When posts are deleted its usually a big hint or editorial. We do are best but we can never get it right every timeevery time

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

Only anecdotal this (as I obviously can't speak for why people are leaving RAWK in their droves as is suggested in the OP) but the few people I know in person who used to come on here and don't any longer is basically because the site and modding has eaten itself.

Major issues arise regarding OUR club i.e. Suarez's antics, rumoured transfers, who we should be going after, managerial/backroom staff changes and it seems that if you actually want to talk about them (as you would in the pub) you've got more chance of doing so on another team's site because those type of threads are invariably locked here.

It can be argued that it's due to thread derailing or whatever but most people have got the sense on who they decide to listen to, so in a lot of cases it seems like the mods are throwing out the baby with the bathwater when they just lock a thread altogether.

There was a time when the place had a bit of a buzz about it, and maybe that was linked to our fortunes on the pitch, but it's a pretty dull and over-policed place now IMO. You say you want pub type discussions yet at the same time are basically trying to suppress human nature of strong (and entrenched) views and pisstaking. You either shut up shop and become a 'high-brow'  blog or accept humanity for what it is with all its faults. You're fighting an unbeatable foe.

This is part of why we are doing this.  The threads get locked when they become essentially the same slanging match between the same people.  We hope that by getting those who are the most vocal to back off a bit then these discussions can proceed more sensibly and the threads remain open.

This is not about stymieing debate but about allowing it to happen.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

I'm all for moderation as long as we're all moderated the same and for the benefit of the forum.

There's an 'old pals act' element to this place. Some posters get more leniency that others. Say they dont, but its a lie.

There is no old pals act.  Some posters get more leniency than others because we think they represent the ethos of the site. 

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

I concur.
Mods, is it possible to issue 'warnings' for repeated 'offenders' instead of shutting the thread down?

See my post above mate.  That is precisely what we are hoping to achieve.  However before we started issuing warnings we thought it was only fair to make everyone aware of the new policy

[yes]

I'm all for moderation as long as we're all moderated the same and for the benefit of the forum.

There's an 'old pals act' element to this place. Some posters get more leniency that others. Say they dont, but its a lie.

Absolutely, and SP's antics in the transfer thread completely support that. Apparently it was hilarious when he was doing those 'Sign Bent' posts, probably because he was doing it in the context of post-modern irony or something whereas anyone else who did it probably just got a warning (they're unfunny whoever does them and in whatever context, incidentally).

[JohnHobbes]

It can be argued that it's due to thread derailing or whatever but most people have got the sense on who they decide to listen to, so in a lot of cases it seems like the mods are throwing out the baby with the bathwater when they just lock a thread altogether.

Yes, people can read or skip through all the thread derailing posts but why should they have to? When a thread jumps from 5 to 15 pages long, and the vast majority of that is due to several posters fighting back and forth, then it makes it hard to find the quality that is there. At which point, most (if not all) people stop posting anything on topic and it's just the ones fighting their positions, at which point the only thing to do is lock the thread.

What would you suggest is done? Just let threads go off topic and allow people to fight the same battles, over and over and over again, in any topic they feel like it? Make readers have to search for meaningful content? All it does is drive people into Flagpole, I'm one of the ones who only posted in the main forum when I started and now it's completely reversed.

What's happening here is similar to the transfer forum where the crap is restricted to one thread, so people can easily see what is important in the other threads and if they want to see the arguments/random musings then they can visit that single thread. Enforcing the same circular arguments to a single FSG thread or XYZ thread will not end discussion on RAWK. It will just ensure that it's kept in a location where I can choose to read it if I wish, otherwise we still get to write and see the same old rubbish we've always done so in all the other threads.

[rednich85]

There is no old pals act.  Some posters get more leniency than others because we think they represent the ethos of the site. 

Ethos of the site.

Is the ethos of the site to constantly slam most posters on the forum in every other post?

Weird.

[the 92A]

I'm all for moderation as long as we're all moderated the same and for the benefit of the forum.

There's an 'old pals act' element to this place. Some posters get more leniency that others. Say they dont, but its a lie.

Of course some posters get more leniency usually those that add to the site or who have a bit of humour about them. A posters that's contributed to the site generally gets  more leeway and is far more likely to get a pm warning them but mates of the moderation team have and will be banned. Most of the posters derailing threads would be gone if they only had ten posts and hadn't added to the site in the past

[yes]

This is part of why we are doing this.  The threads get locked when they become essentially the same slanging match between the same people.  We hope that by getting those who are the most vocal to back off a bit then these discussions can proceed more sensibly and the threads remain open.

This is not about stymieing debate but about allowing it to happen.

I appreciate that Mayo but to start saying that people can't take the piss out of each other is going to make the place very sterile. Indeed, I'd go as far as saying it's impossible on a site that is essentially for Scouse football fans.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

Absolutely, and SP's antics in the transfer thread completely support that. Apparently it was hilarious when he was doing those 'Sign Bent' posts, probably because he was doing it in the context of post-modern irony or something whereas anyone else who did it probably just got a warning (they're unfunny whoever does them and in whatever context, incidentally).

Those sort of "Sign Bent" threads happen every transfer forum and have been started by any number of users.  As far as I am aware nobody has ever been banned or warned for starting one.  SP is one of the more active mods in the transfer forum and those threads both add a little levity and act as a usual reminder of how the transfer forum is viewed.  A reminder that is needed given how serious some posters seem to take it in there.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

I appreciate that Mayo but to start saying that people can't take the piss out of each other is going to make the place very sterile. Indeed, I'd go as far as saying it's impossible on a site that is essentially for Scouse football fans.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I don't think anyone is saying people cannot take the piss...   not sure where that has come from to be honest.  And if we are playing aphorisms...

All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

[yes]

Yes, people can read or skip through all the thread derailing posts but why should they have to? When a thread jumps from 5 to 15 pages long, and the vast majority of that is due to several posters fighting back and forth, then it makes it hard to find the quality that is there. At which point, most (if not all) people stop posting anything on topic and it's just the ones fighting their positions, at which point the only thing to do is lock the thread.

What would you suggest is done? Just let threads go off topic and allow people to fight the same battles, over and over and over again, in any topic they feel like it? Make readers have to search for meaningful content? All it does is drive people into Flagpole, I'm one of the ones who only posted in the main forum when I started and now it's completely reversed.

What's happening here is similar to the transfer forum where the crap is restricted to one thread, so people can easily see what is important in the other threads and if they want to see the arguments/random musings then they can visit that single thread. Enforcing the same circular arguments to a single FSG thread or XYZ thread will not end discussion on RAWK. It will just ensure that it's kept in a location where I can choose to read it if I wish, otherwise we still get to write and see the same old rubbish we've always done so in all the other threads.

No, I suggest you go and read a broadsheet rather than come on a public football fan forum. You don't willingly walk into a lion's den and then moan about the lions.

[the 92A]

Last thing we want is no humour . Where have we said that?

[Benimar Col]

I concur.
Mods, is it possible to issue 'warnings' for repeated 'offenders' instead of shutting the thread down?

maybe a deletion of the offending post and a warning of a ban, but moreso a detailed explanation via pm other than, you have been banned for talking shite ( speaking though experience )

some people's shite might be others people strong views or beliefs

[yes]

I don't think anyone is saying people cannot take the piss...   not sure where that has come from to be honest.  And if we are playing aphorisms...

All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

Who are the good men? 

The 'no pisstaking allowed' thing is in the opening post.

How about - one often meets his destiny on the road he takes to avoid it?

[yes]

Last thing we want is no humour . Where have we said that?

Opening post quite clearly says that pisstaking is unacceptable.