Topic: What is RAWK?

[royhendo]

Definitely think some form of limiting how many times an individual can post in one specific thread per day is a great idea. I'm thinking the player threads in particular - sometimes you get arguments between two or three people (the usual suspects you might say) that go on for hours, covering the same ground ad nauseam, with no hope of agreement as positions are too entrenched and it all ends in bickering and work for the mods. I know that because I've been guilty of it many times.

People would maybe try and make their posts count, right enough... if that makes sense.

[Alan_X]

But it might encourage people to try and produce pieces of writing to try and garner the most 'thumbs up'.
I think this is a winner to be honest.

That's not why the best quality writing is produced. Good writing comes from passion about the subject and an interest in writing for writings sake. It would be sad if RAWK turned into yet another site where people are writing to get 'likes' and 'thumbs up'.

[bepoq]

On the asterisked (*) threads we are happy to bring those back when required especially if there is demand to do so.  I think you are right, they did work. The main drawback with them is the workload for us, which probably limits how often we can have running at a time (and was probably the reason that some of the original ones never got moderated as tightly as you initially hoped).

Hope all that makes sense.

aye, I see your point. any point in designating temporary dedicated moderators for individual threads? or for all * threads as you did for the transfer forum?

[L666KOP]

That's not why the best quality writing is produced. Good writing comes from passion about the subject and an interest in writing for writings sake. It would be sad if RAWK turned into yet another site where people are writing to get 'likes' and 'thumbs up'.

It wasn't intended to come out the way it did  .
I understand what you're saying, but there's no harm in trying to encourage better standards of writing.

I hate it when people say "..............is shite, fuck him off"

It may well be true, but if that's the first line of a well thought out piece of writing it's easier to swallow, and is more likely to provoke a reasoned response, rather than the usual "fuck off", this then leads to the old "superfan" retort etc etc, the thread disintergates and get's locked.

[conman]

Only thing I'd add is that we're often short of volunteers for in match commentary and one or two poor sods seem to do every game so perhaps we could widen the pool of volunteers for that? It's quite good fun to do and some do appreciate it.

You can add me to the list, ill try to help out when i can.

But it might encourage people to try and produce pieces of writing to try and garner the most 'thumbs up'.
I think this is a winner to be honest.

and a full analytics suite would be nice too...

[Ronnie1932]

I agree about a rumours section. It doesn't have to be in the main forum. 

[Barney_Rubble]

Only thing I'd add is that we're often short of volunteers for in match commentary and one or two poor sods seem to do every game so perhaps we could widen the pool of volunteers for that? It's quite good fun to do and some do appreciate it.

We should review the situation and put out a request for volunteers.

p.s. By the way Roy, I just took you off that list.

[Vulmea]

What is RAWK?

Is it a trick question like on call my bluff?

1. Is it the green globby stuff you get at the back of you throat when you retch?
2. Is it the sound made by a new born Raven?
3. Is it the most popular unofficial LFC discussion forum in the world?

The only one you'd discount is 3 - we dont even play in red and white anymore ffs!

I know diddly squat about the workings of a site but I do know you do a great job on here. I think you need to be careful though - the road to hell is paved with good intentions - management by metrics will mean you'll get what you measure.

On the face of it you want intelligent informed posts but a lot of those posts are generated off the back of daft one liners or ridiculous rants - take away those sparks and it could become very moribond.

You want to encourage young reds to get involved but at the same time make them read long winded but well intentioned opinion pieces (thats just my posts without the good intentions) rather being able to express themselves as they want to?

Maybe you need a couple of younger mods, innit?

Maybe protocols to intercept the 'offensive',  'he's shite' or 'sack the manager' posts - maybe a period of probation where posts come with a health warning, are greyed out or can't be quoted or are just generally easier to moderate somehow. Maybe the thread owner has to moderate the thread and you can only open threads once you are proven ? Maybe a newbie board for people who didn't sign up til 2005?

I aint good at the big brother thing but there's got to be a place to be able to post from your gut and your brain.

[L666KOP]

and a full analytics suite would be nice too...

I'm on it, I've so far assembled a rusty Abacus and 12 'jumping' beans.
 

[Cruiser]

Are there still plans for a Hall of fame sub-forum?

Would be a classic and help to separate all the present ongoings getting mixed with the past.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

Are there still plans for a Hall of fame sub-forum?

Would be a classic and help to separate all the present ongoings getting mixed with the past.

We're looking at it mate - and I think we're generally in favour if we can come up with a way that it will work

[Camarero25]

Absolutely hate the idea of any limit to how often you can post, to be honest.

[Hinesy]

 

Absolutely hate the idea of any limit to how often you can post, to be honest.

I agree. I also think there's a problem in stopping posting "Like" or "Great thread" as it stops the good threads getting bumped up the board and lets all be totally honest I bet hardly 1% of this site goes beyond page 1 of the main board, scanning it for stuff and then moving on. Certainly I bet no-one ventures into page 3 or 4 for a look about on a regular basis.

Yet so far many of the wants from you guys has revolved around members posting one word answers such as "Like" or "this"; or inflammatory comments or plain ol shite. These clog up threads and also useless threads stop the better ones rising up the page.

My honest answer is that the membership, as we also do,  has a massive responsibility on the site. If people stopped commenting on shite threads, or reported them to mods, they'd disappear. If people stopped posting inane comments then the threads would improve.

Of course, as I pointed out, if you stop posting "This" or "great post" then the good threads will sink as they don't get bumped back up the board so its catch 22 all round. But the fact remains that you and we together have a responsibility to the site. Its not the mods who post persistent shite and abuse, sure we'll moderate those comments out when we can, but when many people are asking for 'less heavy moderation' what they actually mean is less heavy moderation on the things they think shouldn't be heavily moderated.

I know that may sound obvious but one man's insult is another's funny retort. We say we want less shite but are still all guilty of doing it; we say we want less one word posts, yet the whole way this forum works is by date and without the comments from people who like it but have nothing to add, many good threads would sink...

not easy...

[RJH]

Definitely think some form of limiting how many times an individual can post in one specific thread per day is a great idea. I'm thinking the player threads in particular - sometimes you get arguments between two or three people (the usual suspects you might say) that go on for hours, covering the same ground ad nauseam, with no hope of agreement as positions are too entrenched and it all ends in bickering and work for the mods. I know that because I've been guilty of it many times.

The thing is though, there are occasions where there are sensible debates in quick-moving threads that mean people end up making a lot of posts, without there being anything wrong with the quality/content of them.

The problem is that any kind of automatic system can't differentiate between those situations and the ones you're describing.
I think there needs to be a human element.

[The 5th Benitle]

The thing is though, there are occasions where there are sensible debates in quick-moving threads that mean people end up making a lot of posts, without there being anything wrong with the quality/content of them.

The problem is that any kind of automatic system can't differentiate between those situations and the ones you're describing.
I think there needs to be a human element.

Yeah it's a fair point.

I was thinking of one topic and one poster in particular, I'll admit

[Sangria]

On the Popularity contest, I'd be in favour of there being a bit more of a sort of 2nd tier of posters, who may not be RAWK Scribes, but usually have something interesting and valid to say (when they're not getting into arguments with the Rafa Haters eh FS???).  Perhaps your internal list could be used to add them to a widget or something which would enable those of us who usually enjoy, say, Gremista, or Fat Scouser's posts can be linked straight there?

When I spot that someone usually worth reading has been on, I go to their profile and search posts by to see their latest discussions. You can add them to your buddies list (the alternative to the ignore list) so you can see at a glance who's online.

[rafathegaffa83]

One thing that becomes annoying that would be nice to fix is how good threads (particularly within the transfer forum) get derailed with the same old hackneyed, awful jokes (i.e. Fuck it, it's Gomis; Uruguayanese etc) and ultimately end up getting locked when it absolutely snowballs. It's annoying on several levels, including the fact that it often destroys good debate, results in additional posts containing the same joke that become tiresome to wade through and takes the mods away from dealing with other areas.

Is there any way that can be corrected, other than through continued mod policing?

[Hinesy]

One thing that becomes annoying that would be nice to fix is how good threads (particularly within the transfer forum) get derailed with the same old hackneyed, awful jokes (i.e. Fuck it, it's Gomis; Uruguayanese etc) and ultimately end up getting locked when it absolutely snowballs. It's annoying on several levels, including the fact that it often destroys good debate, results in additional posts containing the same joke that become tiresome to wade through and takes the mods away from dealing with other areas.

Is there any way that can be corrected, other than through continued mod policing?

Well if enough people agree with you and are pissed off with that kind of thing, we'll start muting persistent offenders and again, use the report to mod button for persistently derailing a thread and we'll do something about it

[-RedTilDead-]

Following this when any changes are proposed  will it be possible to have a poll for each change to ensure the majority want it?

[Rafa_La]

Absolutely hate the idea of any limit to how often you can post, to be honest.

Agree there.

With users being in different time zones such limitations could sharply curtail their input.

(Makes senses to me anyhoos )

[Rafa_La]

Well if enough people agree with you and are pissed off with that kind of thing, we'll start muting persistent offenders and again, use the report to mod button for persistently derailing a thread and we'll do something about it

Another .2p

Agree with the report to mod feature.

However I respectfully suggest a revamp of the system (somehow).

Happens here, used happen on lfctv. 

Users acting in good faith end up getting a notice of ause of the report button.
Compounds issues. 
Shyte posts happen but going on report for reporting the shyte is not reasonable.
Ineffective imo.

[redbyrdz]

One other thing that makes 'reporting' difficult is that you have to pick a specific post. But often it is not really a specific post derailing the thread, but a succession of posts and its quite hard to tell where it started or whose fault it was.

Maybe we could have a 'talk to a mod' thread running in feedback, where you could just post when you see something that needs attention, but you aren't quite sure which bit exactly?

[Trada]

Maybe if someone reports one of your posts you should get a PM letting you know that one of your posts have been reported so you can delete it yourself.

I got a ban once for a joke that I didn't know upset anyone and suddenly found myself banned and I would have been more that happy to have deleted it if I had know it had upset someone.

What makes it worse the joke wasn't even that funny and was only three words.

[Rafa_La]

Maybe if someone reports one of your posts you should get a PM letting you know that one of your posts have been reported so you can delete it yourself.

I got a ban once for a joke that I didn't know upset anyone and suddenly found myself banned and I would have been more that happy to have deleted it if I had know it had upset someone.

What makes it worse the joke wasn't even that funny and was only three words.

What if the user declined to do that?
Sure the majority would.  There would be exceptions. Tendency then is for counterproductive reaction.

[Trada]

What if the user declined to do that?
Sure the majority would.  There would be exceptions. Tendency then is for counterproductive reaction.

Then they would just get the punishment dished out to them like normal.

Of course a simple delete of your message won't really help sometimes,  If it upset a lot of people I guess it would have been quoted a few times.

[AlexanderKruseBerg]

But it might encourage people to try and produce pieces of writing to try and garner the most 'thumbs up'.
I think this is a winner to be honest.

I don't agree with that. The post with the most "thumbs up" is not necessarily the best "piece of writing".

Only the post that most agree with.

[BEAST]

a couple of things to clean up the threads (might've already been posted)

1. anyone who +1's or simply quotes another post in full but does not add any text of their own should face the banhammer, it clutters up threads

2. purposefully derailing threads by trying to be a smartass about spelling,grammar, phrases etc ..... examples being the dick swinging contest over the correct way to spell Johan Cruyff in the thread about him maybe being approached for DOF and the usual nonsense, ie "what's an EPL"

[rafathegaffa83]

Well if enough people agree with you and are pissed off with that kind of thing, we'll start muting persistent offenders and again, use the report to mod button for persistently derailing a thread and we'll do something about it

Thanks for the response

[Alan_X]

One other thing that makes 'reporting' difficult is that you have to pick a specific post. But often it is not really a specific post derailing the thread, but a succession of posts and its quite hard to tell where it started or whose fault it was.

Maybe we could have a 'talk to a mod' thread running in feedback, where you could just post when you see something that needs attention, but you aren't quite sure which bit exactly?

There's a comment box - just add a note saying exactly that - "hi mods, not this post specifically but the threads getting out of hand...'

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

Following this when any changes are proposed  will it be possible to have a poll for each change to ensure the majority want it?

Hell no.  This is not a democracy.  We may be caring and listening soup nazi's but at the end of the day RAWK's still a fascist dictatorship

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

One other thing that makes 'reporting' difficult is that you have to pick a specific post. But often it is not really a specific post derailing the thread, but a succession of posts and its quite hard to tell where it started or whose fault it was.

Maybe we could have a 'talk to a mod' thread running in feedback, where you could just post when you see something that needs attention, but you aren't quite sure which bit exactly?

When you report to mod there is a comments box, just use that, ask us to take a look at how the thread is going not just this specific post.

[conman]

Are there still plans for a Hall of fame sub-forum?<br /><br />Would be a classic and help to separate all the present ongoings getting mixed with the past.

this would be great

[stewil007]

Biggest bugbear for me is people whose only response is 'THIS'........somebody says something, its gets quoted and below is one word....

THIS.

adds nothing to a discussion.

[macca888]

There's a comment box - just add a note saying exactly that - "hi mods, not this post specifically but the threads getting out of hand...'

When you report to mod there is a comments box, just use that, ask us to take a look at how the thread is going not just this specific post.

Would it be possible to get rid of the mods who are just basically a shitter and slower version of Alan? When it's all kicking off, we need men and women of action, not these half arsed eejits who come flying in heavy handed after the dust has settled.

No suggestion here but just a little food for thought. Just for one second, I just wanted to give a little thumbs up to the mods. As quite a few of the suggestions have alluded to, RAWKites in general would be much more trigger happy with the ban hammer than any of the mods are, and for the specific crime of disrespecting Kenny or calling for his head, I'd be as guilty of that as anyone. There have been a plethora of psychological studies detailing the correlation between anonymity and cruelty, which was encapsulated in a Derren Brown show where audience members had the fate of a member of the public in their hands. When the audience had no masks on, they were quite compassionate, but when they were masked, they were much more likely to make a cruel and controversial decision for the person such as getting him sacked. But in all my dealings with any of the mods, I've never found them anything but decent and fair. In that respect, I've found none of them are cruel just because of the anonymity of internet land. So I suppose the only possible suggestion in here is that any new mods that get "made" into the RAWK capo di tutto capo are similar fair and even handed characters as the ones we've already got.

[-RedTilDead-]

Hell no.  This is not a democracy.  We may be caring and listening soup nazi's but at the end of the day RAWK's still a fascist dictatorship

Oh, and this is some sort of clinical experiment on the masses? 

Seriously though I thought as you are trying to gauge opinion from the posters and several changes have been proposed that polls might be a suitable method. Easier for you than sifting opinion from posts I would have thought, and interesting for us all to see.

[Twelfth Man]

a couple of things to clean up the threads (might've already been posted)

1. anyone who +1's or simply quotes another post in full but does not add any text of their own should face the banhammer, it clutters up threads

I do this sometimes, because I agree with almost every point made. For example Passmaster Molby's excellent post in the 'Is it that bad a season?' thread, which surprisingly is in lockdown. I guess this is where the thumbs up function would come in handy. Also when a poster that I happen to enjoy reading does that in a long thread which I often do not have time to but skim through, I tend to stop and have a read of the quote. You would lose that in anonymous thumbs up.

[soberphobia]

Everyone ill want different things of course but as many on here are not in the UK and don't have access to the general media I would like to see a general football forum where all football even Non LFC can be discussed. I know it can be done in flagpole corner but they tend to get clogged in between a thread about UFC, Pro darts and ladies jelly wrestling.

I know many hate transfer speculation but a seperate section for it means all of that goes into one section. Funnily enough on sites that have transfer speculation available it pretty much dies down after a while and folks tend to focus more on football in general anyway and it doesn't turn into the zoo that the transfer thread seems to do in the summer when it let out of the cage here.

Just my opinion and someone else will think different. 

[Twelfth Man]

But it might encourage people to try and produce pieces of writing to try and garner the most 'thumbs up'.
I think this is a winner to be honest.

I think it is good idea to at least try out. In many threads including the 'Is it that bad a season?' one you can imagine it would turn into an unofficial poll. You would have Geoffstrong, Andy@Allerton and the more patient posters at one end and then I suspect the vast majority of posters behind Passmaster Molby's post. Just because one side of the debate has more thumbs up does not necessarily equate to wisdom, mind.

[Twelfth Man]

Definitely think some form of limiting how many times an individual can post in one specific thread per day is a great idea. I'm thinking the player threads in particular - sometimes you get arguments between two or three people (the usual suspects you might say) that go on for hours, covering the same ground ad nauseam, with no hope of agreement as positions are too entrenched and it all ends in bickering and work for the mods. I know that because I've been guilty of it many times.

Yes but this is part of the fun too. I don't take seriously any of the debates on here, its just a form of banter, with mates in the pub if you like, and I enjoy the endless debates on player's. We use to go round in circles in the Lucas debates a few years ago, and I must admit I was on the wrong side of the argument in that discussion. I see similar fault lines in the Henderson page but now from the other side if you like. It is good to pop into that thread 'humour' my former self, that is the Jordan critics.

[No666]

I do this sometimes, because I agree with almost every point made. For example Passmaster Molby's excellent post in the 'Is it that bad a season?' thread, which surprisingly is in lockdown. I guess this is where the thumbs up function would come in handy. 

There is already the facility for exceptional posts to be re-quoted in the Important Posts thread. This automatically means that the truly incisive and well expressed post is emphasised. I'm not sure that anything but the real rich double cream should rise to the top.