Topic: What is RAWK?

[lachesis]

RAWK has changed since I signed up. I think registering was closed and I had to try for ages before having a window of open registrations. Back at that time I wanted to sign up, there were a lot of good posts that you took time to read and wanted to reply to.

For better or worse RAWK has changed. Now it's not about the quality of the post but about what gets the most replies. It seems to have largely changed into 'copy media article here and post',  hundreds of replies slating journalists, rags and media in general and they don't actually go anywhere. The only point of their existence is to incite a torrent of 'fuck offs' and 'shit journo'.

I think the idea of reputation is flawed. Any post that attempts to reasonably dissect our awful form and ask questions of management will be given 'bad post' despite its content and the way its written and presented. That isn't a mod problem, it's a culture problem. Maybe post voting with a limit of 3 votes per day and the voters identitied are displayed at the bottom of the post as well, so 'trends' can be identified?

I'm not one to really 'start' many threads, I prefer to post in established threads for a particular topic but often you feel as though posts you make that have effort in are either not read or even looked at. It seems you have to want the celebrity of starting a topic to get the replies and scrutiny that should be the norm. It's this that demotivates people to be arsed.

The post match threads are all but useless. You refresh and read the first three pages and then you click page 4 and it's up to page 12 already. Absolutely pointless, given that 90% of all comments are one liners anyway. I'd bin them off completely. Start a post match thread one day later and up flood control to 5 minutes so people have to read and respond. Put a shoutbox somewhere during the match and leave it open for 3-4 hours after the game then close it again, most of the reactionary shite will get blurted in there.

On a larger scale, it's coming to the point for a lot of people who have been here a while where you think you've covered everything. There is limited current affairs topics that a football club provides, so there needs to be some sort of lead from the site content owners (possibly the editorial team - at the moment they are new so no pressure) that say we would like some topics on the following - but with balance. I think it would be interesting to generate face-off topics.

For instance 'Can Kenny Dalglish take us forward?', one person will write for the 'Yes' side and one for the 'No' side. Then there is a starting point where people can take a standpoint and not feel alone or bullied by one agenda from start to finish,

[killer-heels]

I know people have mentioned discussing the manager and players we have signed/will sign/could sign as two major topics, but to be honest I can see why such topics are locked, even outside the usual abuse, waffling lines. It seems as if within a few posts about Kenny, a post about Rafa pops up.

But I think the most annoying by far is when we are linked to a player or a rival is linked to a good player, we get these repetitious comments about how he is not British, he is not premiership proven etc. and as fact we will not sign him. It is well annoying.

I think the site is moderated fine. You can debate enough things and you can even get away with saying stupid things, which I do all too frequently. Also, if a thread is locked, does it really matter? I am sure people have better things to do than moan about a thread on a website being locked.

[MassDriver]

Just one more thing about the proposed 'like' function.

Terrible terrible idea in my opinion and would only encourage more cliques  , posters virtually patting each other and their mates on the back though it and making it into a popularity contest. Just like on Facebook.

[Finn Solomon]

Basically if for example you have a problem with me or my post deal with it the honest way and PM me and then off the heat of the boards we can explain our positions far better, dont post stuff on twitter that people cannot respond to.

Does that work though geoff? Just the other day on the 'Is this season that bad thread' you had a go at Passmaster Molby, accusing him of wanting Kenny out and Rafa back in when he did nothing of the sort. And when people called you out on it, not in an abusive way but in a 'You couldn't be more wrong way' you didn't respond, kicked up a big fuss, called us all pathetic and proclaimed you were going to work in your garden and you were back again not five minutes later.

Why do you care so much about what happens on Twitter, maybe if you sorted out yourself on RAWK in the first place nothing will happen.

[Outlaw]

Just want to follow-up on this one. I would agree that a moderators personal viewpoint should not influence unduly what they chooses to delete and what they choose to ignore.  There are some rules however which are part of the DNA of RAWK and respecting the players and manager of the club is one of those rules.  That does not mean they are beyond criticism, far from it, but it does mean that criticism has got to be thoughtfully delivered.  The line between what is acceptable and what is not will always be grey and hazy.

My dear, everything should be thoughtfully delivered!

[peelyon]

I think you mods are damned if you do and damned if you dont.  People hide behind a username and a computer and as its been said above, the games in which we lose are 10 times larger than the ones in which we win.

If we lose, cue every players thread being bumped with "hes crap, worst game ever" etc etc and what would be good debate threads just turn into mindless drivel.  People seem to LOVE being negative for the sake of it.  How does "hes crap" actually contribute in any way.

The problem is someone will give a decent post criticising a player and justifying their thoughts and it will just be swamped by crap.  It seems there is ten bad posts for every decent one.  I stay away from the LFC board after we lose and wait for the Round Table, as I cant stand trawling through 20 - 30 pages just to look for a few half decent posts.

The worst thing is if you over moderate the "hes crap" posts, then you get too many people then complaining about their post asking where its gone why its been locked or deleted or whatever.

I really dont know the answer.  I thought at the time of launch the (*) threads where great, but in the end people seemed to ignore the (*) completely and I can imagine that moderating them just became even more of a nightmare.

Realistically I would love a few threads to just dump all the crap drivel and shite into, and have seriously moderate any other thread we have.  That way for those that want to chill out, abuse each other or write garbage can be kept to themselves, as no matter how hard you try RAWK and any other forum will never ever be able to get rid of them all.  It then keeps any decent discussions decent, and would hopefully draw back some decent posters who have either moved on or got fed up.

Also, posts like "This" or just complete requotes with no comment at all just swamp and bloat threads and make it a chore to get through.  Its just another excuse for people to bump up their post count.  I'd delete every single one of these and start ban hammering the hell out of them.

You mods have it hard, and I understand that there is a large amount of "grey" area when it comes to moderating posts, thats why (IMO) you need to go whole hog or just let chaos commence.

I havent visited a player thread for a long long time, neither have I been in or around the post match too much either, and Id love to.  I think as the site gets older and older there is more chance of alienating the older posters who get fed up of reading the crap than you are of the new users. 

Good luck regardless, as like I said your damned if you do damned if you dont!

[Twelfth Man]

I miss the in game threads, the swearing, ribaldry. I found those threads very cathartic, reminded me of the 80s when I first started watching games. These days I know its a much more cerebral, sterile affair. Which is fine, I come here to be informed.


I don't think the site needs much editing at all, the good posts always get picked up and commented on.

I presume, this will be an attempt to make the site more of a proto-fanzine, rather than a discussion site. Articles and 'serious' writing given prominence over the 90 per cent chaff that I so enjoy.

[L666KOP]

And don't worry, I'm not necessarily interpreting that as meaning we are getting it right, it may be that we are clamping down hard in the wrong places and not clamping enough in others.

I'd say this is key mate, like I said last night if you were more ruthless in the 'quality' threads it would, I'd hope start to 'self police' much like the round table does.
But alternatively, like I also said perhaps a 'venting/blow off steam thread running alongside the post match thread where posters get a little bit more leeway to not neccessarily overstep the mark, but to perhaps 'push the boundaries' a bit more. Then lock it after 24hrs. Posters generally know what's acceptable, and what's not, and the 'more serious' posters could stay away.
A bit like a smoking room, if you don't want to chat shit and have a rant, don't go in??
 

[Yorkykopite]

This is actually one of the most readable threads on the board. Is that called irony? One thing's for sure - there's clearly a lot of goodwill towards the site. I think anyone who has made even a fleeting visit to other Liverpool sites - or those from other clubs - can appreciate what a brilliant job the RAWK mods have done over the years.

Most people are having a go at the one-liners ('Downing is shite, get rid'). They're like litter I suppose. You have to pretend they're not there otherwise you'll be constantly picking the stuff up. I think Arcadia made a good point when he said that 'self-editing' (ie choosing what or who to read and ignore) is an important part of enjoying the site. There are certain names I always look out for and always read and others who I automatically close my eyes to. But I imagine most of us do that. I don't know any other way of dealing with the crass one-liners (which are the absolute bane of other football sites). Should they ever be allowed to dominate then the whole site would go down I suppose. But we're a long way from that.

Having said that I wouldn't want to see a ban on one-liners (as someone suggested above). There's nothing like a pithy put down or a smart piece of laconic humour. And I come on to RAWK to be entertained too. There are some very funny people on here.

The hardest task for the mods must be the thing that Kev referred to. When a favourite player or manager is criticised or dissed, what do you do? Is it, for example, ok to ban the poster who doesn't like Carragher and has a sour way of expressing his/her thoughts? This happened to one of RAWK's best posters last week when he was banned for suggesting Dalglish might be moved upstairs. From this innocuous comment the inference was drawn that he was hoping for Kenny to be moved upstairs - therefore the ban. That's got to be a step too far surely, otherwise posters will start to censor their own perfectly legitimate opinions (which will make the place boring) or stop writing altogether.

[mactifosi]

The nature of chat/discussion forums has changed greatly in the last ten years due to the influence of youtube, twitter and other social media.
Many are encouraged to post one line throw away comments, especially by the online newspapers.
We may not like it but that has been the evolution and perhaps we need to address it rather than just keep moaning about it, hoping it will go away.

I don't post much as I would not consider myself knowledgeable enough to post on some topics.
I come here to read and learn, I wish more would take the same approach.

For me the biggest issue is the slagging off of players and managers when it's gets too personal.
Criticism is fine but personal attacks are not and I am sick of them - I used to try positive comments in the post match threads, I just avoid them now.

- I would love to be able to ignore/block some posters so that I don't see their posts - the twats posting personal insults about players.


- Maybe we should have a rant sub forum where people who want to rant can do so.
Perhaps this would keep the more enlightening discussion threads spam free.

Rant and round table forums?
- I think Andy@ should have his own sub forum 

[Alan_X]

The whole favouritism/clique thing isn't news to anyone on here including the mods. Complaints of this sort have been made repeatedly ever since I've been a member of this forum. Nothing will change.

RAWK is what it is, take it or leave it.

And you have to remember that there are a lot of people - many long time members - who know each other because they go to the match together or have got to know each other on here over the years. Is that a clique? I don't think it is. I knew no-one on here when I joined, but over time I've got to know people on the forum and at the match/in the pub.

Everyone is welcome on here unlike closed sites where you need a recommendation to get in. It's a community and it takes time to establish yourself. If you walked into a pub and give it the Billy-big-bollocks you'd get ignored or the piss ripped out of you if you were lucky. If you were unlucky you might get a slap. High-post counts don't mean someone's opinion is more valid, it probably does mean that they understand how the site works.

[Alan_X]

I presume, this will be an attempt to make the site more of a proto-fanzine, rather than a discussion site. Articles and 'serious' writing given prominence over the 90 per cent chaff that I so enjoy.

I don't think that's the case at all. Good writing was always at the heart of the site alongside the Boozer and the other non-Liverpool stuff. We're just trying to get it back to the right mix.

[JerseyKloppite]

Don't think there are any easy answers. RAWK is a great site but I also feel it has changed in the last couple of years.

I agree that on principle it seems a heavy touch approach to lock and bin perfectly reasonable threads on the performance of the team / players because a few idiots don't have a sense of decorum and perspective. I feel similarly with regards the transfer forum and some of the off topic stuff.

I don't like the idea of a thread to vent in - seems like a horrible idea to have somewhere with so much hate. If people get that angry over the internet they should be fucked off out of the forum as far as I'm concerned, with a couple of warnings then an outright ban.

I agree with a post on the first page. I like the RAWK cliques actually, I think they're natural and funny, but from time to time completely innocent or well meaning posts (not some of the stupid but unintentionally and perhaps short-sighted stuff on OTSD) get savaged for no reason. This does not encourage depate or difference of opinion. RAWK is both a community and an LFC fan site, and the two need to co-exist peacefully.

Having positive voting buttons to get good posts to the front page, or a separate 'excellent post' page or something, is a decent idea and one worth considering.

I actually think Ladyb's suggestion above is the best, and the one I was going to suggest myself. The site needs more mods. Those on here do an excellent job but can't be everywhere at once. A few more mods will make the editorial job easier - weed out pointless comments, try to steer debate a bit like they do in the transfer forum. Treading the fine line between over zealous moderation on what is essentially a football forum and a laissez-faire approach is extremely difficult, but so far it has been done well and I think on the whole RAWK pitches at a good level - some good debate well moderated. By far the best LFC forum out there, and the mods and posters would do well to remember that!

Maybe try out a few new mods in the transfer forum this summer?

[It's Jimmy Corkhill]

Got to agree regarding the posts suggesting an easing of the modding style.

There is enough stuff on here to cause arguments already. A thread to contain it will spill onto other threads. I'd say be stricter with the modding if anything, but give more leeway in terms of thread topics. A constructive criticism topic at the end of the season, with a warning in the OP about the consequences of posting ridiculous, non-argued shite, could be the acid test in terms of where the site could go.

[Twelfth Man]

The less editing the better. Let us work out our own rules, organically. The only time mods should step in is when people go against the site guidelines, abusing poster's, players, manager, infringing copyright etc. A soft-touch is much better. As subroc's post below shows, a too heavy handed approach to editing can rightly or wrongly breed mistrust, feelings of bias, unfairness and partisanship.


We already have a thread for quality posts people may have missed. We also have the round table discussions thread. I hope RAWK is not turned into a serious forum for wannabe writers only. It should have space for a wide umbrella of LFC fans, opinions and even the manner in which people express themselves. We can all aspire to write like Orwell but some of us (me) are still at the Jack and Jill went up the Hill stage.

[Alan_X]

I wasn't.

I was attempting to point out the hypocrisy exhibited by many posters in giving all kinds of abuse under the sun and calling him a 'classless c*nt' while posting in a rapidly inflating Hodgson threaad whose sole purpose was to mock and deride him.  And I got called a 'Manc' for that. That is acceptable I suppose?

I have made my point Alan , I don't think I'll be able to convince you so lets leave it at that eh?

(Edit: And you cannot seriously call the trash that was posted in the thread as 'debate' Alan , even by the loosest definition of the word)

First off, no the Manc jibe is used to easily and it's not acceptable (unless of course you are one of the regular Manc fifth columnists we have to deal with). However we can't pick it up every time.

Secondly, hypocrisy is an over-used word on here. Who was being hypocritical? Particular users or the site in general? 'RAWK' says this or 'RAWK' thinks that are meaningless. We are a community with wide raging views. If that makes RAWK hypocritical then in my view that's a good thing.

And in what way is it hypocritical to dislike Hodgson? Hodgson is disliked by many for specific reasons that have no relation to any other Liverpool manager or any other subject on these boards. The only way it would be hypocritical to dislike Hodgson would be if there was another face-rubbing, owl-faced manager who had no clue about the club to compare him to.

It seems to me you're talking about consistency not hypocrisy, and the nature of supporting a football team is that views change over time, even from one minute to the next during a game.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

I miss the in game threads, the swearing, ribaldry. I found those threads very cathartic, reminded me of the 80s when I first started watching games. These days I know its a much more cerebral, sterile affair. Which is fine, I come here to be informed.


I don't think the site needs much editing at all, the good posts always get picked up and commented on.

I presume, this will be an attempt to make the site more of a proto-fanzine, rather than a discussion site. Articles and 'serious' writing given prominence over the 90 per cent chaff that I so enjoy.

You presume wrongly mate.

Firstly there is no desire to remove swearing, ribaldry or humour. I want to see fan written away day reports which hopefully will be brimming with all three.

Also there is no desire to turn this into a po-faced fanzine that only values serious articles. RAWK has always been a home for good original writing but look at the list of writers on the front page and look when they last wrote.

We've taken our eye off the ball and let things go stale. New young writers should be getting encouragement and exposure not an old guard who left long ago.

[GBF]

I cant see much wrong within RAWK, however I would prefer if it does not over do the long essays style posts in the main forum - may be keep them in the "Opinion" section.  There is nothing wrong with them but it turn the discussion forum into a blog. 

Last but not least, I could not resist...

What is RAWK
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more
Oh, baby don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more

What is RAWK
Yeah

Oh, I don't know why you're not there
I give you my opinions, but you don't care
So what is right and what is wrong
Gimme a sign

What is RAWK
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more
What is RAWK
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more

Whoa whoa whoa, oooh oooh
Whoa whoa whoa, oooh oooh

[MassDriver]

First off, no the Manc jibe is used to easily and it's not acceptable (unless of course you are one of the regular Manc fifth columnists we have to deal with). However we can't pick it up every time.

Secondly, hypocrisy is an over-used word on here. Who was being hypocritical? Particular users or the site in general? 'RAWK' says this or 'RAWK' thinks that are meaningless. We are a community with wide raging views. If that makes RAWK hypocritical then in my view that's a good thing.

And in what way is it hypocritical to dislike Hodgson? Hodgson is disliked by many for specific reasons that have no relation to any other Liverpool manager or any other subject on these boards. The only way it would be hypocritical to dislike Hodgson would be if there was another face-rubbing, owl-faced manager who had no clue about the club to compare him to.

It seems to me you're talking about consistency not hypocrisy, and the nature of supporting a football team is that views change over time, even from one minute to the next during a game.

Hypocritical in the sense that calling him the epitome of 'classlessness' while exhibiting a distinct of lack of class in terms in mocking , deriding and abusing a man who should be no more than an irrelevant footnote in our history , something to be forgotten and ignored rather than having pages of pages of the same childish(apparently funny to many) crap. That is what I meant back then and I stand by it.

However that is not the point I am trying to make here. Did my acerbic criticism of the thread and its contents and my attempt to defend my point of view merit a 40 % warning and being branded as a 'wum' by a moderator?  That moderator could so easily have pmed me and asked me to  keep out of the thread or do it as a comment in the thread itself instead of handing out a heavy warning in the first instance , especially considering I was not breaking any guidelines per se , just expressing my views(albeit in an acerbic/sarcastic manner) and defending myself from being flamed(incidentally by a poster who I have had the displeasure of locking horns with again recently , a poster who now is in my ignore list). The poster who was flaming me and the poster who called me a "Manc' got absolutely nothing instead and carried on merrily.

That is what I meant by in my initial post in this thread , i.e if you go against popular opinion , you don't get cut much slack and more often than not , you fall into the trap of reacting to multiple flames and getting warned/muted/banned for your troubles , irrespective of how you put your view across. I was expressing my displeasure in that thread and I did not make more than 5-6 posts in any case so with all due respect Alan , my warning was harsh and quite unwarranted in my opinion.

I am not sure I am able to get my point across to you. And as I said , I am not here to complain against the warning or whinge. I took it and moved on.

I just put it all here to illustrate why people feel disillusioned with the moderation sometimes and think they have not been treated justly at all and as a consequence , go and vent on Twitter or Facebook or whatever(For the record , I have never done it and don't intend to do it either).

It's a humongous job to moderate a site of this scale with this many members and I fully understand the magnitude of task at hand.

"Jay Spearing - Better late than never"  to get rid?

A shining example of the inane pointless and absolutely unnecessary claptrap I refereed to in my first post in my opinion.

[Alan_X]

Also think the idea of mod assistants kind of thing could be a good idea. Some selected posters in opposite time zones to England could have some sort of power to cut-off threads spiralling out of control instead of being cleaned up in the morning by the regular mod team. Might make their work a little easier as I'm sure some people don't like using the 'report to moderator', myself included, even though as much as I'd want to, it just doesn't feel right.
.

Interesting - why don't you want to use report to moderator? All it does is flag a post and thread with your comment attached. The comment can just be 'mods, can you have a look at this?...'

You aren't grassing anyone up.

[SP]

Another thing I find a bit tough about the main forum is the player threads. I understand entirely why we have one thread per player, but sometimes if you want to discuss something specific - an interview, a performance, a specific aspect of their game, - it's just really daunting and off-putting to stick it in a thread which is already tens of pages long. I have been thinking about this a bit, and I'm not sure how you deal with that, because the main forum becomes cluttered if you allow separate threads. Maybe it's just something I need to deal with . But sometimes there's an observation that I'd like to make and I just think, "like fuck am I reading through 10 pages to find out if it's been said". That's the problem with a forum that's so big. And I suppose that's why it's such a challenge to moderate it effectively and to everyone's liking.

If you have an original article about a player, or a news source that you can draw interesting points from, I personally would rather that it was posted in a new topic. Lazy cut and paste OPs can get merged into the mega player topic as unless it usually degenerates into the same bickering. The more effort that someone puts into an original topic, the more effort I make to preserve the topic rather than just binning it...

[Crosby Nick]

In terms of content, there is some amazing stuff posted on RAWK. Top quality writing, analysis and opinion pieces. The problem is that they're difficult to find. A lot have mentioned the Round Table discussions as a plus, and I agree. But there's too little else of that quality, and very little away from direct match analysis.


I learnt SO much from RAWK back in the day. This place taught me what it means to be a Liverpool supporter, it developed my inherent lefty-leanings and it taught me the rights and the wrongs of support. In modern football that is something that we need more than ever. So I have absolutely no issues whatsoever with an approach which forces people to conform to that. If they won't be educated by the things that we write, then honestly, more fool them, and RAWK is better off without them until they learn what it unique about this club.

I agree with both of Rhi’s points here. When I first discovered RAWK, possibly before I even signed up I loved reading through all the long posts on here rather than all the main threads. There were loads of stories about Euro away trips and other things that were well written, funny and also educational. There does seem a lot less of these types of posts now. Maybe they do still exist but given the sheer scale of the place now compared to how it was back then (2004ish) and the amount of posts per day you get now, especially in the Liverpool boards then it is all too easy to miss some great threads. I know there is the Opinion sub forum and it’s possibly my own fault as I don’t look in there as often as I should – is that where the ‘good’ stuff still gets moved to.

I’d love to write more (write more depth, not just post more!... can’t explain why my post count has suddenly gone through the roof of late) but feel a bit limited in what I can write about. Debates about current players and managers just go in an endless cycle of for and against and then descend into name calling. I’d write the odd nostalgic piece about former players or former great matches (although others would do them more justice) if there was an appetite for that sort of thing.

Rhi’s second point is important too I think. We get ridiculed for it externally but who cares – I think Liverpool fans are a bit different. I think the traditions we have and the things we believe in and fight for are worth preserving. I suppose there has to be an effort not to be too condescending or ‘preachy’ but RAWK could and should be a great place for supporters from overseas, all over the UK or even closer to home who still want to learn about the club and the traditions.

[Tomo!]

Question for the mods regarding the player threads.


Is it the same old faces who tend to start the process of derailing or abusing players that lead to them getting locked?

Carragher conspiracy theories.
Kuyt there's a few nailed on to rip into him after a poor game.
Henderson, there's a couple of dead certs to be in there after a bad result regardless of how he's played.

I can handle the odd " he's fucking shit " comment that's been posted out of frustration better than the pre meditated trolling that happens.

[McSquared]

Maybe you can limit a members post count per day in a thread to stop arguing, repetitive posts and general wummery. Perhaps it would also make people think more about the quality of their posts. I prefer to read than post myself btw as their are far more informed people than me on here, which is what was attractive about RAWK in the first place.

[redbyrdz]

Interesting - why don't you want to use report to moderator? All it does is flag a post and thread with your comment attached. The comment can just be 'mods, can you have a look at this?...'

You aren't grassing anyone up.

It feels like grassing someone up though. Its like calling the teacher over. I understand why it is there, and that reporting things will make the whole forum better for everybody, but it still feels wrong. Don't think there's much that can be done about that though.

[SP]

Also think the idea of mod assistants kind of thing could be a good idea. Some selected posters in opposite time zones to England could have some sort of power to cut-off threads spiralling out of control instead of being cleaned up in the morning by the regular mod team. Might make their work a little easier as I'm sure some people don't like using the 'report to moderator', myself included, even though as much as I'd want to, it just doesn't feel right.

The "Report to Moderator" link is your friend. A timely heads up that a topic is going pear-shaped allows a mod to nudge it back on  course without having to go nuclear after the fact. It is far better to nip things in the bud by posting a "This topic is not about Rafa" message than have to delete 50 posts and issue a handful of warnings for posters abusing each other. But we can only do that is we know a topic is going pear shaped. Generally a lock / mass deletion / warning / banning fest means that we missed an opportunity to intervene earlier and head stuff off. But we are not omniscient, and do have lifes outside RAWK that sometimes need our attention - hence we rely on users reporting stuff, preferably before it becomes a train wreck that ends up being binned.

[subroc]

I dont think there is a need for any post limitations per day, etc. What is needed is for people to not get personal and just stick to the issues. Don't become abusive of others. Be courteous to everybody and give others the benefit of the doubt - in other words, practice the Golden Rule, i.e. treat others as you expect to be treated. Cream will rise to the surface - the good posts will be recognised as such by merit, not by a moderator's choice or because a favoured clique approves of it. If you do not like to read about a particular issue, don't read it. Vote with your keyboard, so to speak. The sheer volume of posts - regardless if their quality - is caused by the sheer number of people on this forum! That is a compliment to its success.

[Rafa_La]

Hinesy, I found some of the things you said in this thread a but curious. I'm responding to them with the intention of giving another perspective, not to single you out. I hope my comments are taken in the spirit they are intended.
A moderator's role should be to decide on the manner in which something should be discussed, not what should be discussed. That's for those wanting the discussion; the users of the forum. That's a general principle, from lowly forum moderators right up to high-court judges.

Maybe this just struck a cord with me because I'm an egalitarian, but what!? Why would it being an honour to be recognised by staff? It's my assumption that 'staff' are just posters with a slightly different set of permissions on a web forum. Aside from respecting the time a moderator takes out of their own life to help with the website, why would they be worthy of any more honour than any other poster?

The issue of custom titles is something done by the staff more as light humour than afflicting punishment. You state moderators have a role in deciding the manner of discussion.  Applying titles (imo) is part of their remit of running the forum. Your reaction appears you do not appreciate this. A user deeply hurt by an awarded title can have it removed rather than moaning. Humour differs for everyone

[JerseyKloppite]

The "Report to Moderator" link is your friend. A timely heads up that a topic is going pear-shaped allows a mod to nudge it back on  course without having to go nuclear after the fact. It is far better to nip things in the bud by posting a "This topic is not about Rafa" message than have to delete 50 posts and issue a handful of warnings for posters abusing each other. But we can only do that is we know a topic is going pear shaped. Generally a lock / mass deletion / warning / banning fest means that we missed an opportunity to intervene earlier and head stuff off. But we are not omniscient, and do have lifes outside RAWK that sometimes need our attention - hence we rely on users reporting stuff, preferably before it becomes a train wreck that ends up being binned.

I agree. I'd never used it before until recently, but I've flagged a few posts, mainly where people were deliberately wumming, or trying to get a rise out of people. I don't take it lightly, but for all the people saying we need more moderation (myself included) it is important to remember that in a topic which spawns 30 pages in an hour, the mods can't and shouldn't have to bother, keepign up with and reading every post.

The members have to police themselves - it's not as though the mods are going to give you grief about it if they diagree (probably...)

[Pope Dave]

Cracking post Dave, you should do it more often

Lots of good points there.  We do attempt to be gatekeepers and we do attempt to allow opinions to be expressed without the poster being bullied by the mob.  Often what you're seeing as laissez faire moderating is not an editorial decision at all but simply ignorance.  We may not know it is happening.  Which is where the Report to Mod button comes in.  We always look at them and on a site this size we are increasingly reliant on users helping us to spot problems.

And point taken on pruning rather than locking.  Perhaps we need to be cleverer in how we focus our efforts.  I am with Alan on the "venting" thing.  I just don't get it.  You know hardly anyone will read it, you know hardly anyone will respond to it and even if they do chances are you will miss it.   However perhaps there is an argument that we just leave the post-match threads unmoderated, let people vent, let people yell shit at each other and concentrate our efforts on moderating more effectively elsewhere?  Then we just bin the whole thing in the morning and have a more reasoned, slower moving, moderated discussion.

Thank you!

I think there's a lot to be said for post-match venting, but clearly it's a difficult thing to police because the threads spore very quickly. This in turn suggests that most of the comments in those threads aren't actually read by many, because people are writing hurriedly and, well, venting. So I think allowing the comments to grow organically then quarantining them for the more-reasoned discussion makes sense, and this is what I think the nature of the round-table threads is, where discussion is certainly more keenly informed.

But as much as there's a place for the round-table, I think there is also probably a place for a shit-can. I have a lot of respect for many posters on here, and learn a lot from them about the team I've always supported and the game itself. RAWK, for me, is primarily an educational tool. Unfortunately a lot of the teachers are drunk. A designated place to put all that garbage is a good idea. I don't think it needs to be closed, just given a wide berth and a health warning.

It's frustrating that forum users can't be trusted more to not act like dicks or to use the spell-checker, but the internet makes us all stupid. One thing I absolutely would endorse though is a ban on one-word posts, perhaps with public flogging for those posting 'this'.

Nice avatar too

The Captain has it pegged.

[Outlaw]

The issue of custom titles is something done by the staff more as light humour than afflicting punishment. You state moderators have a role in deciding the manner of discussion.  Applying titles (imo) is part of their remit of running the forum. Your reaction appears you do not appreciate this. A user deeply hurt by an awarded title can have it removed rather than moaning. Humour differs for everyone

I've no issue with custom titles. I didn't even comment on them, just the 'honour of being recognised by staff' thing.

[Harinder]

Anyway, you'll be delighted to know that we also have plans to try and encourage more writing the history of LFC, and the whole experience of going to the match through the years.  Yeah, auld arses, stand by your zimmers, we're coming for ya!

Would this be by decade? It would be great not only from an auld arse perspective but those who haven't been around as long

[RedMarko]

Personally, I have not seen a major problem with how the forum is moderated. It just seems to me that posting habits have changed.

As mentioned on numerous occasions already, there was a time when you came on here to be educated/entertained/informed. Personally, I only commented on a topic if it was of particular relevance, I had a major issue with it, or I felt kudos was due.

Nowadays, it seems that a topic starting is like a magnet for comment regardless of the topic subject matter or quality.

I've noticed that post counts seem to be shooting up nowadays. There was a time when only a very few would have greater than a few thousand posts. Of course, you expect this number to increase with time, but it seems to have exploded in recent years with posters hitting 10K posts. There are quite a few posters out there with >10K posts who I can honestly say  I have not read many good articles from.

This is not meant to be having a go at such posters. It is simply the way the forum has turned over time. It seems closer to a conversational site than a site for articles and responses. Some of the threads look more like an MSN conversation than a forum discussion.

I often wonder about the Scribe subsection of the forum and whether or not it still follows the pattern the rest of the site did up to a few years ago.

All in all, I'm not sure there is much can be done to get the site back to where it once was. I'm not sure it can be done. However, I for one would like to see more heavy handed deletion of posts (not necessarily with censure) - if it's shite that adds nothing but wummery, delete it. Not for censorship mind, just for quality control

[MassDriver]

On a lighter vein , regarding custom titles, I got mine for being a 'tit' and posting while high as a kite. 

I am a custom tit now...

[jooneyisdagod]

Johnny as one of the auld arses, we generally like to talk bollocks about watch with mother than bring in the main site stuff, the problem lately is two fold we see people making comments about Kenny and yes we are rightly very protective of him, however we also know that he will be aware of his mistakes, but there is an element of this club still owes him more time and more respect than some are willing to give him on a daily basis, we also know that sticking with a manager works in the long run, if he is the right manager. So it is not a clique talking down to anyone it is a few people with experience of shit seasons calling for a little more patience.

That said recently yes we all got a little angry with a poster making comments on twitter in which the poster targetted was going to leave Rawk over this however was sorted over a PM as it should be in here and is now water under the bridge,

but cliques are not confined to the older posters, for example we also now have a clique in twitter involved with a banned poster openly targetting a few posters in here like some tag team, this leads for me to distrust some genuine views as maybe being part of this group for example. If we are serious about getting rid of these cliques as you call it then people need to be a little more honest and upfront rather than show one face in here and then call posters and the mods c**ts on twitter.

Basically if for example you have a problem with me or my post deal with it the honest way and PM me and then off the heat of the boards we can explain our positions far better, dont post stuff on twitter that people cannot respond to.

You have every right to your opinion that Kenny needs more time just as well as the other person has every right to hold an opinion that Kenny must go.  The problem I have is that often you find a person that thinks Kenny should go is scared to even voice his opinion because of the shitstorm that he will have to endure from numerous posters who sit on the other side of the fence.  Its the insults and the problem of many against one that I dislike.  I suppose anyone with a divergent opinion faces this issue but its the problem of almost unionisation amongst those with a different opinion that causes problems. 

I don't want to take names but there are numerous posters that would have received permanent bans by now for all the abuse they throw around if they weren't old timers and that is just not right. 

I'm no great wordsmith.  English is probably not my first language and I try to express myself as best as I can.  Sometimes I type a few paragraphs and at other times I type just a couple of lines.  And I have been as guilty as many others of having posted sarcastic one liners but even if I wanted to sit and type a better thought out post sometimes I wonder if its worth all the hassle simply because I know a bunch of people are probably going to jump on it and call me all sorts which I will need to defend myself against before I snap and cop a ban or get a thread locked because it was going over the same territory. 

[JerseyKloppite]

On a similar note, I wonder whether bringing the song archive up to date might be something we could look at too? More than happy to work on that if no-one else is. It's a really useful resource, and could probably be more than what it is now.

Agreed, I'm keen for this. I don't think there is enough education about the history of the club, and what it means to be a supporter. Singing at the game is a huge part of this for Liverpool.

To be honest, it's not just RAWK. If you go to the match these days the behaviour of the average supporter has changed, even in the past decade or so. I went to my first game in 2000 and sat in the main stand. Didn't sing constantly (especially me as I didn't know the words...) but the atmosphere was good and positive.

These days if I sit on the Kop I tend to enjoy it - just for kicks for the Swansea game I got a seat in the paddock behind the benches. Absolute silence, save for the occasional whinge or moan. People seem to just support the team for the sake of it, rather than getting any enjoyment out of the matchday experience.

But these are comments for another thread; my point being that as the nature of the matchgonig fan has changed, so the natuer of football fans in general, and forum posters, has also changed.

[bravarado7]

The moderation here is very good. Particularly the concept of Round Table threads which allows people to have a more sanity-filled discussion of the game. The way people react in Post match threads is a reflection of their true feelings. We loose and it goes boom in no time. We win and it moves at a snail's pace. That's to be understood given that we all are human beings at the end of the day and have a heart which will be hurt if the team loses and am pretty sure many posters cant find a better place to show their 'grief' ( i call it 'grief' not knee-jerking). Thats when the moderation is pretty difficult and i feel you guys do a great job in letting people vent that anger out.

[Sir Harvest Fields]

I dont agree with the clique comments to be honest. I thinks it more that the posters know each other fairly well, in person or otherwise , and when a poster says something some might find harsh ( like Macca888 ) and its not been pulled up, its probably due to the fact most have become used to his sense of humour and know to take it as a piss take.

Ill admit i rarely go into the main boards as its a right mess. After a defeat id rather stab a pen in my good eye than read some of the crap going on. I think the moderation is fine to be honest, i did get a warning and was watched as i used a word i didnt know could be offensive, but that was an honest mistake and a word thats used a lot round my way, my other bans were totally deserved

Id like the site to be easier to navigate though.I have a few mates on here who dont even know how to get to some of it ( dozy twats ) Apart from that i think its very well run, just a shame about the post game threads that put people off going in the main boards. Oh, and good job on getting rid of the in game thread.

[RooiBefok]

On every sporting forum you will get contributors who are 'Pro' a certain player and conversely those who are 'Anti' the same player.

Arguments either way on a common thread is what results in one contributor eventually calling an opposition contributor 'You huge female reproductive organ'!

The simple solution is to have two threads for each player/staff member - One thread 'Pro' and the other 'Anti'.

Post something negative on the 'Pro' and something positive on the 'Anti' and expect a 1 week ban for the first offense; 2 weeks ban for the second offense etc.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

For me RAWK is a place where I can talk to other match going fans and I've met a fair few in 'real life' because I've spoken to them on RAWK. Always great meeting someone in Liverpool/At Anfield when you've talked to them online and belting when you meet them on away days in England or even better in far flung corners of Europe with the Reds. Also met a fair few people - some not match going - when I've been on holiday all around the World. Excellent stuff.