Topic: What is RAWK?

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

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.

  I am the Claridge to Al's Dalglish.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

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

Hawthorne Effect

[Hinesy]

limiting daily posts sounds to me like punishing the majority for the minority's actions. This isn't a school where we say "you've ruined it for everyone". We should police thread derailers more harshly not stop everyone else's fun.
Secondly unless a totally new way of thread management is designed and implemented then good threads will sink if we stop people posting 'like' etc. As I said last night, member responsibility in not cluttering up boards with shite would be one way to help the better threads stay visible.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

limiting daily posts sounds to me like punishing the majority for the minority's actions. This isn't a school where we say "you've ruined it for everyone". We should police thread derailers more harshly not stop everyone else's fun.
Secondly unless a totally new way of thread management is designed and implemented then good threads will sink if we stop people posting 'like' etc. As I said last night, member responsibility in not cluttering up boards with shite would be one way to help the better threads stay visible.

The conundrum is this. Can we come up with a mechanism that allows users to tell the author they found the OP interesting and simultaneously bumps the post, but which is not as intrusive on general readability as quoting the whole thing and adding "This".

Does a quick one-line comment saying "Really enjoyed that, thanks for posting" really disrupt the flow of debate?  Should we be encouraging them rather than discouraging?

[flashman]

The conundrum is this. Can we come up with a mechanism that allows users to tell the author they found the OP interesting and simultaneously bumps the post, but which is not as intrusive on general readability as quoting the whole thing and adding "This".

Does a quick one-line comment saying "Really enjoyed that, thanks for posting" really disrupt the flow of debate?  Should we be encouraging them rather than discouraging?

For me its not disrupting the debate, its adding pages and pages of posts that add nothing, especially if the whole post is requoted. So instead of a round the table of 4 pages, it becomes 20 odd pages which is more difficult to read (esp at work!!).

Couldn't the "like" button also move the thread back to the top of the page, in the same way that posting "this" does?
Also as I mentioned earlier, the post doesn't have to have "liked by 234 people" next to it, it could just be shaded a diffferent colour to stand out. Result would be a reduction in size of thread to a manageable level and the ability for quality posts to stand out.

I would suggest this option for all posts, as it is often the posts after the initial OP that are the real crackers.

[Alan_X]

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.

We're looking for good ideas that will improve the site and fit its ethos not the most popular ideas. 

Besides, who votes? We have 38,000 members. As this thread has shown there are many who read a lot and post occasionally or not at all. Wouldn't it be more unfair to make changes on the vote of a vocal minority with their own agenda rather than the considered, impartial and Godlike opinions of the mods. Maybe we should allow changes to be made if 75% of the members vote for it (27,500 members).

[flashman]

Its probably been mentioned before elsewhere but would charging a nominal fee like £2 per year stop WUMs joining in the first place.

Its a bit like the Telegraph/Guardian/Independent where the amount of crap user comments increased once the Times went behind the paywall.

Or if we are talking business you could charge 1p per post 

[SP]

Its probably been mentioned before elsewhere but would charging a nominal fee like £2 per year stop WUMs joining in the first place.

Its a bit like the Telegraph/Guardian/Independent where the amount of crap user comments increased once the Times went behind the paywall.

Or if we are talking business you could charge 1p per post 

Charging for access turns it into a business with a whole different ethos.

[the 92A]

The conundrum is this. Can we come up with a mechanism that allows users to tell the author they found the OP interesting and simultaneously bumps the post, but which is not as intrusive on general readability as quoting the whole thing and adding "This".

Does a quick one-line comment saying "Really enjoyed that, thanks for posting" really disrupt the flow of debate?  Should we be encouraging them rather than discouraging?

I don't have a problem with people throwing in a one line appreciation of a good post. It's a bit annoying if they quote a long post instead of editing it down but I don't think it generally messes up the better threads that tend to move at a more sedate pace anyway and sometimes is actually useful in bumping them up the board. What is a problem is when a thread is moving at a pace and is usually full of one liners adding little actual knowledge like the transer threads or the post match threads after a defeat and it's the nature of the thread that makes it hard to keep up with rather than appreciation of posts.

[Hinesy]

I don't have a problem with people throwing in a one line appreciation of a good post. It's a bit annoying if they quote a long post instead of editing it down but I don't think it generally messes up the better threads that tend to move at a more sedate pace anyway and sometimes is actually useful in bumping them up the board. What is a problem is when a thread is moving at a pace and is usually full of one liners adding little actual knowledge like the transer threads or the post match threads after a defeat and it's the nature of the thread that makes it hard to keep up with rather than appreciation of posts.

Agree totally here.


Interestingly just re read the RAWK FAQ's in the Feedback Board where most answers and worries seem to be answered. As much for us mods as the masses.

[stevedo]

For me its not disrupting the debate, its adding pages and pages of posts that add nothing, especially if the whole post is requoted. So instead of a round the table of 4 pages, it becomes 20 odd pages which is more difficult to read (esp at work!!).

Couldn't the "like" button also move the thread back to the top of the page, in the same way that posting "this" does?
Also as I mentioned earlier, the post doesn't have to have "liked by 234 people" next to it, it could just be shaded a diffferent colour to stand out. Result would be a reduction in size of thread to a manageable level and the ability for quality posts to stand out.

I would suggest this option for all posts, as it is often the posts after the initial OP that are the real crackers.

If someone posts a well thought out, detailed, researched point of view in any of the threads that a lot of subsequent readers think is excellent (but can't be expanded upon) how can this appreciation be shown so that it highlights that this opinion has (potentially) a large backing, before a couple of repetitive "ignore and snipe" posters flood the page?

Apologies for the long sentence. 

[flashman]

If someone posts a well thought out, detailed, researched point of view in any of the threads that a lot of subsequent readers think is excellent (but can't be expanded upon) how can this appreciation be shown so that it highlights that this opinion has (potentially) a large backing, before a couple of repetitive "ignore and snipe" posters flood the page?

Apologies for the long sentence. 

The appreciation would be many users clicking "like" which would highlight the post somehow (highlighted?), after a specified number of "likes".
Each "like" would move the thread back up to the top like ! 

[Camarero25]

Really doesn't bother me if people post "This" or similar. It doesn't make the thread much harder to read at all imo.

[electricghost]

We should police thread derailers more harshly not stop everyone else's fun.

On this point do the mods, or those that recieve them  ,  think that the "watched" status is effective in curtailing people's bad posting habits ?

What about the possibility of a new sanction along the lines of the NNT one but instead NNP (No New Posts) just for the main board for those that derail threads ?  Maybe it could drop bit by bit like the watched status or posters would have to plead their case in Feedback like they do for the NNT addition.

[Hinesy]

On this point do the mods, or those that recieve them  ,  think that the "watched" status is effective in curtailing people's bad posting habits ?

What about the possibility of a new sanction along the lines of the NNT one but instead NNP (No New Posts) just for the main board for those that derail threads ?  Maybe it could drop bit by bit like the watched status or posters would have to plead their case in Feedback like they do for the NNT addition.

That's an interesting point. I'm not sure how much value it has to us, once the watched status has gone up, apart from those that reach the limit for automatic muting. That's something we might use more in the case you've mentioned above.

[AirConGipsyRed]

I've really enjoyed reading this thread. I have read it all before posting and much of my opinions have already been stated. I am pretty much with what Davvo7 wrote.

I tend to read a lot more than I post and to be honest I haven't been reading the site as much as before as I have got fed up with bitching in the main forum. Hopefully, this thread will help it a great deal.

My only other thought is about derailing threads. Would it be possible to not allow people betting on outcomes of events in the main forum. There is a betting section and it should stay there. The reason I say this is that the original Aquilani thread (last year I think) got completely derailed because two members had a bet on whether he would be here at a certain date. They got so entrenched in their position because of the bet that anyone with a different opinion to theirs was pretty much hounded from the thread. It became an absolute joke. It turned the two posters into parodies of themselves and the thread became a car wreck.

It's just a thought.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

On this point do the mods, or those that recieve them  ,  think that the "watched" status is effective in curtailing people's bad posting habits ?

What about the possibility of a new sanction along the lines of the NNT one but instead NNP (No New Posts) just for the main board for those that derail threads ?  Maybe it could drop bit by bit like the watched status or posters would have to plead their case in Feedback like they do for the NNT addition.

I'm not sure if the "Watched" tag itself has any deterrent effect, however as a tool for us it is quite handy.  When issuing a warning you can see a list of all the previous warnings that user has had.  So if a user has repeated warnings for abuse and is being abusive yet again then you can decide that a larger warning that leads to not being able to post for a while might be appropriate. 

[Slightly Less Mediocre Baron Bennekov]

For me, RAWK is just too populated to allow for good discussion. The post-match round table threads have been excellent because they move along at a steady but not lightning pace and posts are generally well thought-out. It seems that many people get scared away by the need to post more than a few lines of instant reaction, and this is a good thing. But many threads in the main LFC section of the forum just don't lend themselves to good discussion because they move too fast and good posts have a habit of getting lost amidst the unremarkable. On a similar note, you can arrive a few days late at the round table threads, read through, get a sense of where the discussion is going, and chime in accordingly, but when you're confronted with 20 pages spanning a matter of hours, you either think "why bother?" or you just read the end of the thread and end up repeating something that's already been mentioned.

I spend most of my time in other areas of RAWK because threads are, generally, easier paced, often funnier, and posters either seem to chill out a bit or simply have a bit more respect for each other.

This!

Despite my post count I'm not the most eager poster in the main forum because of the above and because of the abuse you get if/when your opinion does not comply with the general opinion. I'm not scared of a good sensible discussion but the one-line reactions to a possibly good post is just too annoying imo. The voting up idea introduced by conman is not bad at all. Not bad at all I tells ya...

For the record: I've only read through the first 1½ pages so I might be echoing other posts in the thread. Sorry if it happens to be the case.

[Big Red Richie]

Oh, and if we get three quotes, can we have some new smileys from a different catalouge.   The existing ones are getting a bit worn, and out of fashion. 

[rednich85]

I'm not sure if the "Watched" tag itself has any deterrent effect, however as a tool for us it is quite handy.  When issuing a warning you can see a list of all the previous warnings that user has had.  So if a user has repeated warnings for abuse and is being abusive yet again then you can decide that a larger warning that leads to not being able to post for a while might be appropriate. 

There should be some sort of 'slate cleaning', done. If a poster goes 'x' amount of time without a warning, all previous occurances are wiped from their profile.

Otherwise some poor fella will just have a reputation as a repeat abuse giver and when a mod looks at a certain comment, there's a bias there.

[Alan_X]

I've really enjoyed reading this thread. I have read it all before posting and much of my opinions have already been stated. I am pretty much with what Davvo7 wrote.

I tend to read a lot more than I post and to be honest I haven't been reading the site as much as before as I have got fed up with bitching in the main forum. Hopefully, this thread will help it a great deal.

My only other thought is about derailing threads. Would it be possible to not allow people betting on outcomes of events in the main forum. There is a betting section and it should stay there. The reason I say this is that the original Aquilani thread (last year I think) got completely derailed because two members had a bet on whether he would be here at a certain date. They got so entrenched in their position because of the bet that anyone with a different opinion to theirs was pretty much hounded from the thread. It became an absolute joke. It turned the two posters into parodies of themselves and the thread became a car wreck.

It's just a thought.

[scratched record]if someone had reported it to the moderation team the members would have been warned and the posts deleted. [/scratched record]

[SP]

There should be some sort of 'slate cleaning', done. If a poster goes 'x' amount of time without a warning, all previous occurances are wiped from their profile.

Otherwise some poor fella will just have a reputation as a repeat abuse giver and when a mod looks at a certain comment, there's a bias there.

That assumes that the mods are too cretinous to look at the date of the warnings and make a suitable judgement.  That is not the case.  Mostly.

[bigbonedrawky]

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.

This..

[rednich85]

That assumes that the mods are too cretinous to look at the date of the warnings and make a suitable judgement.  That is not the case.  Mostly.

It assumes nothing of the sort.

[Arcadian]

This..

This.

In all seriousness though. The "this" post doesn't aggravate me in the slightest. (to be fair it's hard to get me upset about anything on an Internet forum) I've been guilty of the "this" post and was honestly unaware of its disliked status. Sometimes it's a fantastic way of making sure a post gets noticed, particularly in a fast moving thread. Sometimes the "this" post is the only reason I've caught a belter of a contribution.

[conman]

This.

In all seriousness though. The "this" post doesn't aggravate me in the slightest. (to be fair it's hard to get me upset about anything on an Internet forum) I've been guilty of the "this" post and was honestly unaware of its disliked status. Sometimes it's a fantastic way of making sure a post gets noticed, particularly in a fast moving thread. Sometimes the "this" post is the only reason I've caught a belter of a contribution.

seeing "This" in a post ain't too bad, but if there are 50x "This" or "Like" or "I agree" in a thread, the threads balloons in size, and thus becomes daunting when you open a thread of 25 pages for the first time. I tend to just skip to the last 2-3 pages, as i simply do not have the time to read the rest.

The other benefit, is that the post becomes highlighted if "liked" enough times, so when you read a certain post for the first time, you know it is going to be good, and you also know you won't be seeing it repeated 15times in the next 4 pages. It's simply a means to tidy up the threads and showcase the quality posts.

[-RedTilDead-]

We're looking for good ideas that will improve the site and fit its ethos not the most popular ideas. 

Besides, who votes? We have 38,000 members.

Out of interest has there ever been an all user RAWK poll?

[kakskümmend neli seitse shagging kõik jõulunädal]

Out of interest has there ever been an all user RAWK poll?

Isn't every poll that's created in theory accessible to all registered, non-banned RAWK users so long as the poll links to a thread that is not in a limited access area of the site?

[-RedTilDead-]

Isn't every poll that's created in theory accessible to all registered, non-banned RAWK users so long as the poll links to a thread that is not in a limited access area of the site?

I guess so but I've never seen a poll on here. Apologies if I am missing the obvious. Is there a section for them?

[kakskümmend neli seitse shagging kõik jõulunädal]

I guess so but I've never seen a poll on here. Apologies if I am missing the obvious. Is there a section for them?

Nah. When a new thread is started, there is an option to create a pool attached to said thread - there are some restrictions though for newbies, I think - a certain number of posts or similar.....

[SP]

I guess so but I've never seen a poll on here. Apologies if I am missing the obvious. Is there a section for them?

No polls allowed on the main LFC board.

[kakskümmend neli seitse shagging kõik jõulunädal]

No polls allowed on the main LFC board.

Ah, there's another restriction

[Commie Bobbie]

What Is RAWK?

Fuck, I haven't got a clue?

Do think there should be some form of 'ten commandments' over what is acceptable, and what is in essence not. In that sense, I mean - respecting the city and the club's heritage, history and patrons.

[lachesis]

I think the challenge is that any 'high quality' post usually starts a thread, but there are some threads that start with just a basic paragraph that have some really good replies to. Some of these are posted in the 'important/quality posts you may have missed thread'.

Sometimes the mods split these out if they are deemed worthy of topics of their own. I'd say there is enough high quality content intermingled with the shite and maybe the challenge is getting those type of posts/replies highlighted.

If there was a 'thanks' button on certain posts, you could maybe turn that into a feed. The top 25 hottest voted thread/replies which take you right to that post rather than needing to read the shite that went beforehand.

I also think routine, templates and schedules would help a lot but maybe that's cos I'm OCD.

[macca888]

No polls allowed on the main LFC board.

5 fucking minutes and he's turned into Kim Jong Il. You've created a monster! The Gazpacho Gestapo force is strong in this one.

[AirConGipsyRed]

[scratched record]if someone had reported it to the moderation team the members would have been warned and the posts deleted. [/scratched record]

Fair enough Alan, I guess I have get used to the idea that reporting to moderator is not the same as telling tales out of school.

[Alan_X]

It really isn't mate - it's a really useful tool to help us run the site to everyone's benefit...

[Twelfth Man]

I'd say there is enough high quality content intermingled with the shite and maybe the challenge is getting those type of posts/replies highlighted.

If there was a 'thanks' button on certain posts, you could maybe turn that into a feed. The top 25 hottest voted thread/replies which take you right to that post rather than needing to read the shite that went beforehand.

This is a good idea. My biggest problem is that I simply do not have the time to go through every page on a typical thread. If there was some way of  jumping straight to the best posts without having to skim through all the pages, it would make the experience a lot more rewarding. However, how do you judge what is best, or worthy etc? it is a very subjective thing. Thumbs up will not always pick up the best posts (though I do think on the whole it will do).

Currently I often end up only reading the OP and 1st page, then perhaps the last two pages, often missing out on a large chunk of the thread in the middle. You could perhaps have a facility where the most rated posts, stay at the top of the thread (limit this to perhaps the top ten posts, more for longer discussions) and then have new posts under them. So that way anyone can jump into a thread, read the most important posts, and get a good idea of what is being discussed, without having to trawl through endless pages.

[Hinesy]

This is a good idea. My biggest problem is that I simply do not have the time to go through every page on a typical thread. If there was some way of  jumping straight to the best posts without having to skim through all the pages, it would make the experience a lot more rewarding. However, how do you judge what is best, or worthy etc? it is a very subjective thing. Thumbs up will not always pick up the best posts (though I do think on the whole it will do).

Currently I often end up only reading the OP and 1st page, then perhaps the last two pages, often missing out on a large chunk of the thread in the middle. You could perhaps have a facility where the most rated posts, stay at the top of the thread (limit this to perhaps the top ten posts, more for longer discussions) and then have new posts under them. So that way anyone can jump into a thread, read the most important posts, and get a good idea of what is being discussed, without having to trawl through endless pages.

or you could just look through the thread. 

in all seriousness it doesn't take that long to scan threads and find the better posts, and you're trusting the other membership to rate the kind of post you'd like. That's problematic.

[The 5th Benitle]

I hate polls meself. Coming over here, taking our jobs etc etc.
For some reason I'm reminded of Sarge?
Please never change the no polls on the main board rule, it would be awful.