These forums

[LRJ]

I think there should be more effort from the mods when closing a thread, lots of the time its closed and thats the end of it, an explanation would be nice so the creator/followers knew why it was closed

And mods need to react quicker to people, eg somebody called treml was right spamming a thread, posting totally off-topic and everything and nobody banned him for ages causing the ruining of the thread (about Mourinho leaving) which i for one was interested in

All in all its not just the posters that arent up to scrath tbf

[robbo_16]

How about if the same question keep popping up, have a general response already made up (similar to a signature - the response would be agreed on by authoritive figures and would only need to be copy and pasted), which would get posted by a moderator. It would have a fair tone, indicate that the question the user has asked is frequent and point them in the direction of a FAQ section via a link.

[birdy123]

All in all its not just the posters that arent up to scrath tbf

Hopefully more moderators will be put in place in the not too distant future

[LRJ]

i remember somebody asking to be one

the message from Ter was '' we are not currently looking for more moderators '' despite the fact that there is only about 5

[Ter]

i remember somebody asking to be one

the message from Ter was '' we are not currently looking for more moderators '' despite the fact that there is only about 5

That is the standard reply when people ask to be a moderator. Moderators are selected by the current bunch of moderators and voted in via a top secret method involving dark tunnels, gowns and other stuff I'm not allowed to talk about.

[Kain]

Originally posted by Liverpool Rule---Jehrome:

I think there should be more effort from the mods when closing a thread, lots of the time its closed and thats the end of it, an explanation would be nice so the creator/followers knew why it was closed

And mods need to react quicker to people, eg somebody called treml was right spamming a thread, posting totally off-topic and everything and nobody banned him for ages causing the ruining of the thread (about Mourinho leaving) which i for one was interested in

All in all its not just the posters that arent up to scrath tbf

Tbf, the moderators can't be online all the time (though I admit, if there were more moderators who were regular posters, perhaps there would be one online almost all the time). Treml did go on forever though!

[LRJ]

right, i understand now.

highly doubt that there is gowns involved though, way too classy

[Kris]

Originally posted by Liverpool Rule---Jehrome:

i remember somebody asking to be one

the message from Ter was '' we are not currently looking for more moderators '' despite the fact that there is only about 5

1. theres more than 5.

2. We close threads without explanation because they dont need one. Its a direct violation of the house/forum rules which you are required to read on registering.

3. OTF, which you seem to be referring to, is lower on our priority list then the other SI forums. Perhaps read my earlier email about the amount of posts and new members we get a day?

[Kris]

FYI there are 52 users with moderator privledges at least.

28 are non SI.

[LRJ]

i know there is more than five

1) I mean that i actually see about, posting all the time and whatever

2) I know there was more than 5 i was being under-exagerating (I dont know the word)

[Kris]

In OTf maybe (and Ive explained why I wasnt around, combined with the fact I was visiting the in-laws in Jamaica when hurricane dean hit for the past month).

Most moderators are online during the day, as Ive said a lot of it is background work that you dont even see.

[FrazT]

Originally posted by Kris:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Liverpool Rule---Jehrome:

i remember somebody asking to be one

the message from Ter was '' we are not currently looking for more moderators '' despite the fact that there is only about 5

1. theres more than 5.

2. We close threads without explanation because they dont need one. Its a direct violation of the house/forum rules which you are required to read on registering.

3. OTF, which you seem to be referring to, is lower on our priority list then the other SI forums. Perhaps read my earlier email about the amount of posts and new members we get a day? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Kris- while there are certain times when no explanation for closing a thread is OK ( experienced users ), there are also lots of times where a couple of lines from the Mod would be an advantage especially if the OP was new to the Forums.

The whole theme of this thread has been to try and be less harsh on newbies as well as trying to educate them, so surely some short explanation would be better than none at all?

[LRJ]

yeah i agree FrazT, i mean ive seen somebody have their thread closed so they have either opened a new one exactly the same or opened one asking why it was closed

i understand its difficult for a mod to always be around, but why not get new mods for each forum who are always there like me (im not saying make me a mod) im always in OTF except from the odd occasion so make a person like that a mod for that forum

just an idea, would probably benefit you all

[birdy123]

a lot of it is background work that you dont even see

I appreciate that, but as has been mentioned in this thread a couple of times, it is nice to see moderators around and for them to set an example for newer members.

[Kris]

We cant set an example for a few thousand new members every week.

Thats your job (as one of the 100,000 forum members), ours is to maintain the forum, report bugs and do housekeeping (on top of the normal mod duties).

We also wouldnt take mods on for OTF only, I originally and still do come from Tech (PC) forum. People seem to highlight OTF a lot when its really a forum that SI could best do without but adding to the community as a focal point of anything offtopic needs to have.

FMS/FMO/Tactics Forum being some of the fourms we would and have take(n) on specialised mods.

[LRJ]

Im not saying just OTF i said for each forum, i used OTF as an example because thats my main place

[dafuge]

What about the Challenges / Sign-Ups / Holiday Games forum, will that get it's own mod?

[Kris]

And if you read my post properly then I state

We also wouldnt take mods on for OTF only, I originally and still do come from Tech (PC) forum. People seem to highlight OTF a lot when its really a forum that SI could best do without but adding to the community as a focal point of anything offtopic needs to have.

FMS/FMO/Tactics Forum being some of the fourms we would and have take(n) on specialised mods.

[Kris]

Originally posted by dafuge:

What about the Challenges / Sign-Ups / Holiday Games forum, will that get it's own mod?

that forum is on a trial run iirc, mods will no doubt be assigned or it will be put back to a fully post moderated (started) forum.

[LRJ]

Originally posted by Kris:

And if you read my post properly then I state

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">

We also wouldnt take mods on for OTF only, I originally and still do come from Tech (PC) forum. People seem to highlight OTF a lot when its really a forum that SI could best do without but adding to the community as a focal point of anything offtopic needs to have.

FMS/FMO/Tactics Forum being some of the fourms we would and have take(n) on specialised mods.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Kris]

So whats your point, no we wouldnt take mods on just for OTF. I was pointing out that we do take on mods for other forums which are have a direct link to SI/FM/OOTP/EHM.

[LRJ]

yeah but i never said take them on just for OTF

[Kris]

I never said you did, I stated that we wouldnt (given your example) take them on just for OTF. It's no a SI related forum and it really doesn't benefit SI in nayway other than to be an outlet or convenient dumping ground for anything non SI/FM/OOTP/EHM related.

[LRJ]

ok, but i think it does offer something to SI

if you got rid of OTF i think alot of users would leave, where-as now alot of users have OTF as there main place but still go around GPTG, GD, TT.

I wouldnt leave, id just return to Challenges or GPTG as i started at the latter then moved on

[Kris]

Most OTF people (read about 70% of the active members in there) do not post or view the other forums (short of release date).

[daggerhammer]

To be honest i dont think there is such a big bullying problem on the forum. I cant say iv'e ever been a victim.

ok so some people do get jumped on, but then they do ask/ suggest some really rediculus things.

the best way to deal with it if you do believe there is a problem is to reset karma points back to zero if people are deemed to be out of order! that would sort them out!

[LRJ]

i think some people jump on your back too easy, the other day i asked if something was sarcastic and another person who had nothing to do with the conversation says 'if you cant tell then you deserve to die tbh' maybe not them exact words but it was die/shot and i was like wtf there is no need

i dont think reset karma points, happened to YNWA and he threw a bennie and closed his thread (well refused to continue it) which results in unneccesary problems

i just think we need new shorter bans like 1 week, 3 days w.e so people stop

yellow cards arent really affective

[LRJ]

Originally posted by Kris:

Most OTF people (read about 70% of the active members in there) do not post or view the other forums (short of release date).

expected more tbh

meant to reply in other post

[spotg]

Originally posted by Kris:

Most OTF people (read about 70% of the active members in there) do not post or view the other forums (short of release date).

Bang on.

This is the first time I've been out of OTF for about a year. Unless a thread gets linked in there, I just don't come in.

I'm sure that as far as SI is concerned, OTF is a waste of time and money.

[Michael F]

Originally posted by Ter:

top secret method involving dark tunnels, gowns and other stuff I'm not allowed to talk about.

Ter's been watching the Stonecutters, Simpsons episode

[Kris]

Yellow Cards arent effective for the determined idiot.

Shorter bans would result in a lot more administrative work as the forum software really isn't geared twords that.

And , as mentioned, SI want bans to be a last resort.

People wont stop just because they receive a 3 day 1 week ban, a 3 month or lifetime ban is sufficient imo.

[LRJ]

i see what your saying there Kris but the ban could increase each time until you are getting to the 3 month/life ban

[The Enforcer]

Originally posted by muncherdave:

To be honest i dont like the idea of karma or any other reward system. If, for example, the user that has the highest amount of karma on the entire site one day breaks a rule they should be punished in the same manner as the lowest, so it makes the whole system a little pointless other than rewarding people for being decent on the forum, which is how they should be anyway.

Do we really need treats to be nice people here, isn't the gratification of helping another user when they are in trouble enough? And is it going to make a big difference in stopping the real issue (abuse)?

Strict guidelines on what are and are not acceptable are necessary here I feel, I'm sure once they get laid down some regular users would help by reporting posts like they have with other rulebreakings. The main problem is where to draw the line however, a lot of things like sarcasm can be misinterpreted because its just in text form when the users intent may actually be innocent and humourous, and before you know it every thread has a post that could be seen to be abusive when they are tongue in cheek.

Oh, and if people are going to be complaining they haven't seen whatever new rules you are going to put in place, you could always just do a mass email or private message, with whatever rule(s) come from this issue and maybe all the other rules as a reminder in there. People have no excuse to have not seen them then.

Sorry if it didn't come across well, but any reward system effectively run by the members, which would include both the ability to mark up and mark down, would run hand-in-hand with a disciplinary system run by the mods. To give an example, this means that someone with 100% positive feedback from members could still be banned by a mod for a racist remark. One would like to think their 100% would take a nose-dive also.

I think what I was driving at, is that it looks like the consensus is that a clampdown on bad behaviour by both newbies and oldies alike is necessary. This seems likely to result in the 'do's and don't's' and the punishments attached to not following them being displayed more prominently and quite rightly so. I feel that an announcement of some kind of reward system next to the rules and regulations would help to give the forums a more positive spin.

The sort of thing I am envisaging at the top of the forum/subforums is:

"Please enjoy these forums, but obey these rules [link], otherwise these punishments [link] will be imposed. We also have a "Kudos System" [link to explanation of how it works] in place, so that consistently helpful posting is recognised and rewarded."

The second sentence would make the forums seem a lot more inviting, in my view.

[Matthew Le God]

Originally posted by Liverpool Rule---Jehrome:

yellow cards arent really affective

well im not going to post another video again

[Michael F]

Kris, do you not think that warnings/yellow cards are seen more as a trophy than actually being a warning about their conduct on the forum?

[LRJ]

yeah ive seen some people show them off but like Matthew said, he aint going to post more videos in te wrong place

I dont think that Karma should be removed, it earns some people respect in ways, like if i was new to these forums then im gonna give Mika and Ratinho more respect than another new person, the only way i know he has been around long is his Karma rating (and maybe the registered date )

anyway thats me done for tonight, will carry this on tommorow

[Kris]

Post counts were removed as they were seen as a status symbol (god knows why, Im the saddest user here )/

Yes, some people view cards as a trophy, however they tend to end up getting banned shortly after

[The Enforcer]

Originally posted by Frankie 7:

I for one don't think Kudos would work here. it would only cause unrest between members. Some members might feel that they are getting alienated just because no one bothered rating them. Not everyone will bother to rate other members.

This could be avoided if the system was operated in a way that members' ratings were hidden from all but SI, thereby keeping everyone guessing and, more importantly, posting helpfully.

[Gazzaroon]

I have to say that I have found these forums becoming too insult driven and have therefore not visited as often as i used to. I love playing the game and I love talking to people about the game but I am not happy coming to the forum to see people complaining for the sake of complaining and not being very nice about it.

I have actually taken it to be the age of the people on these forums to be a basic problem, but I am not sure that is the problem. I am a regular user of another forum and it does have a nice community feel about it and everyone is nice to each other and when someone starts a new thread about a problem the other users don't complain, insult or anything like that the moderators will simply merge the new thread with the old thread and that is the end of the problem.

Also if someone does ask a question people try to help them rather than call them an idiot. For me now I just look for when the newest release is coming out and that is all apart from sometimes checking a couple of posts.

WHen I first joined it was a very nice place - today not so much!

[Schit Onzermancs]

I agree with wwfan that there is currently a large divide between the fan-base and it's apparent in these forums (particularly the tactics forum). I think that the biggest reason for this gulf is down to the state of the game itself and the supporting texts—the manual and tutorial just don't tell us what we REALLY want to know. A lot of the arguments arise simply because we STILL don't know what the sliders do exactly. If we can't even agree with the functions of each slider then we are already at a loss. With a feedback system, and knowledge of what each slider REALLY does (for example, what DOES the defensive line really do?) in place we would be able to learn from the actual game itself rather than adopting a poster's 'theory.' Many an argument has surfaced because a person in need will follow somebody's 'theory' to the letter, come back in failure, and be told that the game is more than just tactics — that they haven't managed the 'other' segments of the game correctly (team-talks, media interaction, training, etc.). How can one truly learn the pros and cons of a tactic if this is true and outside variables are actually so influential and dominant?

Personally, I would like to see the back of the 'gloating' threads (as I call them) where people post successes and tactics in a story-telling manner. It's awful that I have to say this, but there is no way to know if the person posting has cheated or not so the thread holds no value at all. I've posted successful tactics to this forum before only to be told they are useless. Why does it work for me and not others? I honestly don't know? I feel that tactical threads, or experiments, should be carried out in a collaborative manner by a number of people until consistent success is achieved by all (whatever success may be since it's relative). This will stop people responding in a 'theoretical sense', meaning, people will often post what their thoughts are on the real-life game without actually having any proof as to whether this applies in FM. This is, after all, just a game.

I personally feel that the moderators should moderate more than post, or at least have a separate log-in name when they want to contribute. Often they will use their position of 'power' in their postings. Being a moderator does not make one an authority or a master tactician. Unfortunately, certain moderators feel that this is the case it seems and to disagree with moderator's opinion will often leave one held in contempt. This is supposedly a democracy yet does not always feel so. If a certain section of the fan-base feel the game has tactical flaws or inadequacies, it should not be held as a 'complaint' or be deemed worthy enough of a crime to have the thread closed if communicated constructively enough. Many threads have been closed because the topic contradicted the moderator's perception of the game. Pride and sentiment is at an all time high currently.

To summarise:

— We need a new manual

— We need to all agree on what each slider does

— Tactical 'experiments' should be implemented in a collaborative manner to reach a standardised agreement

— People need to stop 'theorising' so we can deal in fact

— Mods should not close postings that are constructive regardless of personal sentiment

— Insults should be dealt with zero-tolerance

— The ambiguity of the game needs addressing without enabling us to 'paint by numbers'

At the minute, the AI has evolved to such an extent that it is extremely effective, and a lot of human users simply don't know how to combat it with the tools at our disposal. This is why many cheat threads have reared their ugly heads. I think it's time we had a feedback system that allows us to know how and why we are being exposed. At the minute is seems the AI scores from 1 shot all game on the counter attack (or with a swift change to the dreaded 4-2-4) although the human has 25 shots on goal. I can assure you that if we knew why this was a regular occurrence, there would be a much more harmonious forum.

[Dayle Wood]

Originally posted by Schit Onzermancs:

all time high currently.

To summarise:

— Mods should not close postings that are constructive regardless of personal sentiment

— Insults should be dealt with zero-tolerance

These two are in conflict with each other. Constructive posts that spiral into abuse SHOULD be closed and treated with zero tolerance.

That is what the mods do. Sentiment doesn't even enter into it.

[Schit Onzermancs]

Constructive posts should NOT be closed if one idiot comes along and ruins the discussion. That idiot should be immediately dealt with. There is no reason for a constructive discussion to reach 'gutter level.' I'm not sure how these two conflict, Dayle.

I would also like to see forum-members warned for 'policing.' There are a certain section of forum-members that are 'pally' with the moderators that have recently formed a clique of some sorts. I don't think this is healthy for the forum either since disagreeing with one person often leads to a disagreement of many, hence 'bullying' arises.

[Dan Baker]

Originally posted by spotg:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kris:

Most OTF people (read about 70% of the active members in there) do not post or view the other forums (short of release date).

Bang on.

This is the first time I've been out of OTF for about a year. Unless a thread gets linked in there, I just don't come in.

I'm sure that as far as SI is concerned, OTF is a waste of time and money. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm similar to spotg, in so much as that I avoid venturing into the other areas of the forum too much.

However, that's mainly due to what I have witnessed when going elsewhere - particularly in GQ. In OTF, we have the FM thread which is well populated, as the people in there understand that there is a certain 'standard' set within OTF in order to be a respected poster - I know that I couldn't express myself in the same way in GQ, because people are either too young, too stupid or too stubborn to go along with the way a thread is going.

We then find ourselves in a tough spot - I don't doubt that many of the users in that thread (myself, Andy Jordan and Purvis immediately come to mind) would like to give constructive feedback to the SI team, but no-one ever really ventures into the thread to respond. Well, apart from Ackter - and I don't want to go into that.

I understand that OTF is the excommunicated relative of the rest of the board, as it offers little in terms of game/brand development - however, there is a regular userbase that could be mined for ideas and feedback, under different circumstances. If GQ could be straightened out then the rest of the board could possibly pull together - but the volume of posts my casual members/players mean it's difficult to maintain such a standard.

Kudos to those who've built a reputation in GQ though - and in particular for swimming against the tide.

[Dayle Wood]

Originally posted by Schit Onzermancs:

Constructive posts should NOT be closed if one idiot comes along and ruins the discussion. That idiot should be immediately dealt with. There is no reason for a constructive discussion to reach 'gutter level.' I'm not sure how these two conflict, Dayle.

I would also like to see forum-members warned for 'policing.' There are a certain section of forum-members that are 'pally' with the moderators that have recently formed a clique of some sorts. I don't think this is healthy for the forum either since disagreeing with one person often leads to a disagreement of many, hence 'bullying' arises.

It conflicts when a 10 page thread that started of pretty good but for the last 3 pages has just been bickering and whinging and so on. At that point the thread has outlasted its usefulness and should be closed.

As for your second point, policing and being friendly with the mods are two different things entirely. There is no reason we can't be frienly with mods.. They are people after all and enjoy the game and community as much as us.

I fully agree that 'policing' or moderating of other members should in the main be left up to the mods. However people advising other people that they are breaking rules (cd cracks, swearing, wrong forum etc etc) should be acceptable if done in the right manner and in the best of intentions.

[Schit Onzermancs]

Originally posted by Dayle Wood:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Schit Onzermancs:

Constructive posts should NOT be closed if one idiot comes along and ruins the discussion. That idiot should be immediately dealt with. There is no reason for a constructive discussion to reach 'gutter level.' I'm not sure how these two conflict, Dayle.

I would also like to see forum-members warned for 'policing.' There are a certain section of forum-members that are 'pally' with the moderators that have recently formed a clique of some sorts. I don't think this is healthy for the forum either since disagreeing with one person often leads to a disagreement of many, hence 'bullying' arises.

It conflicts when a 10 page thread that started of pretty good but for the last 3 pages has just been bickering and whinging and so on. At that point the thread has outlasted its usefulness and should be closed.

As for your second point, policing and being friendly with the mods are two different things entirely. There is no reason we can't be frienly with mods.. They are people after all and enjoy the game and community as much as us.

I fully agree that 'policing' or moderating of other members should in the main be left up to the mods. However people advising other people that they are breaking rules (cd cracks, swearing, wrong forum etc etc) should be acceptable if done in the right manner and in the best of intentions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree mate, that often threads can become a bickering site with all kinds of insults flying round. I would rather there be a solution that involves ridding the world of the idiots instead of closing the thread completely simply because an imbecile or two can not hold their tongues. Why should we all suffer? Know what I mean?

[williamshankley]

I agree the rules need revising! Speaking as a member that received a yellow card. I believe I deserved the card! I was over the top and I do think that its due to the level of critism that is being bandied about! Then again Grame Kelly agreed with me I recall seeing so its not only the members that have been guilty of this!

If Ter the skin man is reading then, and this is over due I apologise!

I believe short week bans would be good!

More stricter rules would be good!

[thefootman]

I remember the strategy guides that used to come out after the most recent versions of CM and I personally

found them extremely useful.

They would cover things in far more detail than the manual and it's a shame that they don't produce one for FM.

This would be an extra cost,of course.The reason I mentioned them is this:

Is it possible a major online strategy guide may help to reduce the need for people to start the threads that end up

in squabbling matches in the first place?.(Something along the lines of Mark Vaughan's hints and tips but a lot more

in depth?).I know the SI guys have an extremely heavy workload (so could it be produced by someone else with a unique

insight into the game?).

A link to the download area could encourage new users to consult it first,but this is assuming they can be bothered

to read it.(And considering lots of them don't read the house rules I'm probably being a bit naive to think this way).

There will be many who would really appreciate it (and of course it would be optional).There are areas of the game

that are simply not explained in enough detail for many people to understand them and more help in this area could

possibly reduce the amount of 'this game is c**p/too hard/cheats threads' that result in so much nonsense being posted.

This is not to undermine the current forums in anyway at all.But it might help to keep the sensible discussion threads

in pole position where they belong.

Feel free to disagree

[Dayle Wood]

Originally posted by Schit Onzermancs:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dayle Wood:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Schit Onzermancs:

Constructive posts should NOT be closed if one idiot comes along and ruins the discussion. That idiot should be immediately dealt with. There is no reason for a constructive discussion to reach 'gutter level.' I'm not sure how these two conflict, Dayle.

I would also like to see forum-members warned for 'policing.' There are a certain section of forum-members that are 'pally' with the moderators that have recently formed a clique of some sorts. I don't think this is healthy for the forum either since disagreeing with one person often leads to a disagreement of many, hence 'bullying' arises.

It conflicts when a 10 page thread that started of pretty good but for the last 3 pages has just been bickering and whinging and so on. At that point the thread has outlasted its usefulness and should be closed.

As for your second point, policing and being friendly with the mods are two different things entirely. There is no reason we can't be frienly with mods.. They are people after all and enjoy the game and community as much as us.

I fully agree that 'policing' or moderating of other members should in the main be left up to the mods. However people advising other people that they are breaking rules (cd cracks, swearing, wrong forum etc etc) should be acceptable if done in the right manner and in the best of intentions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree mate, that often threads can become a bickering site with all kinds of insults flying round. I would rather there be a solution that involves ridding the world of the idiots instead of closing the thread completely simply because an imbecile or two can not hold their tongues. Why should we all suffer? Know what I mean? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>yep, and I agree.

[dane0]

Having been a moderator of a relatively large community on the internet (app. 200.000 registered users, although a much smaller part of those attended the forums) I recognize a lot of the problems facing these forums from a time of 4-5 years ago in "our" forums... On the FM forums the problems seem to be centered around a general lack of feeling of this being a real "community". The place seems to be perhaps too big to create that sense of being a close-knit community, but that doesn't mean that it couldn't be a good, albeit very large community. Remember that the golden standard for a community is being exactly that, a community and this community could be great.

So what to do? Well, what worked at the forums were I moderated was relatively simple. The place was extremely "laissez-faire", but it worked wonders to let people know what the rules were and enforce them strictly when they were broken. The main problems as we saw them were the following:

1) Abusive posts directed at other users

2) Post boosting (ie. pointless posts, posts containing a smiley only etc.).

3) Threads asking the same questions that had been asked a thousand times before.

4) Threads asking for cracks etc., especially of the software that our community centered around.

So actually more or less a complete replica of the problems facing these forums. The measures that we took to beat the problems were relatively simple:

1) Very quick reaction to posts or threads with the above problems. They should preferably be deleted, closed or moved to the appropriate forum within 15-30 minutes. This is paramount to secure that abuse etc. is kept to a minimum. When abuse against forum members occurs it is not enough to simply close the thread. Make a post saying that such posts are wrong and harmful to the forum, chide the offender. Warn the perpetrator that further actions in that vein will have consequences. This must be entirely consistent across the different boards.

2) ALWAYS give a reason to the user in question why you took action against their posts/threads. If deleted write to the user why it was deleted. If it is a post containing content that has already been debated delete the post and send a message with a link to the former post etc.

3) Be a noticeable presence in the forums. Be sure to make a post saying when a post is close to going over the line instead of just stepping in when the problems have already gone out of control. This requires great constraint from the moderators chosen. Power hungry people must be kept a long way from these positions of power (which they certainly are as long as they control forums to which people dedicate a lot of their time). Being a presence is also about being a moderator who knows most of the people who come on the forums; indeed I guess the only reason why you're a moderator in the first place is because you spend more time than most people on the forum in question, so this should actually be a prerequisite for being a mod.

4) Locate key users of the forum, ie. the people that the general populace respects and urge them to take an active role in the forum. It is unfortunately the case that reacting against a faceless moderator who wants to tell you how to act on an internet forum is the easiest form of "rebellion" today. A lot of users seem to take great pride in "standing up" to moderators and fight just for the fight's sake. As a moderator you're more or less alone at this point, unless you can get the respected users to take a stance too and make it unacceptable by the standards of the forums to act like that, be it against moderators or other users.

The amazing thing that we discovered was that once the worst troublemakers were gone (whether they were forcibly removed or left by choice once they couldn't act like they would anymore) and the tone on the forums had been improved the forums started moderating themselves more or less by themselves. Actually after 6 months or so we could more or less count on 95% of the users to behave themselves without any need for intervention from our part and we knew who the people who would step dangerously close to the line were, so that the quick intervention mentioned in point 1 became that much easier.

The downside to this approach is of course that it demands a damn lot of the moderators. If there is only about 50 moderators and many of thos are SI workers who have enough to do with putting out the game it is simply completely impossible to moderate a community as big as this one effectively. We worked with about 1 moderator for every 100 users or so, and that was about right I guess.

Also this demands a lot of coordination between the different members of the moderator team. Everyone needs to agree on where the lines for the different forms of intervention lie and it is absolutely essential to warn fellow team members about potential troublemakers and about what actions you take against members.

Finally you must always be prepared to take responsibility for your actions as a moderator. If you cannot defend the actions you've taken, DO NOT take them.

Being a moderator is hard work and I certainly don't envy the people who have to sort these boards out, although the potential to become one of the best communities on the web is certainly there, especially as the contributions of the people behind the game could be the defining trait to make this community just that little bit better than all of the rest...

[sydfc4ever]

I guess the main rebuttal to this thread is that you are interloping on peoples given right to free speech, by stating what is and is not acceptable in your eyes; you are limiting the spread of insights into a narrow field.

Having said that I must admit that I do not post on a regular basis due to this very issue, I understand people may see this as a contradiction to what I said above, but I do not believe banning or punishment a solution to any issue. Education is, as always, the way forward.

If a member makes an inappropriate comment enforce a ruling that states they can only view for a short period, and also must take a short quiz on the rules and regulations prior to being given posting rights again.

I think the issue regarding our ‘karma’ is also an area to be discussed. ‘Karma’ points should be a reward for intelligent and productive posting, receiving a bonus because you type WHS in 10 different threads is, in my opinion, idiotic. Personally, if I receive a reply to my post from a user with a rating of ‘Star Player’ or similar I pay far more attention than people on my own level, ‘Amateur’.

People like Jimbo, Ackter, etc may occasionally post something that could be taken as offensive or derogatory but I believe that is simply due to frustration.

So I return to my main point here, if we can educate the people, we can better the world.

That’s me done, I’ll take my ‘karma’ points now thank you kind sir!