Forum Topics (Posters Leaving) Post.

[Guest SteveA]

Maybe a match section with 3 forums:

• Pre match talk - This could be opened from day after the pervious game i.e. Sunday or Wednesday then closed a few minutes before kick off

• Match talk - This could be opened for 90minutes from kick off to full time.

• Post match talk - This could be open from shortly after kick off up until the next pre match talk is opened and round and round.

Just an idea which may free up some space in the other forums as it can be hard to find other threads non match related, when looking through loads of threads saying the same thing.

[Maesknoll Red]

If was guilty of singleing out a poster or two sure but he at least had something interesting to say. I can certainly understand his frustration even if not with his methods of putting them across.

If you didn't like what he said then that's your problem but I'd rather a single dagest than a thousand Rod12's with the same boring illegible topics (with misleading titles) over & over & over again...

Anyway, back to the point, I can see the mods have merged threads already since the Northampton game and the City board looks better for it... Well done lads (& lasses? Do we have any female mods?)

Thanks and no, there aren't any female mods.

[Northern Red]

Lifetime bans for anyone who mentions how long they've been supporting City in way that suggests it makes their opinion more important/correct.

Now that one I like. The people who piss me off the most on here are the ones who feel they don't have to justify their endless whingeing because they've been going since 1880 or whenever. E.g. "now listen sonny Jim, I've been supporting City for 47 years so therefore I'm right and you're wrong for trying to be positive"

[Rednready]

Now that one I like. The people who piss me off the most on here are the ones who feel they don't have to justify their endless whingeing because they've been going since 1880 or whenever. E.g. "now listen sonny Jim, I've been supporting City for 47 years so therefore I'm right and you're wrong for trying to be positive"

There are just a handful of us in our sixties who post weekly, and I don't recall, any of the pensioner crowd using the sonny Jim scenario. Just a few in their 50's and likewise. I will agree that there are some posters in their 30's and 40's who think they're old and mature and use that arguement.

However, there are plenty of teens and twenties, who think they have all the answers, and anyone over 40 should be dead and buried. Some of us just smell that way.

A good social mix is just fine. I live in a household with grandsons, son and his wife, ages ranging from 6-63. Mostly we get on well, other times we tolerate each other.

In any event, as the mods frequantly tell us. Use the ignore button for posters who annoy you. Its like the tv, we don't have to see anything we don't want to.

[The Fat Controller]

Thanks to the Mods for the increased effort on merging threads.

[Redhyde]

To be fair if the rules were enforced, especially the attacking the post not the poster one people wouldn't probably get fed up and leave. I don't tend to read the city forum around matches because of all the posts abou tthe exact same things. More merging is good

Basically, either relax the rules or enforce them.

When doing so explain it perhaps? A list of bannings, what for and how long would stop the silly where's so and so rubbish and the confusion/anger surrounding that.

[Chappers]

I have supported City for 28 years and I agree

More seriously, talk to any group of fans and you will find a few who talk rubbish, and change opinions on a whim. The main thing that I dislike is the personal abuse - Disagree by all means, but treat others with respect. Also, abuse to posters who support other Clubs and try to make sensible comments on here needs stamping out. I would complain about people who post the same stuff on all related threads, but I duplicated a post last night... Sorry!

[Port Said Red]

A think this forum reflects a malaise in all walks of life.

The current media, and it will only get worse/better (POV alert), means that people are used to expressing their opinions instantly whether by email, phone-ins or on forums such as this one.

I have just returned from a self enforced exile because I can't bear to wade through the forum topic titles, let alone the topics themselves, after a defeat or two.

I discussed this in the pub with Tompo and Willsbridge Red before Saturdays game, I hate to think how legendary teams and players of the past would have fared if this level of technology had been available then. Galley and Cheeseley and players like that went in and out form just like players today and no doubt rumours and conjecture about their state of mind etc, would have abounded on here when they did.

I said once before that we should have a "knee jerk" button that would allow a poster an hour or two to withdraw their post before it was put on the board, as impossible as that would no doubt be, it would be the only solution I could see.

A couple of points on this thread.

Whether a post is "rubbish" or not is very subjective.

Rather than worry about several posts on the same subject, could posters be persuaded to not post a similar thread every two days. E.g. While I admire Arny's enthusiasm for the cause, "Should Stewy play or not" can surely only be debated a limited number of times?

[Meh]

Another 2 gone this week.

This forum is fastly becoming exclusive. It used to be inclusive

[rednotblue]

I think the Mods need something that is pinned that sets out the dos' and don'ts for OTIB.

E.G personal attacks on posters will result in the post(s) being removed and the poster being banned for a week.

I also think we the users need to read the forum a bit more as I believe it is the fact some are not reading other posts and just writing their opinion as a new topic as opposed to replying to a topic.

Mods are you able to look at people who regularly post new topics and decide from there whether they should be mergred or not. E.G someone who frequently posts a new topic and there is already a topic on going. E.G Bradley Orr sending off

Now as we all now Bristol Boy posts a lot but generally it is something different. However I think there must be others who just post new topics even when there is an adequate topic already going.

I could harp on about the good old days of OTIB when the likes of Edson, RichieB, Godzilla, Tom_F and RedTop posted regularly and there was always interesting debate and it was puncuated and not this text talk or only written in one case. And in fact I will, now I know this will sound old but if a post is typed and it is hard to understand then I feel it should be deleted. We all speak the Queens English so damn well write it.

[Redhyde]

Now as we all now Bristol Boy posts a lot but generally it is something different. However I think there must be others who just post new topics even when there is an adequate topic already going.

No he posts the same things each week and there are generally other threads on it. Not least by himself!

But, his posts are better and they generate much more interest because he's posted it. Which frankly is what we/I want.

[Dolman Block B]

A think this forum reflects a malaise in all walks of life.

The current media, and it will only get worse/better (POV alert), means that people are used to expressing their opinions instantly whether by email, phone-ins or on forums such as this one.

I have just returned from a self enforced exile because I can't bear to wade through the forum topic titles, let alone the topics themselves, after a defeat or two.

I discussed this in the pub with Tompo and Willsbridge Red before Saturdays game, I hate to think how legendary teams and players of the past would have fared if this level of technology had been available then. Galley and Cheeseley and players like that went in and out form just like players today and no doubt rumours and conjecture about their state of mind etc, would have abounded on here when they did.

I said once before that we should have a "knee jerk" button that would allow a poster an hour or two to withdraw their post before it was put on the board, as impossible as that would no doubt be, it would be the only solution I could see.

A couple of points on this thread.

Whether a post is "rubbish" or not is very subjective.

Rather than worry about several posts on the same subject, could posters be persuaded to not post a similar thread every two days. E.g. While I admire Arny's enthusiasm for the cause, "Should Stewy play or not" can surely only be debated a limited number of times?

Take yer point, but Stewys gone and i havent posted since.

Ok i did go on a bit, but more in hope than anything else.

The expectation never happened and perhaps the saga has now died a death.

But you never know... Legend (alias Arny)

[rednotblue]

No he posts the same things each week and there are generally other threads on it. Not least by himself!

But, his posts are better and they generate much more interest because he's posted it. Which frankly is what we/I want.

Well alright they are but you know what I meant!!

[Ian M]

I also think we the users need to read the forum a bit more as I believe it is the fact some are not reading other posts and just writing their opinion as a new topic as opposed to replying to a topic.

I think part of the problem is a lot of people are guilty of using vague or misleading thread titles which makes it harder at a glance to see if a topic has already been covered.

Over the last couple of weeks we (the mods) have made an effort to re-title threads where the title hasn't been entirely descriptive and merge similar topics. On occasion we have ourselves been guilty of over-merging as we get a feel for how the users want it implemented but we have received some positive feedback for this.

With time I hope that as users accept that if they start a new thread on the same topic it will be merged with the rest, that they just add to the existing topics instead. This will make the forum a lot easier to navigate for those who are only interested in viewing a couple of subjects.

As for personal attacks, I myself have dealt with a few instances of these recently but cannot (whilst in paid employment without net access!) read every thread so have to rely on others to help out by using the report button. However, one thing I will say is that lately some users are quick to claim "personal abuse" to mild comments that I wouldn't categorise as a personal attack.

[Gerry Gows' Tash]

Intersting debate - I haven't been a regular contributor to the forum for some time now, one of the reasons being the perceived need to "moderate" i.e censor contributions. I accept that there is a need to prevent bad language from appearing on a forum to which children may have access, and the need to moderate anything which can be potentially libellous from appearing, however;

What is the logic behind deleting "meaningless" post ? One persons meaningless post may be anothers fascinating debate - I'm not a great fan of endless posts about what I see as trivia (the price of catering, the music the team should run out to, or the cost of booking tickets by phone) so guess what - I just don't read them. They are at best amusing and at worse a harmless distraction. I also accept that things I may be intersted in (the minutiae of tactics, or who should play "in the hole") are extremely dull to others. My point here is what is "meaningless" and who decides ?

In a similar veing, what exactly is wrong with saying "I agree" ? Some posts are so well written and make a point much better than many posters probably could themselves, there is nothing to add, but to show support for an opinion it is logical to post a short, supportive answer. This principle is the basis of democracy, saying "aye" or "nay" is how laws are passed in parliament - and I fail to see why it is deemed problematic on a football chat board ?

I can't get very excited about repeated topics either. Yes it's mildly annoying trawling through 10 diferent threads on the same subject, but if its a subject that intersts you then what's the harm, its a couple of nimutes out of your life, that's all. Merging them does't really solve the problem as the thread of er the thread gets lost. For me the banter between posters is an integral part of OTIB and merging threads destroys it.

As for "abusive" posts I think you need to set clear guidelines for what constitutes abuse, otherwise the facility gets abused by people who set out to be offended and/or use it as a way of censoring views they don't agree with. Football is a passionate sport and attracts strongly held beliefs, it is right and healthy that these are debated in an open and fair way. If you prevent this you end up with something that is so bland it is not worth reading, let alone participating in.

My overall problem with any form of moderation is that you are trying to impose a set of rules on a format whose beaty lies in accesability and democracy. In real life conversations are not always logical, people drift off the subject, repeat things, spout nonsense, make pointless interruptions, wind people up, argue and disagree, why the desire to sanitise a chat board to the point where it doesn't resemble real communication ?

[Tom Fleuriot]

Intersting debate - I haven't been a regular contributor to the forum for some time now, one of the reasons being the perceived need to "moderate" i.e censor contributions. I accept that there is a need to prevent bad language from appearing on a forum to which children may have access, and the need to moderate anything which can be potentially libellous from appearing, however;

What is the logic behind deleting "meaningless" post ? One persons meaningless post may be anothers fascinating debate - I'm not a great fan of endless posts about what I see as trivia (the price of catering, the music the team should run out to, or the cost of booking tickets by phone) so guess what - I just don't read them. They are at best amusing and at worse a harmless distraction. I also accept that things I may be intersted in (the minutiae of tactics, or who should play "in the hole") are extremely dull to others. My point here is what is "meaningless" and who decides ?

In a similar veing, what exactly is wrong with saying "I agree" ? Some posts are so well written and make a point much better than many posters probably could themselves, there is nothing to add, but to show support for an opinion it is logical to post a short, supportive answer. This principle is the basis of democracy, saying "aye" or "nay" is how laws are passed in parliament - and I fail to see why it is deemed problematic on a football chat board ?

I can't get very excited about repeated topics either. Yes it's mildly annoying trawling through 10 diferent threads on the same subject, but if its a subject that intersts you then what's the harm, its a couple of nimutes out of your life, that's all. Merging them does't really solve the problem as the thread of er the thread gets lost. For me the banter between posters is an integral part of OTIB and merging threads destroys it.

As for "abusive" posts I think you need to set clear guidelines for what constitutes abuse, otherwise the facility gets abused by people who set out to be offended and/or use it as a way of censoring views they don't agree with. Football is a passionate sport and attracts strongly held beliefs, it is right and healthy that these are debated in an open and fair way. If you prevent this you end up with something that is so bland it is not worth reading, let alone participating in.

My overall problem with any form of moderation is that you are trying to impose a set of rules on a format whose beaty lies in accesability and democracy. In real life conversations are not always logical, people drift off the subject, repeat things, spout nonsense, make pointless interruptions, wind people up, argue and disagree, why the desire to sanitise a chat board to the point where it doesn't resemble real communication ?

Just what I was thinking.

It's also worth pointing out that when you get 16 threads on the same subject they tend to be about subtly different angles on the same thing. In theory this should allow each thread to discuss that particular angle. The problem comes when people use a precise point to make a more general one. But this doesn't mean it's right that the threads are merged. Instead maybe the person using every small point to bring up the idea that (e.g.) Stewart should play, or Lansdown's evil, or the Royal West Mercia Police are more corrupt than Iraq/Indonesia/Mexico, should be submerged. Or just stay on topic.

Personally, I think the moderators should just leave everything except stuff that could get them sued. Although I think a swearbox would be a ###### great way to raise money.

[NewYorkFan]

I agree. (ops bound to be deleted or moved to the Shopping Forum!)

[Dolman Block B]

I agree. (ops bound to be deleted or moved to the Shopping Forum!)

8000 miles away and one sentence........

N Y BCFC fan, love it............