I know I don't post on this part of the forum very much but I think this part of the site is run very well. There are some good debates on here and features like the sweepstakes are good features which will atrract new posters! Obviously, there will be some arguments about certain drivers but that's what makes a forum a good forum in my opinion. When people with strong opinions on a subject have some top-quality debate. All in all, keep up the good work!
Yes it is quite funny that the entire site seems to be in meltdown at the moment apart from the F1 board which is resolving its own personal problems.
Some interesting points have been put forward here which is good. Will leave this open for a weekish then summerise what I see as the main points to make sure we can all relatively agree and make sure I haven't missed anything. Then we can make adjustments to the house rules in applicable.
Like you I've seen the forum develop from the start, 606 seems like a distant memory now. The only issue I have these days is with the live threads on race days as things get a bit overheated sometimes. I think the moderators do very well from what I've seen, i managed 3 or 4 days myself before I had enough so to say they've been doing it for months is a good thing!
Let's not beat about the bush. The 2011 drivers who have taken the most flak are Schumacher, Hamilton, Maldonado, and Massa in one order or another. Hatred for things done in the past, overt racism and wanting revenge for a perceived vendetta against one of "our boys" are among reasons that have been mooted. It's not for me alone to decide which of those allegations are true, or for which drivers the criticism has not been deserved. But the fact that these allegations are sometimes made by users who are actually here to talk about sport would suggest that we haven't quite found the right moderation balance.
You are right, the balance is way one sided here but with positiveness I am sure it will get better sooner rather than later.
The 'balance' is a direct reflection of membership. It is a consequence of any discussion and any debate, that the views expressed are a result of its participants. Unless you artificially restrict members on the basis of their views in some way (totally unworkable in my view) OR restrict those members from expressing their view in some arbitrary fashion (totally wrong in my view as this defeats the point of a forum), one will always find that some views are more prevalent than others. Therefore any forum takes on the flavour of its membership. I contribute to a number of fora around the globe and fully expect to find more interest (bias if you prefer) for Webber in Australia, Vettel in Germany, Alonso in Spain, Villeneuve in Canada, Bourdais in France, Montoya in Colombia and Barrichello in Brazil. Every member of any forum has every right to contribute within its 'House Rules'. - - - House Rules should make no restriction on opinion whatsoever (notwithstanding that all opinion should be presented in a reasonable manner which is not personalised against other members). Pretending these differences do not exist is utterly ridiculous and places an artificial prejudice upon membership.
I second that all the differences should not be personalised against members, and must be put forward in an open-minded manner. To be a better forum, views should not be of/for a mass majority of one nation, it would be more inviting if all user nations were taken equally. The new house rules will sit well, max efficiency from the moderators (which is not wavering "yet") is needed to achieve optimum performance here. At the moment though, things are not too bad.
Some good points here. I always prefer to see balance too. That is why I visit many different forums. For the sake of discussion, I suppose one might draw a comparison between these two people: Mr Sausage lives in Dormington and is a man of habit: he uses the same shops, knows his onions and has a cup of tea at 5 o'clock. On Tuesdays he meets his mates from work at the pub where they play darts until 9.30 and leave just before closing time. Every year he takes a week's holiday in Dormington-on-Sea, but is sometimes joined by his mates. He is very fond of his Elvis collection but also likes Cliff Richard. He knows what he likes and what he doesn't like. He knows his place and what to expect and has his life nicely mapped out. Miss Caviar flies the world and has diverse interests. She buys shoes in Milan and enjoys iced coffee whenever - sometimes with cream. She is spontaneous with a preference for fresh people and places to visit. After a recent holiday in South Africa, she flew to her sister's in Switzerland, meeting her new brother-in-law the next day at a neighbour's barbecue, who'd arrived by helicopter from Monaco. Later that day, they flew up above the snow line to watch the sun go down behind Mt Blanc. Just before landing, the three of them received an invitation to a concert in Vienna. "We'll be with you by 8:30!" she exclaimed. Restricting one's space and discussion limits one's experience. Rationing membership of a forum is restrictive; and restricting what can be said is fish and chips only on Fridays.
I am constantly annoyed by the consistent hatred towards certain drivers whom I quite like (Webber, Massa, Hamilton, etc.) and people still think it's ok to have a good, demeaning laugh at said drivers. Honestly, it does not produce anything of any value to any conversation and it will only result in a bloodbath.
And I'm consistently annoued by the BS people write about their favourite drivers, who use any bit of information, twist it out of context and then use it as proof that their driver is best/deserved to win. If you don't want people to tell you exactly how bad they are don't come in trying to tell us they are the greatest driver ever born, especially when they can't even beat their team-mate. Also people who start arguements then run around crying and making a fuss when someone accepts their offer, who turns up now and again, starts arguments then cries to moderators when people give him back what he asks for and gets good threads closed off.
I read the above post, which personally criticised me by name, shortly after it had been posted. I then carefully watched and speculated how long it would be before it was noticed by a moderator. 5 hours later my member name was removed and the rest of the post was left untouched. Yet when I posted a comment my entire post was deleted on the grounds that it mentioned another member's by name. Erm? Consistency I suppose. Leaving that aside Why would any intelligent person get annoyed about someone having a favourable opinion about a driver? Is it only a small clique that is allowed to have such views? How does a member qualify to become one of the members of this small clique of opinion deciders?
Regardless of whether there is any basis to what has been said here, surely it is not helpful to 'name and shame' publicly with labels which might cause offence? I have no intention of taking sides here but public comments of an inflammatory nature really should not be on show and do nothing for the credibility of the forum in general, thus making others less likely to add quality. Regardless of accuracy or historical basis, the 'named and shamed' one is likely to be further inflamed and ever more likely to retaliate in similar fashion; and the downward spiral continues. I feel it would be better if, when people feel a need to express a grievance at someone else, they make more constructive use of the Personal Message facility within this site. This reduces the potential for embarrassment and improves the chance of being able to smooth out one's differences with another member. Perhaps this thread is itself an example of the manner in which 'flash-points' can occur?
I find it ironic that a thread that's supposed to be about improving the quality of the forum's content has become a slanging match between two members. Way to miss the point guys.
