Where are they
- Thread starter SussexBlueBird
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
If Jager is not an active member, has announced he's leaving the forum and won't post anymore, it's disingenuous of him to moderate others comments.
If that is really what you're suggesting Scottswan, his moderator status should be removed by Syd or Mick immediately.
A silent mod with a club loyalty policing posters from other clubs smacks of big brother tactics, and it stinks.
If that is really what you're suggesting Scottswan, his moderator status should be removed by Syd or Mick immediately.
A silent mod with a club loyalty policing posters from other clubs smacks of big brother tactics, and it stinks.
Err, why? He's a Swans fan, it's the Swans board and I really don't see the harm in someone using powers of moderation for the better, regardless of whether he's publicly said he's not going to post any more. He can't touch anything other than what's posted on that board and having a "silent" third moderator (which isn't really the case anyway) isn't the worst thing in the world.
I've looked at the stuff he's deleted and it's stuff I'd delete anyway, so whats the big deal? Sounds, to me, like people are trying to make this into a big deal when in reality it's of no consequence to anyone except John, who has to put more time into his wumming because it keeps getting deleted.
Also, you mention "club loyalty" and I see that in evidence here. You jump on what you feel are poor ethics by Jager but make no mention of John being caught either repeating damaging gossip, or worse, outright lying about someone else. What's your opinion on that?
I've looked at the stuff he's deleted and it's stuff I'd delete anyway, so whats the big deal? Sounds, to me, like people are trying to make this into a big deal when in reality it's of no consequence to anyone except John, who has to put more time into his wumming because it keeps getting deleted.
Also, you mention "club loyalty" and I see that in evidence here. You jump on what you feel are poor ethics by Jager but make no mention of John being caught either repeating damaging gossip, or worse, outright lying about someone else. What's your opinion on that?
whats wrong with banter, i'd like to see the offending posts as JH feels he is overly moderated, i agree he said something ages ago that wasn't called for, but apart from that i think he has every right to post on the swansea board even if it is only tongue in cheek stuff, we have dai on here sometimes wumming but i dont delete it as i feel it adds to banter and the atmosphere of the board, my opinion only of course, i dont know what your philosophy is, one thing i dont want the cardiff board to be is sterile which it certainly isnt..
Scott!
I'm surprised you can't see the wrong in what is being done,if as you say Jager continues his role as a mod on a forum he decided to leave.When many from your side constantly accuse JH of being a liar it doesn't appear that a poster on your board is taking the moral high ground.
I'm surprised you can't see the wrong in what is being done,if as you say Jager continues his role as a mod on a forum he decided to leave.When many from your side constantly accuse JH of being a liar it doesn't appear that a poster on your board is taking the moral high ground.
I mean John was saying that Jager had been removed by the not606 higher-ups, and, in my opinion (although I appreciate that's relative) implied he had something to do with it by saying "I haven't decided on Phil yet". I then proved this wrong by pointing out Jager was still active, albeit in a background capacity.
I can "see the wrong" done here, but, as I've said, Jager has removed the posts of one user, who has a track record of abuse and winding up fans of my team, so you'll forgive me for playing the worlds saddest song on the worlds smallest violin.
Well Scott,
If you're happy for a non poster with a massive chip on his shoulder to moderate on your board, so be it.
I can't see how this is fair on a cross board post though, I have only posted on the Swans board a few times and that was to wish you well in the Prem.
I do however post on Cardiff/Swansea cross board posts and I think it would be wrong for a "silent" moderator to have the ability to delete posts.
If you're happy for a non poster with a massive chip on his shoulder to moderate on your board, so be it.
I can't see how this is fair on a cross board post though, I have only posted on the Swans board a few times and that was to wish you well in the Prem.
I do however post on Cardiff/Swansea cross board posts and I think it would be wrong for a "silent" moderator to have the ability to delete posts.
It isn't on a cross board, that's my point! As a moderator, you can only moderate threads that are primarily on your board, for example I can moderate nothing on this thread. As I've said, he has only, exclusively, removed posts solely on the windup from John, on threads solely on the Swans board, so I see this as a storm in a teacup. As I've said, if anyone has a problem take it higher, but I think it's all a bit sad.
Scott!
It's not just John's posts being deleted though is it.The post's are popular on both sides because they can go off at a tangent.I've had some good banter with certain Jax on John's threads.The current situation hardly serves to build bridges.
It's not just John's posts being deleted though is it.The post's are popular on both sides because they can go off at a tangent.I've had some good banter with certain Jax on John's threads.The current situation hardly serves to build bridges.
Sorry if I got that wrong about cross board posts, but I think it's a bit sad that someone who signed off with a cloud of glory is still able to make any board a laughing stock.
Pundits Comments was a cross board thread by John very recently.It was deleted on the swan side.I assume no reason was given to John?
thats my point, i think its unfair that on a site which prides itself on free comment and debate, that tongue in cheek banter (which is what i assume it is, unless i'm proven wrong) is deleted, as i said i think only racist etc crap should be removed, and unless its someone like supersaint22, an explanation should be given as to why something is deleted, i think its poor moderating to not do so, and john has the right, if nothing else, to at least know why his stuff has been deleted..
Posting has nothing to do with moderation . Run your board the way you want & leave other boards to run their own . The only sad part of this is your demand to let Hughes run riot on a board that's not his , really