Just a thought, but why don't we try to start next year with a few ground rules to avoid much of the rubbish that has de-valued the quality of this forum for the last few months? A few suggestions: 1. When a thread is clearly 'anti-name change' people like me and others (who are bored by the whole thing) don't contribute to it. This will allow those with the same opinion to air their grievances without the whole thing degenerating into playground name-calling. 2. If someone posts an antagonistic thread aimed at "fuelling the fire" between the two camps we all just ignore it and let it drop off the page. 3. Posters who want to post new threads on the name change consider the existing threads on the board before posting new ones that are very similar. These posters can still make their point by adding their information to an existing thread. This is a method that works well with threads like "Bruce's January shopping list." so there should be no problem doing it for the name-change issue. 4. We all try to remember that this is primarily a football forum for football supporters and not pollute every thread with the same subject. 5. Finally a request for moderators to put aside their personal preferences regarding the name change issue and instead concentrate on trying to encourage the above points, and allow the board to get back to football / jokes / good banter and all of the other things most of us joined up for.
Damn good idea Craig. The whole name-change issue has become an annoying and potentially self-destructive diversion for those of us who come on here to discuss the team and what happens ON the field, but its become a crusade for the CTID name change proponents. My suggestion to the MODS...make it a sticky at the top of the page....exclusively for discussion, pro and con, of that issue, and leave it completely off the regular thread discussions. Then those of us who are simply not interested can have some peace and talk football/banter etc.
Being fair, that applies both ways. The other night there were 4 football threads at the top of the board before any name change threads. Then some plank came on and started posting on the name change threads to complain there weren't any football threads. Then there was somebody in a similar situation posted on a name change thread about whether or not who was going to partner Sagbo in the next game was more important or not, and then had the nerve to complain we were trying to dictate where he could post when I pointed out we were already talking about that on the other threads that he'd completely ignored. It doesn't go unnoticed that the ones that do that the most are also amongst the ones that do the most complaining about bias moderating, despite the fact we let them keep posting and disrupting those threads in the same way. ---------------------------------------------------- With the idea of the sticky I'm happy with us doing that if it functions in the same way as the transfer threads do, people want it to work that way, and providing people are happy for us to run with 5 stickies during January (Bruce's transfers, other PL transfers, the Prediction League, name change, and History). Logically you'd drop the history thread for the month to keep us at the target of no more than 4 as that's the least used thread in January, but it'd be a bit too ironic to drop the history thread for the name change thread.. With the transfers we have the sticky that covers all the rumours, but when anything significant happens the player gets their own separate thread. With the name change we'd have to operate in a similar way. If there's a significant event then it's allowed it's own thread. I would say significant events include: the club/AA giving an interview/issuing a statement in the matter, the FA/PL or their officials or officials of their member clubs giving an interview/issuing a statement on the matter, CTWD or any other stakeholder issuing a statement saying suggesting what they intend to give as their opinion to the FA when consulted, or a merchandising launch. Those are things which are relevent to fans what ever their view, or are of interest to supporters of one side or the other who don't want to get involved with the debates. If CTWD or anyone else started issuing statements every day then it would start taking the piss unless their was actually a change in their view so it would have to change our policy. There'd be no dragging specific threads on and on and on either, after a few days they'd have to be merged in (I'd suggest a CTWD response to a City release should be merged in (we can change the thread name to reflect the response) and vice versa. The merchandising issues I'm saying should be allowed because I don't think guys like playfortheshirt, CTWD, or any pro name change group should have to do their advertising in the main thread when there's people who can't be arsed debating it but who like the stuff and want to buy one. What won't count as significant posts is yet another journalist supporting/opposing the cause, or anyone just randomly starting another thread about marketing and the rest, they need to be people with influence over the decision to justify their own thread. I'll have a look around and see if I can find anything else that's banal that I've missed.
Obviously it works both ways Ricardo, but instead of thinking about individual posters and individual incidents why don't we try to work on solutions.
It sounds, at first glance, to be eminently sensible......However - the 'name-change/anti' subject surely can't be fitted into one sticky, can it? You get threads/subjects like this: http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/242753-Marketing-Get-the-fundamentals-right and then this: http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/242495-Richard-Scudamore-hopes-it-s-a-NO-for-tigers then this: http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/241682-We-Are-Not-Alone-!!! Three very different approaches to the same (i.e. name-change) subject.....
I agree with you Craig but Canada Tiger couldn't you let your personal opinion drop? The whole thread is about not making everything about the name change yet you have to get a sly dig in there, really was it necessary? Are you really in need of having a go at some other members? Craig i agree wholeheartedly, i think the whole thing has divided the forum and no proper discussion goes on, even about the name change, its just belittling each other, whether you support it or not. There are so few decent football discussion now i rarely post as much as i used to because of it.
Well apart from the fact it won't work, I am not prepared to stop myself challenging lies and misleading half truths, especially in the CTWD influenced threads. It's a discussion forum. Not a closed shop for a specific group(s). A better suggestion would be for people to stop creating loads of threads of the same type, of posting nothing except a link to another site/article etc. That's something that could easily be dealt with by mods. If people want to post stuff free from criticism or to not have their views challenged, they should go post on AN or CI, as I don't see there's likely to be a sub forum created here with access restricted to the special ones.
I agree Stan. It would be difficult to have one universal sticky, but 50% of the threads could be posted by the OP in existing threads. Such as if one reporter / manager / official disagrees with the name change there's no need to start another thread for someone else with the same opinion when it can be added to the first one.
OK - since the pack was shuffled and a number of threads merged, I've tried to find a relevant thread in which to insert a posting. (E.g. 2 of which I put in the 'We Are Not Alone...' thread, last night. I'm trying. (very trying, I know...)
The whole point is not to stop you expressing your opinions on the name change, but to keep your postings out of none name change related discussions; you know, the football talk that some people come on here for. It's killing the forum right now, and to be honest, its ****ing childish by both sides.
Also all of the arguments have gone round in circles about five hundred times by now. It's pretty apparent that people have made their minds up so what's the point of continuing to argue about it? Only the posters who want to score personal points are keeping the debate alive. The rest of us seem willing to agree to disagree.
and if you're happy to put up with the banal **** that Happy Tiger comes out with every time she posts then you should stay on here
No offence Hapless, but your hypocrisy and stupidity are breathtaking. You're usually the first turd to spit his dummy out and bleat about moderation, bans etc. You come across not only as a shrill ponce but now also someone who is spectacularly dumb about what a forum entails. Merry Christmas all the same.
Thanks. If you thought any different I'd be taking a long hard look at myself. Then using bleach to clean myself. Quite clearly I know what a discussion forum is for, otherwise I wouldn't be on here arguing it with ****wits like you. I've never bleated about a ban, although I live in hope one day you and Erik will get ****ed off from here of course, and that's not a small club that think the same. I know, you like the attention, so you're not bothered. You will **** up enough one day though so that we can bypass the club mods and go straight to the one's who will ban you. Shrill Ponce? You think, from a forum, that I'm a pimp with a shrill voice? Surely I'd be too busy looking after mah ho's to fight racism and bigotry online if I was? Hypocrisy? Merry Christmas my arse, I doubt you're taking a day or two off from dreaming of a White England.
If we feel someone has done enough to warrant a ban, we request it of the supermods. If you feel the system is failing with that in some way, you're quite at liberty to contact them yourself. Although your post does seem to show that you've chose not to do that so far as you don't feel the posters have "****ed up enough one day though", so maybe you're attaching comments to them that they haven't made on here?
