Either your talking about Smug's bollocks about us editing his posts and "starting" threads in his name that he never wrote, or you're talking about Fez commenting about posts being changed when they're quoted?. If it's the former it was total crap. We have the ability to edit anybody's post, but when we do something like that it isn't just obvious to the supermods, it displays that fact for all the world to see (I'll edit the post above this one by adding an extra full stop to the end so you can see just how obvious it is). As far as starting threads under his name goes. All we did was move posts off the thread they had nothing to do with where he was intentionally continuing discussions he was being asked to have elsewhere (on a new thread or by PM, and we gave him the choice). When we move posts to a new thread, or merge threads, the first post posted goes as the opening post and we have no control over the order they appear in. If it's the latter he wasn't just talking about us being able to do it, he was talking about anybody being able to, and there's not an awful lot we can do. You're able to edit the quotes when you make them so that if you just wanted to respond to this part of this post you could delete the opening section of this post (you'll see I've split your post into two bits for illustration). That obviously leaves it open to someone changing the content of the post and it not being obvious they've done it. When you see an 8 page thread like the club name or the City of Culture award threads we're not going to look at every post that includes a quote and then go and find the original post to make sure that it's not been tampered with, I mean we'd need a full time team of mods just to deal with Tickler's multi-quotes. If someone feels their post has been edited in a quote then they can report the post using the triangle symbol down at the bottom left of the screen to highlight it to us, but I can't remember ever receiving a message for this reason. I don't really know what more we can be reasonably expected to do about a problem that isn't obvious and that nobody tells us about at the time. There's been a few server issues recently (usually just after the owner tries to fix something ), but the guest viewing thing sounds like you're being logged out between posts. Unless you know that's the case because you're logging back in, are you also finding that threads are showing new posts (by being bold) and then go back to normal without you opening them? (Also, are you on the site through a normal internet browser or through an app on your phone?
That is an excellent response that lays out my concern with the full accessibility of the system. I understand it is a part of the system set-up and would require IT involvement to change it, but I never understood the relationship between posts, reports, mods, super-mods and the site owner - why would I? I have a better idea now, but it was an unpleasant experience getting there. But let me explain why I have underlined the last part. I made the same comments about the snide editing at that time (it's clear all mods and an ex-mod, who intervened, were aware of what was happening), initially my posts were being edited to misrepresent what I was saying; this was being done by both content deletion and content change/addition. I thought it was wrong and not the correct way to progress the conversation - let's face it, a similar conversation at the bar would not last long on that basis. Now here is the added level of difficulty/frustration I faced: I was dealing with someone who was on the opposite side of the argument to me and using this dubious method of argument, but that same poster then adopted his position of moderator and did exactly the same, but then moved posts as you have described. At the same time he was sending me personal messages which were intended to provoke. The line between poster and moderator was well beyond blurred, and, in my opinion, deliberately abused. I tried to reason my position in open forum, which, in my opinion was the right place as it was a public conversation, but received the usual abuse from the other mods (not you) about being whiney, etc. These remarks once again crossed the line between poster and moderator with no distinction between the two. It is extremely frustrating to have to deal with, but when it is combined with an argument style that is deliberately provocative (not what I would expect from a mod) then the vast majority of excellent moderation is tainted; the continued use of this piss-poor method has now led to a small group adopting a similar style to counter it, which is sad and disappointing - but if you wish to rid the site of this, then perhaps a look at this editing ability, it's acceptable use and some form of distinction (a lead heading of MODERATOR POST for instance) between a user comment and a moderator comment, would draw clear lines of argument/guidance, whilst also acting as a gate the mod must open to return to the impartiality of moderation - it can only help when you are tired, pissed, not bothered to read back or emotionally involved. It would also help a reasonable poster to respond in the correct manner to the correct addressee, poster or moderator.
No it wasn't. There were some questions on how it worked and also some criticism of the motives. On the first occasion I posted a perfectly valid thread which was sarcastically retitled, to attract adverse comments, then moved from the Hull board to Sunderland. If it was considered unacceptable it should have simply been deleted. The second time it happened I was making reasonable on-topic comments which were moved to a new thread entitled 'smuginantibes' and nothing to do with the topic. This naturally lead to adverse comments, as people wouldn't know it wasn't me who posted the thread, and lead to me being called a ****, ****wit etc. I predicted, on that thread, that it would be locked as soon as mods received any criticism and that's what happened. I accept what you say about the technical aspects but, as these criticisms of mod threads keep appearing, perhaps you should accept some of that as well. BTW, I was perfectly polite to you so it's poor that you should refer to my questions about 'editing his posts and "starting" threads in his name' as bollocks. It's reasonable that ordinary posters don't know exactly how all aspects of the website work and ask for a bit of clarity. Whatever the case, I've never seen a board where the mods are mentioned so often, if I were you I'd ask why some Hull posters feel their board isn't such a great place to be. The mods often seem to be talking about being mods, making veiled threats and seem to account for half of the posts ....... just saying. p.s. I haven't come back to post, on here, I just feel I should be allowed to respond to your comments. Bye and good luck with your HCAFC dilemma.
Tubbytastic only ever wanted to argue with people. He never contributed any sensible arguments. He just argued for the sake of getting at people and many interesting threads were hijacked by him and spoilt because no matter now much you wanted to ignore him he got to you in the end and then someone would retaliate and the thread would deteriorate further. Different views are one thing but provoking an argument for the sake of it is ridiculous. I even thought on the occasions I had a spat with him that he was kind of lying in wait and as soon as I posted something he would pounce.
You do keep trying to sell that jaded version of your visits here, yet keep confirming elsewhere why it's bollocks. You need help for your issues.
You are quite right in what you're saying, unfortunately Jules, there are a number of posters that have agendas (see above) and will take any opportunity to whinge at moderation. whilst trying to avoid people realising their part in it. You can predict quite easily who is liable to appear on these threads and what they'll say. They tend to be the same ones that claim to have an opposing view on any topic, but often claim to be playing devils advocate too. It's boring in the extreme, they've already cost us one mod.
BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER BADGER.....MUUUUSHROOOOOOOM............(now that's annoying)
As I've said previously when you've made the same allegations, all actions can be seen by the supermods, even at a later date. If you feel bias or abuse has come in to the modding, report it. If mods are abusing their role, it will be apparent and the supermods and site owner will act.
I know you have said it previously, that doesn't make it right; it has also been said it is impossible to read it all and as I made no report, the super-mods would probably have been unaware - I was unaware of their existence then. I didn't bring this up again for the sake of it, but because another mod wrote a very good response to another poster and I and that incident were a key part of it, so I have simply restated it as it was and will remain. Beyond that I don't really care, as I see you bicker endlessly with posters and the line between you as a poster and you as a mod is very unclear and usually very provocative and argumentative; there have been a number of other very reasonable posters who have also had concerns with your style.
As has been said to you previously, if you have an issue with moderation, you can report it to the supermods. As for 'bickering' it's more repeating the same thing to the same people. It's boring for all concerned, including those reading. Perhaps my replies would be more measured if I simply had a cut and paste stock reply to the usual suspects raising the questions they've had answered again and again.
Any reference to super-mods is quite a recent thing, to me, at least, so your once again repeated point is pointless. That's your perception of the 'bickering', I don't believe everyone shares your view. But all is said, let's move on.
I keep looking to see if the 'echo' function's got left on or if the 'ignore' function has an extra option of 'only for certain elements of replies' that others are using and I don't know how to.
That's a bit unfair isn't it? He was only asking. I am a knobend. Edited by Hull City AFC (DMD) on Friday 22nd February at 12.13pm
