Hinting vs Naming

As this was put as a new thread, I feel that a new opening post makes more sense. A member asked if telling the site about revenge ratings was pointing towards their review, or indeed towards the revenge rater concerned.

CHANGED BY ADMIN

We are not all tarred with the same brush.

Questioning the integrity and reasons for posting a thread that relates to a current event is not an personal insult but more a question to what the real reason for posting the thread was.

In both cases it was so easy to find out who it was who did what so you may as well have named them and saved people the bother of checking out the reviews, even ops stop people doing that.

None were personal insults, name calling or baiting Rachael, unlike our nice friend here and his name calling.

Am I losing the plot here or is it post if you agree but not if you don't?

The rules of the forum are straightforward. No hinting no naming. Since they are being interpreted in different ways by members, there will be a new rule list at the end of the week when I have more time.

THis is not a response to Soundsexciting rather a general comment on the naming rules that often pop up on forums like this.

It is possible to be generic, one just has to think about how a post is phrased - rather than "I received a X rating on an opinion and think it unfair" one could write "what do member's think about odd ratings?" or "I have noticed that certain members rate down unfairly, what should be done?"

However, I do agree that posts stating that "I have won a crown/diamond" (not picking on you here Rachel) are equally offensive IF there is an enforced no naming rule.

I guess what each forum has to decide is the extent to which it is happy for naming to occur. Naming is different from shaming or encouraging people to root out trouble.

I would agree with you there Claire but I feel that sometimes we all like to boast a bit about getting crowns etc, as we get a bit excited now and then.

I think hinting where the result is harmless (as in not getting people to look for a specific person who they think has doen something different to the norm.) is okay. saying "I got a crown/diamond!" is really just like saying "I earn 50K!" or "I have just scored the winning goal for Newcastle agains Chelsea!"

The principle you are veering towards is quite right, but maybe a bit of common sense would avoid all of these issues, no?

I think Claire has a point. The reason I posted that I had a crown was that the thread concerned was "how does one get a crown?" and I was so shocked I got one, I posted it to show members that even I can get em and really at that stage of the game, most people have read it anyway. I shall talk to other admin and see what they feel should be appropriate rules on the site and how to implement them in a way that suits all.

Be carefull Rachael otherwise you will be starting to get yourself in a situation where people don't know where to draw the line.


I just think a common sense rule is needed here and not a set in stone one.

Common sense ruling has always been the way that we went on this forum. No naming no pointing fingers. Apparently that is not clear enough for some members, so we will work out rules for the forum that are. We wish for the forum to be an enjoyable experience for all, and only by deciding what those rules are and how to enforce them in a fair way can we move forward.

If your not careful we wont be able to write anything on this site anymore, i think it is just really petty.

Yes I would like members to feel they can post what they want, and as far as I am concerned, the rules that matter are no pointing fingers at other members or no naming. These will be clarified later.

I thought we had a nice smooth running site before a certain members stuck their ore in.........

Not sure who those members are !! We do have a nice smooth site most of the time Lynzie, and in order to keep it that way, just be the member you always were. I dont think you have every broken the rules at all, and your postings are welcome.

the problems that happen on sites like this is that where members should warn moderators about postings that go against the rules, they post a reply. If members were responsible enough to keep personal issues between themselves and the members involved and not post it on a board then the problems would not arise.

Thingywhatsit wrote:

the problems that happen on sites like this is that where members should warn moderators about postings that go against the rules, they post a reply. If members were responsible enough to keep personal issues between themselves and the members involved and not post it on a board then the problems would not arise.

I agree 100%

Good grief, thats a first. You okay ?

Thingywhatsit wrote:

Good grief, thats a first. You okay ?

ran out of Calpol.

Just so that there's no mistaking, my point was simply to make a point. There are degrees of no naming from no names at all to no nasty names. Where I sit in the debate I think has been made clear in various places before.

Personally I rather that a common sense approach is taken - naming should be at the discretion of the board participants provided that it is done in such a way as to not antagonise or cause unnecessary hurt.

I have never had an issue with factual info being presented.

This is an argument that crops up time and time again on every forum. Each has its own way of dealing. It's also, I suspect, one that it going to come up with increasing regularity following the successful libel prosecution earlier this week of a woman who targeted a political party candidate on a forum. That's probably a different debate entirely as there is no libel if what is stated is true, but, expect more of this folks!

Your friendly lawyer, over and out!

Do you know, despite all that she is really quite nice.

Quote :

Personally I rather that a common sense approach is taken - naming should be at the discretion of the board participants provided that it is done in such a way as to not antagonise or cause unnecessary hurt.

I agree with you Claire and always tried not to have strict rules, but rather trust members to participate in a friendly way. Trouble is that where people's opinions differ, what I find lacking is the means to argue a point without getting personal. There's no need for personalities to come into subjects at all really because it's a topic being discussed, not people. In fact, I use this in life too. My husband and I regularly talk about things that we have differing views on, and that's what I would like to see here. If I don't like what he says I don't call him names and jump up and down. I discuss. Discussion is really healthy. When we first opened the forum, we had loads of moderators but hardly any need to moderate. Now we have strong moderators and I believe that instead of retort and getting back at people who have posted something you find as objectionable, the way to go is to advise a moderator and let them decide. I belong to forums where you cannot type in capitals without the post being deleted, and find this infuriating and don't want this forum to go down that road. If ALL members adhered to politeness, and silently reported things they thought were not right, they could be dealt with in a more discreet manner. You can never please everyone, although a good way forward is to think before you post "is this personal ?" and if it is, modify it in a way that puts forward your argument without being personal. Ask yourself "Does my posting point at anyone?" and if it does, change it so it doesn't. All I would ask of members is to be reasonable in their postings, and remember to treat others with the same respect you wish to be treated with.

A good start would be to warn anyone calling someone a rude name (not in jest) about their future conduct really.

There is no need for it and no excuse.

Also, maybe a three strike rule for people who do not stick to the rules?

Just an idea.

We had weakest link on the other site, and I would have to talk to other admin before implementing something like that. For the moment, I believe that being decent to each other would be a good start.

And the personal insults?

bearing in mind you can be held responsible now (See Claires post) I feel it would be better to have a zero tollerance to this.

I have a zero tolerance to personal insults.

Unless it's about Angus. Who smells