Feedback Post

Have we put together "standings" yet?
Click to expand...
No. The closest we come to that would be to count the number of violations moved to the Woodshed for a particular poster.

The guy is right in a sense - formerfan, as we all know, pushes the rules to the limit. But lately, I don't think he's even done that. Instead, he simply is posting negatives, and for some reason, members seem to want to convince him the program is moving in the right direction. A futile effort - if he can't see improvment after this year, he'll never see it.

 
I definitely think we need some type of system, for a couple reasons

1 Serve as an example to other members as to whats unacceptable behavior

2) Show we are fair & liberal and dont just ban members for personal reasons -- this is important b/c many other boards have bad reps for being ban-happy when someone says something that hurts their feelings or criticizes the program.

the 3 strike system accomplishes both of these things. I havent been around the board very much lately, but as far as Im aware we've been enforcing this consistently, resulting in bans for several people, i.e. armistead etc. But of course this is not to say that we cant still ban jackholes without 3 warnings when deserved.

I know FF pushes the limits quite often, but I think we're at a consensus that overall he is respectful of the rules and not deserving of a ban -- but let me know if things have changed. Other than him, are there others that are deserving of a ban, or havent been assigned strikes appropriately?

And if you guys think the strike system isnt a good deterrent or very effective in enforcing the rules, Im certainly open to new suggestions - so lets discuss.

 
I don't have a problem with the design of the 3 strike system. I do think the 3 strike system hasn't been enforced in every case. Look at the offending posts' thread. Former has 3 or 4 in there. How does that work? That's what I mean when I say we either enforce it or do away with it. Otherwise, it becomes a joke IMO.

Given that, and the fact that it has been so long since the last recorded violation by Former, it would be awkward to say the least to enforce it at this point. So is our only choice to wipe the slate clean? That doesn't sound too good either.

I would say he is respectful of the rules, now. In the past, well not so much. AR is right that recently, he's just been a big douche when it comes to anything positive. The guy comments on the bowl game which he admittedly hasn't even seen in it's entirety.

I know it sounds like I am trying to run him out of town. I'm really not. I would just like to see the rules enforced equally and not at the expense of a few posts to get our visit count up. Great football games drive that up. Most every time the kid posts in a thread, everyone goes apesh#t. And it's not just the fact that he posts. It's the fact that he quite possible is the biggest a-hole on the board that get's people riled up. There are people on the board that have dissenting opinions that aren't like that and it's great. You can actually have a decent conversation with out trying to weed through all the bullsh#t that makes up most of his text.

Anyway, sorry for being so long winded. That's just the way I look at it.

 
:yeah

IMO FF serves a useful purpose on many threads and on some he and Nameless get into seeing who can pee the highest up the tree. Neither really break the rules just p/o the other posters. I am hesitant to delete a post usually because I dont see the post soon enough to make it effective. :thumbs It appears that since the CU and MU wins many posters have hit their BS threshold with FF and Nameless much quicker. IMHO

 
Back
Top