I was originally going to post the following statement in the "Interesting" thread but decided it needed a place of its own on the main board as I think it is quite important.

Its threads like the "Interesting" thread (and a few other current ones) that sometimes make me wonder why Donald and myself bother putting in the time, effort and money we do to run this site.

The original poster, whether by design or accident invites a barrage of negativity by saying everyone is quiet after a win, and true to form the poster is proved 100% correct, a trait that is repeated in thread after thread after thread. And when we cant abuse <insert name of player or club official here> we get down to abusing our fellow supporters, site posters, or a particular favourite of many .... the mods and admin who volunteer their time to try and make sure it is a pleasurable place for fans of ICT to congregate and discuss things.

I have had some low points on the site a few times over the 15 years since I started it, but right now, I think it has reached bottom and I can honestly say that personally, I now take ZERO pleasure in reading this board and dealing with all the petty squabbles and back-biting that goes on. It is no longer a fun venture to run, it is a chore. For most of this season, once I have updated various report/stats/league-table pages on a Saturday, I tend to bugger off for the rest of the weekend secure in the knowledge that by Monday there will be some form of manufactured ****storm going on. For the most part, that Monday morning firefight has been something that has been way too easy to predict!!!

This situation, where some so-called fans of the club are showing utter contempt not only for the club and the team, but also for their fellow fans, and (in some cases) those who provide (or help to run) this free service where they can vent their spleen, is not a situation that can continue. That is not what this site is about. This is not why I started it, and it is not something I am willing to be a part of if it continues down this negative, petty and abusive road.

I am not saying we all have to be happy clappers, blissfully toe the party line and swallow all the BS that we get fed from time to time. I am not saying we cannot disagree with each other or the club in posts. I am not saying we cant highlight things that are wrong or be negative when there are negative things going on. thats what a forum is all about ... its a place to discuss things like adults, to put your point across or raise awareness of your concerns and to show the club that you will be heard when they do things you dont like or when results dont go our way. However, being constantly petty, abusive and negative dilutes any impact, influence, or relevance that this forum may once have had, or may have again in the future. Right now it is (quite correctly) seen as a joke or an irritation to many !

If you look back on both mine and Donald's posts of the last couple of years you will see that we have both praised the club when we thought they got it right but also been highly critical when we thought they got it wrong. I have agreed with many of you, I have disagreed with many of you and I have resembled both remarks with many of you too. However, in most cases, I have done so in the context of a discussion rather than being abusive. As far as I am concerned, that is the way it should be. Everyone should have the right to express their opinion, and everyone should be allowed to do so without being abused just because someone else disagrees. Contrary to popular belief, the moderation team will not delete a post just because it doesnt match our own opinion. One of the major reasons for that is that we don't all have the same opinions !! We quite deliberately chose a moderation team with diverse opinions and we think that has been shown to be the case over the last few seasons. Regardless of any issues we have with the running of the club, we are also usually first in the queue to offer our help where and when we can, or to browbeat first Mike and now Darren about things we can try and do, advertise, or get the club to do to benefit the fans as well as themselves ... thats part of being a fan and that desire has not diminished in me despite the miles (or my TFC season ticket).

However, if there is one thing that annoys me more than anything else on this board, and it is something that has been on the increase over the last 12 months, it is the type of reply that frequently comes after a post where someone expressed an opinion in polite and normal language, a response that calls them names that need to be asterisked or calls them stupid or basically denegrates or abuses them in some fashion. That is not acceptable. Depending on the veracity of the abuse it is somewhere between disrespectful and bullying and the bottom line is that if that is how you think you can behave, or want to behave, then quite simply we do not want you on this site, not now, not in the future, not ever. We are not telling you how to behave, that is entirely up to you, we are simply telling you what is and is not acceptable on this forum and reminding you that the consequences of inappropriate behaviour are wholly your fault.

Ok, now that I have got my feelings on the current situation out in the open for all to see, it is time to talk about a solution. I will be honest and say I do not know what it is in its entirety, I wish I did.

I know we could go to one extreme or the other with moderation and either over or under moderate ... in fact we continue to get both accusations thrown in our face on a regular basis right now. However, I know from experience that neither of these approaches will work so I have binned both of those ideas.

For that reason, I am therefore putting the onus on the site users themselves. Myself and Donald might pay the bills, and the moderators might volunteer to help run the site, but everyone on the site has a stake in its continued existence. My number one requirement is that the unsolicited and unwarranted abuse has to stop and we get back to being a discussion forum rather than a board where people feel they cant express an opinion without being bullied or abused for stating it. As I said above, it is fine to disagree or post an alternative viewpoint, but that should be done with at least a degree of civility. If we cant do that, then quite simply this forum may cease to exist in its current form, its as simple as that.

I have discussed my current feelings with the moderators and with Donald and we have had - and continue to have - a full and frank discussion on the matter. The bottom line is that we are prepared to look at how this forum is run and to make changes to our rules to accomodate any realistic and sensible suggestions from the userbase (for example: tightening up abuse penalties and perhaps relaxing other rules). We will also try once again to make the moderation and rule system more transparent and consistent so that it is clear to all what is and is not acceptable. However, it cannot and will not be a one-way street. Site users - assuming they want to remain members of this site - will have to play by whatever "golden rules" are finalised or they will face exclusion from the site regardless of who they are or how long they have been a member.

As I said above, I am willing to listen to sensible and realistic suggestions but I just want to make it clear that this thread is not going to be allowed to turn into a bitch-fest about how you got a warning for this or that or how you dont agree with certain things. If you got a warning and want to ask about it or have a problem with something then we have a process for dealing with complaints and you should send a message through the contact form in the site menu. Those kinds of posts will be deleted from this thread.

I want this thread to be for constructive comments and realistic suggestions. If there is some criticism mixed in and it is in the context of a reply with something constructive then that is fine. However, please be pre-warned that this posting is deadly serious and as melodramatic as it may sound, the future direction and existence of the site is on the table so if I feel that any poster is trying to "take the piss" on a subject that I feel is extrmely important I will have no hesitation in excluding them from the thread.

so now that I have said my piece and given out the guidelines for this thread, let the fun begin !!!

I have to agree with The Knowledge. If you can't at least try to post in English, using punctuation and grammar etc to the best of your ability, as well as posting in a normal manner (not this new line for every phrase nonsense), then you shouldn't even try at all.

This isn't a English class, if it's readable who really cares!

That's the point though, sometimes it isn't and at the bare minimum, people should at least try and make an effort.

I have to agree with The Knowledge. If you can't at least try to post in English, using punctuation and grammar etc to the best of your ability, as well as posting in a normal manner (not this new line for every phrase nonsense), then you shouldn't even try at all.

This isn't a English class, if it's readable who really cares!

That's the point though, sometimes it isn't and at the bare minimum, people should at least try and make an effort.

You have no point though. If someone makes a valid point, yet it isn't in proper english or has the correct grammer does it make it any less valid? I think not.

I've yet to see one post on this forum i've not been able to read!

We actually have had some users who's post were very difficult to read/understand. However, it is not for anyone to ridicule users for this and the moderators will tend to talk with these people privately to offer some friendly advice and guidance on how they can improve things.

We don't allow TXT Speak as a matter of course, and we do expect certain unwritten "forum etiquette" to be followed (no posting in all caps or large fonts all the time etc), but in the grand scheme of things it has never, and is not currently, a big issue and we seem to be slipping into the area of nit-picking when we need to be focusing on the larger issues.

Things have improved since this discussion started. We have had one or two who ignored the points raised here and they currently find themselves in moderated status (posts need approving by one of the team before they appear live on the forum) and one or two who have slipped as a result of the anger/frustration of events on the park, which we recognise and understand, and it's been dealt with by giving them a quiet nudge. We still have users sticking their nose in where these decisions have been made, and that doesn't help....but we'll deal with that.

Much is made of what moderators should or should not do and when they should do it. What I would add to that is the fact that each user on any forum is the first line of moderation. You have the power to review your own posts before hitting the submit/send button and taking a moment to read over something before you do so can make a world of difference.....not only for checking spelling/grammar, but for judging the tone/nature of your reply.

Thank you Mick and CaleyD, I am one of the poor written English posters.... and we go round and round this topic once a Quater... lol. sorry Laugh out loud. hehe

At the same time, like has been suggested before, no post counts and titles! I'm a member on several other sites and this does create a "I'm better than you mentality" especially with established members who think there views are the be all and end all, with a lot of 'established' members jumping on the bandwagon! And putting off new members??

we will look at that.

I like Micks idea of moderated posts appearing as "Edited by CTO Staff" in case the poster concerned thinks that they are being targeted by a particular member of the admin staff.

Edited November 30, 200916 yr by RiG

I like Micks idea of moderated posts appearing as "Edited by CTO Staff" in case the poster concerned thinks that they are being targeted by a particular member of the admin staff.

I dont like Micks idea . If your going to censor someones post at least have the balls to put your name to it .

I like Micks idea of moderated posts appearing as "Edited by CTO Staff" in case the poster concerned thinks that they are being targeted by a particular member of the admin staff.

I dont like Micks idea . If your going to censor someones post at least have the balls to put your name to it .

It is not censorship DC, it is moderation and if your posts are deemed in need of moderation then perhaps you should take an introspective look.

I have had posts deemed by particular mods to be inappropriate which in hindsight probably were, but at the time I felt they were justified. For a short period I then took to scrutinising every post of that mod which I saw and picked fault where I could which is not only childish but detracts from the experience/purpose of the forum.

Personally, I believe it's an excellent idea.

at the end of the day we will look at all suggestions put forward and consider them on merit .... we will not please everyone, that is impossible, but we will make a decision based on what we think will make life easier for all.

As regards moderation being by "the team" that is something we will consider but I cant say what we will decide yet as that discussion with the mods hasnt taken place yet and currently, the edit line automatically inserts the "edited by" part into it whether they want to or not.

For a short period I then took to scrutinising every post of that mod which I saw and picked fault where I could which is not only childish but detracts from the experience/purpose of the forum.

Personally, I believe it's an excellent idea.

Glad it wasn't just me doing that. One thing that helped me appreciate the work the mods put in is when they started to use the "reason for edit" box. I realise it's no fun to have to moderate countless posts when you want to enjoy the forum yourself but when you are on the other side and believe you are in the right a wee explanation can make a big difference to how your attitude is affected. I think that the idea of removing the mods ID from the edit is good, it removes the personal element from any ensuing discussion.

And, what do you mean by respect? I certainly get offended by the Islamophobia spoken about by certain members on here. Should that be banned? If not, should anti-Semitism, homophobia, anti-black be ok too?

I can't believe anyone hates Renegade. I disagree with about 90% of his posts but certainly enjoy reading them probably more than anyone else's.

I've noticed your first point. I noticed a few months ago, one poster came out with a seething anti-Islam stance. Was anything done about it? No. If he'd said the same about Catholics or Jews or some other minority group, they'd be banned for life on sectarian grounds.

On your last point, I must have had the most attacks on me than any other poster on the this forum, and once on P&B, where I was referred to by a regualar poster on here as a "retard". But on here I've called everything from a halfwit, to a County supporter, numerous parts of the human anatomy, numerous different names for human waste, an idiot, stuck in a pre-war era, had a thread calling for my dismissal and even a Gay Crusader! Seriously unbelieveable stuff.

On your last point, I must have had the most attacks on me than any other poster on the this forum, and once on P&B, where I was referred to by a regualar poster on here as a "retard". But on here I've called everything from a halfwit, to a County supporter, numerous parts of the human anatomy, numerous different names for human waste, an idiot, stuck in a pre-war era, had a thread calling for my dismissal and even a Gay Crusader! Seriously unbelieveable stuff.

I sympathise with you Renegade. I have been called many things, I was even called a Jaggy once but I could live with most if not all of them but a C*unty supporter? Man, that must hurt.

I've noticed your first point. I noticed a few months ago, one poster came out with a seething anti-Islam stance. Was anything done about it? No. If he'd said the same about Catholics or Jews or some other minority group, they'd be banned for life on sectarian grounds.

I dont recall the post in question but I have one simple question for you ..... did you use the report button ?

The FIRST line of defence in any moderation on the site is always going to be the users themselves. If you are offended by a post you report it. Mods and Admin may not read every thread so might miss it. If it is reported we will certainly discuss it and either agree with you or disagree with you. If we agree with you we will then do what the team have decided is the best course of action (edit, warning, deletion, ban etc). quite simple really ...

Our forthcoming golden rules, much of which have been written/suggested by site users rather than mods will make it clear that you are the first line of defence in deeming what is acceptable or not. If we can get to a stage where the users are more self-moderating than they are right now it will be a better place for us all.

IIRC, a couple of mods were involved in that thread, and would've have seen what I mentioned, but did nowt about it or didn't think it was bad enough to moderate.

But here's another idea. Why not change a few of the moderators around periodically. Theres's one or two moderators who are quiet good, there's one or two that are a bit hasty, there's one or two that are a bit high and mighty and there's one or two that seldom seem to be around. So, I suggest, you keep the admin as they are and install one or two as "permament moderators", whilst changing a few of the mods every month or so. That way, other possible trouble makers see what it's like to deal with trouble, and may create a greater all round respect on this site.

As you say, we have a wide range of moderator "types" and that's fairly intentional as it provides a more balanced view. Not all moderators are active in terms of physical participation in moderating the forums, but they are there as they provide valued input to discussions and the like.

There's no way we would consider any form of random moderator appointments either. Moderators have a lot of responsibility and they need to be trusted. They have access to tools on the site that, in the wrong hands, could cause a lot of damage. They also have access to information which we simply could not, and would not risk just any old person getting their hands on.

Also, just as you need a fairly consistent starting 11 in football in order to put together some consistency in play, we need to use that same principle when it comes to the moderators to ensure a consistent approach to moderation.

They have access to tools on the site Far too many tools on the site if you ask me! :hale:

Why not change a few of the moderators around periodically. Theres's one or two moderators who are quiet good, there's one or two that are a bit hasty, there's one or two that are a bit high and mighty and there's one or two that seldom seem to be around.

More a subjective account than a scientific one though eh Renegade? One man's 'hasty' is another man's 'firm' etc etc.

Due to everybody's different work patterns, some people can be off the site for a good spell then very active for a spell. Some are on during the day, others at night, etc.

One thing you can be sure of is that the team reads, on the moderators' forum, the reports of what's happening and decides as a team what action should be taken. So often it's immaterial which mod has warned you or raised your warning level or deleted your post or smacked your botty. It's usually a team decision.

IIRC, a couple of mods were involved in that thread, and would've have seen what I mentioned, but did nowt about it or didn't think it was bad enough to moderate.

My question remains ... did YOU use the report button? If the answer is no, then the whole point you are making is moot.

As a moderation team there may be some discussions we think are near (or have gone beyond) the knuckle and we may intervene, but there may be some where we let them roll unless we receive a complaint. Its a judgement call and a balancing act between over and under moderating and as I said above, the first line of defence is with the users and their ability to report a particular post and why they think it is unacceptable.

If we get a report it may tip our own opinion about a thread one way or another. If we dont get a report from you then, sorry, please dont complain about the thread several months or years later and hold it up as an example.

Rotating Moderators ? - sorry, no. They would get dizzy.

As Mantis said, one man's "hasty" is another's "firm" etc. One of the factors in choosing the mods we have now was to choose people we trusted to act responsibly but who might have differing opinions on things and I think we succeeded. In fact, I know we succeeded if you are able to categorise them as you did.

Any discussions we have as a mod team tend to offer up different opinions and that is exactly what we wanted. We didnt want a bunch of clones, we wanted people who would throw their opinion into a mod discussion even if it was an unpopular one. We wanted mods that would say "Hey Scotty ... you are over-reacting" or "you are wrong" and thats what we got. We are not perfect, and never will be, but we do make better decisions because we have that wide range of views within a team who are not scared to voice their opinion.

I've yet to see one post on this forum i've not been able to read!

I have.

IIRC, a couple of mods were involved in that thread, and would've have seen what I mentioned, but did nowt about it or didn't think it was bad enough to moderate.

My question remains ... did YOU use the report button? If the answer is no, then the whole point you are making is moot.

I didn't but did think about it at the time. How good it would've done is another thing though.

Fer fecks sake - close this feckin thread down - it is now getting boring and boo hoo hoo - if ya give it out - which many righteous tawts do - ya have to take it back.