Zone Update Members

[THE SEVENTIES NORTH BANK]

Agree.

Rigsby might have divided opinion at times, but he rarely crossed the line.

FWIW, Rigsby has been one of the better posters in this place, for years. Too many of the good ones are dropping off. No Carl, no Rusty, no Swissy, no Dick Bate's Protege, no cockles. You've Gotta have SOME people who'll spark debate

No wiggy, no osymundus, no onion bag dave.

 

[Benfleet A1]

I'll put money on it that the biggest troll on here is still active.

 

[THE SEVENTIES NORTH BANK]

It Says Banned under his heading. He's been gulaged

Oh O.K. I know he had a few arguments this week that got a bit tasty. That must have pushed him over the ban edge. Shame because when he stuck to talking about the team, players and performance, he was fair. Certainly a loyal supporter going home and away.

 

[MK Shrimper]

Agree.

Rigsby might have divided opinion at times, but he rarely crossed the line.

FWIW, Rigsby has been one of the better posters in this place, for years. Too many of the good ones are dropping off. No Carl, no Rusty, no Swissy, no Dick Bate's Protege, no cockles. You've Gotta have SOME people who'll spark debate

You can spark any debate you like, however some go out of their way to be offensive and/or wind people up. As far as I know Swiss, Rusty and Carl (Hitman) are still about? Rusty crossed the line several times.

 

[Benfleet A1]

You can spark any debate you like, however some go out of their way to be offensive and/or wind people up. As far as I know Swiss, Rusty and Carl (Hitman) are still about? Rusty crossed the line several times.

That line gets crossed every day by one particular poster. No great suprise that that account is still active. Thank god for the ignore button.

 

[davewebbsbrain]

So for those that have been released, what's stops them rejoining under a different name?

 

[Swiss Tony]

Agree.

Rigsby might have divided opinion at times, but he rarely crossed the line.

FWIW, Rigsby has been one of the better posters in this place, for years. Too many of the good ones are dropping off. No Carl, no Rusty, no Swissy, no Dick Bate's Protege, no cockles. You've Gotta have SOME people who'll spark debate

Hanging on by my boot straps old boy.

 

[manor15]

So for those that have been released, what's stops them rejoining under a different name?

Every new member requires approval and if there are reasons to be suspicious then they're kept a close eye on. Giving away our high tech MI6 style secrets would only help them to find a way round it. It's not a coincidence that Cricko has a lot in common with Bond.

 

[AndyT]

Just a suggestion, but maybe the best way of dealing with "problem posters" if that's what they are, is to poll the membership on whether they should stay or go.

I'd take a wager that the majority of them would still be wanted on the forum. They may "wind-up" the odd poster in a heated debate on a delicate subject, but in the main, they don't upset people and this would be reflected in an open poll.

Personally, unless someone is out and out making threats, I wouldn't ban anyone. If you don't like what someone says, then stay clear of that debate or challenge them.

It's all too easy to look at a few bad points on someone, without looking at the good and beneficial ones, as well. As someone said earlier, sometimes you need a feisty debate. Gets us all involved and opens us to air our opinions.

There's not a single poster I have wanted banned on here. I'm shocked that people feel the need to disenfranchise others because they don't play the same way as them.

In the case of 'rigsby' sure he might lock horns with certain posters, but this is far outweighed by his insightful match reports and interesting views and comments. He also brings a positive and constructive air to counter a lot of the negativity on here, at times.

There's been plenty of times he has given good advice on here and helped others, as well.

I'd wager he has also financially contributed to the 'zone as well, to keep it going.

So, by all means, moderate certain threads if they get out of hand, but none of this banning nonsense, please.

This is a football forum and as such will be emotive. Or shall we all sit in a circle holding hands and lacing daisies in each other's hair!

 

[fbm]

Perhaps a lot of the issue is not what is being said, but how it is being said?

No idea - I'm not aware of what is meant to have happened here

 

[AndyT]

Me neither, mate.

I'm also unsure who else has been banned. 'rigsby' is the only known one, so far.

The original post on this thread mentions "certain posters are only here to **** off the majority with their views".

I must admit, I don't know anyone who's agenda involves this as a priority. It's all about perception.

 

[GBJ]

You can spark any debate you like, however some go out of their way to be offensive and/or wind people up. As far as I know Swiss, Rusty and Carl (Hitman) are still about? Rusty crossed the line several times.

Can't recall Rigsby going out of his way to offend people, or wind them up, and to suggest otherwise is nothing but (biased) speculation & conjecture.

I know you've tussled with the man a few times, along with a few others, but I don't recall him breaking any site rules.

To this day, I'm still amazed that grown adults cannot function properly on an Internet forum, without resorting to throwing teddy out the pram.

From an owners POV, I appreciate its not all smiles & roses policing this place at times, but temporarily/permanently banning those who actually contribute so much, be it good or bad, is simply shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[mfurok]

Just a suggestion, but maybe the best way of dealing with "problem posters" if that's what they are, is to poll the membership on whether they should stay or go.

I'd take a wager that the majority of them would still be wanted on the forum. They may "wind-up" the odd poster in a heated debate on a delicate subject, but in the main, they don't upset people and this would be reflected in an open poll.

Personally, unless someone is out and out making threats, I wouldn't ban anyone. If you don't like what someone says, then stay clear of that debate or challenge them.

It's all too easy to look at a few bad points on someone, without looking at the good and beneficial ones, as well. As someone said earlier, sometimes you need a feisty debate. Gets us all involved and opens us to air our opinions.

There's not a single poster I have wanted banned on here. I'm shocked that people feel the need to disenfranchise others because they don't play the same way as them.

In the case of 'rigsby' sure he might lock horns with certain posters, but this is far outweighed by his insightful match reports and interesting views and comments. He also brings a positive and constructive air to counter a lot of the negativity on here, at times.

There's been plenty of times he has given good advice on here and helped others, as well.

I'd wager he has also financially contributed to the 'zone as well, to keep it going.

So, by all means, moderate certain threads if they get out of hand, but none of this banning nonsense, please.

This is a football forum and as such will be emotive. Or shall we all sit in a circle holding hands and lacing daisies in each other's hair!

As someone who has been abused by Rigsby on more than one occasion and generally disagrees with his unswerving support of Brown, I certainly do not agree with banning him. We should welcome his posts which provide us with the opportunities to put him right and............you never know............perhaps sometimes he's right.

 

[GBJ]

Perhaps a lot of the issue is not what is being said, but how it is being said?

No idea - I'm not aware of what is meant to have happened here

It's an Internet forum mate. A fairly mild one at that. As long as no site rules are broken, I fail to see the problem in people debating, discussing or defending their views, however controversial

 

[GBJ]

Hanging on by my boot straps old boy.

Hang in there Swissy

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Why was Rigsby banned?

Like him or not, he was a regular contributor to the site, and to my knowledge, didn't break any rules.

he broke them constantly, bear in mind that most people don't get to see the worst output as it gets deleted. Its pretty frustrating being on here then having whole chunks of conversation deleted because someone crossed a line - just makes the whole thing a waste of time. It's a waste because he was a big fan of the club and very knowledgeable but he would even troll on the football boards while on the politics boards he would spend half his time alleging people held opinions that they had never expressed.

 

[Ironshrimper]

No.5? Must up my game. :angry:

I would give you some likes.... I used to work for NR, Euston Tower... for a good few years..

 

[Lord Football]

Just a suggestion, but maybe the best way of dealing with "problem posters" if that's what they are, is to poll the membership on whether they should stay or go.

I'd take a wager that the majority of them would still be wanted on the forum. They may "wind-up" the odd poster in a heated debate on a delicate subject, but in the main, they don't upset people and this would be reflected in an open poll.

Personally, unless someone is out and out making threats, I wouldn't ban anyone. If you don't like what someone says, then stay clear of that debate or challenge them.

It's all too easy to look at a few bad points on someone, without looking at the good and beneficial ones, as well. As someone said earlier, sometimes you need a feisty debate. Gets us all involved and opens us to air our opinions.

There's not a single poster I have wanted banned on here. I'm shocked that people feel the need to disenfranchise others because they don't play the same way as them.

In the case of 'rigsby' sure he might lock horns with certain posters, but this is far outweighed by his insightful match reports and interesting views and comments. He also brings a positive and constructive air to counter a lot of the negativity on here, at times.

There's been plenty of times he has given good advice on here and helped others, as well.

I'd wager he has also financially contributed to the 'zone as well, to keep it going.

So, by all means, moderate certain threads if they get out of hand, but none of this banning nonsense, please.

This is a football forum and as such will be emotive. Or shall we all sit in a circle holding hands and lacing daisies in each other's hair!

There are some fair points in the above post and I think some explanation may help.

I am kind of in the easiest position of the mod team having been given my badge very, very recently and having no history (that I know of) with anyone - but I'm happy to be transparent.

Rusty simply wouldn't stop posting or including in his profile some quite nasty and unpleasant stuff. Potentially, if someone had complained, the board ran the very real risk of having to explain why we were allowing things that support holocaust denial, right wing death squads and the like on our board. He also posted (and attempted to post) some quite vile stuff that really has no place on media such as this. He was given enough chances.

The other two garnered enough complaints from other users about their on-going behaviour for us to take it seriously.

Mrs Blue had caused several long term posters to stop posting, citing that his behaviour was making the board unusable. Sometimes you need to listen to your posters and do something. You will all be the arbiter as to whether the board is better without Mrs Blue's input - I know from the feedback we had over the summer that some of you were disappointed that Mrs B was allowed back.

Rigsby is more difficult as personally I had a different take on him than others and quite enjoyed swapping barbs with him. But, the general view was that he'd got unnecessarily unpleasant and aggressive. He had been warned by a mod previously to wind it in. Didn't.

One of the very first things I did when I became a mod was to read through the mod café threads to get a fell of how the board was run (and also to see if I got a mention). What was clear is that this board has for many years been run in a very "live and live" manner where banning people has been a very, very rare thing. Some people have put serious amounts of work into making this the place what it is and have taken a bit of pride in the end product. What essentially has happened today is that for some of my colleagues the point of "enough is enough" has been reached and they've dealt with it.

Hopefully you'll accept the experience I've shared as an honest assessment and understand there isn't anything else to add to this discussion.

On that basis, and with an honest assessment of recent events, I trust no one will mind if I now close this thread so we can go back to talking about the usual stuff.

Thanks