PROPOSED NEW FORUM RULES

[6621104]

transparent - a word beloved of politicians and managerial types . Meaning: to give the appearance of openness whilst preserving anonymity and lack of accountability.

[GrumpyOne]

What are you trying to say.

Nothing evil.

I reckon you'd be a good Mod, but a recommendation from me would be like the kiss of Death.

[Greg T]

To answer questions - the swearing rule (remembering the forum is read by minors as well)

Swearing is not permitted. This includes abbreviations, acronyms, or any form of alteration of the swear word, in any form, that may constitute the reader to understand that it is a swear word.

Can I put forward some dissention on this. I agree with the altered spelling of a swear word, that's an obvious one. However I would think widely used internet acronyms such as "WTF" as an example, are in such mainstream use, and are such a prevelant part of the modern lexicon as to be basically inoffensive, no?

LOL, ROFLMAO, WTF are commonly used by kids texting and to me are a long way from using the word f**k (self censored for the eample) in a sentence.

Whilst I fully support the measures to improve the forum and the experience of the users, I also don't think we need to make it a chapter of the temperance society. Can I get soome feedback from all concerned on this? Just seems a little over the top to me to eradicate the use of such widely acepted acronymns because "won't somebody please think of the children!". If a kid is on here and old enough to understand the acronym, then I would hazard a guess they are already using the long form of the word themselves!! And whilst there are children on here I think it is obvious the vast majority of users are adults or adolescents and as such, shouldn't be restricted to Disney channel level of communication.

100% agree.

200% agree

[BackFromUSA]

To answer questions - the swearing rule (remembering the forum is read by minors as well)

Swearing is not permitted. This includes abbreviations, acronyms, or any form of alteration of the swear word, in any form, that may constitute the reader to understand that it is a swear word.

Can I put forward some dissention on this. I agree with the altered spelling of a swear word, that's an obvious one. However I would think widely used internet acronyms such as "WTF" as an example, are in such mainstream use, and are such a prevelant part of the modern lexicon as to be basically inoffensive, no?

LOL, ROFLMAO, WTF are commonly used by kids texting and to me are a long way from using the word f**k (self censored for the eample) in a sentence.

Whilst I fully support the measures to improve the forum and the experience of the users, I also don't think we need to make it a chapter of the temperance society. Can I get soome feedback from all concerned on this? Just seems a little over the top to me to eradicate the use of such widely acepted acronymns because "won't somebody please think of the children!". If a kid is on here and old enough to understand the acronym, then I would hazard a guess they are already using the long form of the word themselves!! And whilst there are children on here I think it is obvious the vast majority of users are adults or adolescents and as such, shouldn't be restricted to Disney channel level of communication.

Hi all

Valid points that have support.

The rule itself should stay but the MODS are aware of community standards, but rather than write exceptions to the rules we have flexibility on how they are implemented.

For example ...

Telling someone to F OFF ... obviously a breach with a warning via PM.

"FFS how does he miss from 10 metres out" ... could let that slide and maybe just clean it up with an edit to read "<edited by MODS> how did he miss from 10 metres out?"

"WTF are you on? You are obviously an idiot." - a breach in that context because of belittling but might just get cleaned up by mods and a reminder re the rules sent by PM unless it is a serial offender and the broader context (the rest of the post) has multiple breaches, well that would be an automatic warning via PM.

As you can see. The rule exists but we can apply common sense ... and we can either leave it / edit it / a polite PM reminder re rules / send a warning via PM ... case by case

[Wayne42]

Ultimately the forum has finally got what it wished for.... enjoy

[desertsaint]

"FFS how does he miss from 10 metres out" ... could let that slide and maybe just clean it up with an edit to read "<edited by MODS> how did he miss from 10 metres out?"

As you can see. The rule exists but we can apply common sense ... and we can either leave it / edit it / a polite PM reminder re rules / send a warning via PM ... case by case

Sorry, but the above example is not common sense at all. you are changing the emotion of the post. sterilizing it.
the meaning of a message is in the context of the message. change that and you change the message. it would take all personality and colour away from posts and ruin the forum.

[BackFromUSA]

hmmm you see I would argue that everyone will know that an expletive was used at the start of the sentence simply because <edited by MODS> is there where FFS was

[Cairnsman]

The new rules are poo!

[saintspremiers]

Cairnsman - what do you think of the process suggested above - I am worried by volunteering openly you are now open to public debate ... thinking this might work better via Private Messages (PMs) ... if you like I can remove your post above to avoid open debate ... before too many people see it!

Nah leave it in the public domain. If I'm going to be a mod I want to be transparent.

Gday Casper.

Please keep in topic. This thread is not to talk about our Prez.

[markp]

People will just need to get creative is all.

I've got an English friend who tells people he wants to ...er, go away, in his best public school accent to 'jog on', it hilarious 'jog on chap!'

Can also recommend 'jolly' and 'jolly well'... dawg gawn... blessed ... WTB - what the blessed?

[joffaboy]

People will just need to get creative is all.

I've got an English friend who tells people he wants to ...er, go away, in his best public school accent to 'jog on', it hilarious 'jog on chap!'

Can also recommend 'jolly' and 'jolly well'... dawg gawn... blessed ... WTB - what the blessed?

Oh jolly hockey sticks, hurray hillary.

the swearing rules are megalomanic posturing by the mods and the intolerance is incredible.

Was all for cleaning up the jacking of threads and baiting, but to get a warning like i did for praising Gary Abletts game last week with a few swear words was beyonfd belief.

Absolute overbearing santisation.

Unfortunately I think we have created a monster. What I thought would bring more people to this forum, passionate and erudite debate on the issues of football will actually drive users away.

To not be allowed to express yourself in a societial norm is censorship on a Soviet scale.

Can see this new regime being a train wreck with huge egos and individual puriticanical halfbaked moral standards being foistered on to posters.

This will all end in tears unless basic common sense is employed.

[dragit]

Well I have just decided to cut to the chase...

From now on when I get in a huff I will simply post

<edited by MODS>

You guys will know wassup.

[Cairnsman]

Well I have just decided to cut to the chase...

From now on when I get in a huff I will simply post

<edited by MODS>

You guys will know wassup.

Instead of saying wanker which I'm not sure if that is banned under the new rules but if it is could you say something like "Tosser from Barossa" when you want to call someone a wanker.

[markp]

I think the problem is that there are some posters who (do and would) cynically and deliberately exploit any leeway or loopholes to the max, so zero tolerance is probably (unfortunately) the way to go.

[stinger]

Ultimately the forum has finally got what it wished for.... enjoy

my grandfather...pop...always told me to be careful what i wished for........still haven't got that e-type....

[dragit]

Ultimately the forum has finally got what it wished for.... enjoy

Is that you bobmurray?

[BakesFan]

Great danger of over-sanitising....re: swearing/acronyms...

.Mods need to make it clear whether they're applying the 'average bloke' rule or the 'nun in a convent' rule when it comes to judging expletives.

[matrix]

"FFS how does he miss from 10 metres out" ... could let that slide and maybe just clean it up with an edit to read "<edited by MODS> how did he miss from 10 metres out?"

are you friggin kidding me????

seriously?

well you better appoint 48 mods then just to keep up in the match thread
which gets emotional in there
i mean cmon. seriously you are going this route where you will delete FFS and replace it with edited by mods???

its funny
the probs we've all been speaking about for the last year seem to be the ones pushed to the back burner
like the actual friggin site itself
oh well
might as well say bye now because i wont last twenty mins here ffs

[kosifantutti]

hmmm you see I would argue that everyone will know that an expletive was used at the start of the sentence simply because <edited by MODS> is there where FFS was

If that was my post that had been modified, I would be concerned that people would think I had used something that I consider much worse than FFS. But I guess you have to draw the line somewhere.

From now on I'm going with For Faletic's Sake

[6621104]

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.(Eleanor Roosevelt)

Apologies BakesFan but this is such a great quote I had to Hi-jack it. Coz I think we can see a way out of the sanitization of this site. The notion of what is a swear word, when many appear now in dictionaries has changed. Perhaps when linked to discussion of individuals they retain some of the original emotive impact, and maybe it is OK to keep an eye on this and moderate use. But, I would maintain that in the context of discussing events and ideas the use of swear words has become a form of shortcut to express feelings of exasperation - such as "FFS how could he miss from there" and hyperbole - "what a f****** useless idea". Such use is common and should remain unsanctioned. So I support the average bloke interpretation as long as the average bloke is not directing his expletive at an individual.

[BakesFan]

not my quote, 6621104.....therefore there is nothing to hi-jack.

It is a beauty though..something to aspire to...(even though I often fail miserably)

[Cairnsman]

"FFS how does he miss from 10 metres out" ... could let that slide and maybe just clean it up with an edit to read "<edited by MODS> how did he miss from 10 metres out?"

are you friggin kidding me????

seriously?

well you better appoint 48 mods then just to keep up in the match thread
which gets emotional in there
i mean cmon. seriously you are going this route where you will delete FFS and replace it with edited by mods???

its funny
the probs we've all been speaking about for the last year seem to be the ones pushed to the back burner
like the actual friggin site itself
oh well
might as well say bye now because i wont last twenty mins here ffs

Yeah I've got to agree Matrix. I didn't really get involved in the whole "Proposed New Forum Rules" however I must be honest the introduction of the swearing clause(s) seem more like they come from a personal agenda than they do the mainstream.

I would propose that the majority of posters who post on here on an almost daily basis and have for possibly a period spanning 5-10 years (my best estimate) are the spiritual moderators and in the past they have seemed to have a way of controlling the completely out of line stuff. I would guess that most of these same posters are in excess of the 30 years of age, the average age possibly being 40 something (just a guess) and I reckon that is one of the main reasons this site has appeal. It's main contribution of good stuff is by middle aged adults. Yes there are kiddies that hang around the feet and listen in and even occasionally chime in with an attempted gem of their own, but just like at the footy the kiddies are going to hear some naughty stuff, more than likely the stuff they hear and yell in the playgrounds at school.

This site is an internet landmark that would be bookmarked by most journalists reporting on AFL so they can visit regularly for insights and angles that were once gathered by mingling with punters in the outer. And if you want evidence of that you only have to point to a recent headline by the HS that read "Studs and Duds" which was accompanied by a picture of Jack Steven. That is proof that this site has content worth scanning by professional journalists. Now my point is if you start to sanitise the site with some ridiculous over zealous god bothering rules then you will rip away the appeal of the site.

If you ask me the moderators should have to answer to a board of people (the ones I call the spiritual moderators). Rules should be voted in by the board and the moderators just police the rules voted in. VOTED IN!!!!!!

[gringo]

We need some expletive emoticons then because there is no way you can punctuate your posts with out resorting to swearing otherwise. Just like you need stupid smiley faces to indicate irony etc. Sometimes FFS is all there is to say to give dramatic effect.

[markp]

We need some expletive emoticons then because there is no way you can punctuate your posts with out resorting to swearing otherwise. Just like you need stupid smiley faces to indicate irony etc. Sometimes FFS is all there is to say to give dramatic effect.

Agree with this... Good idea.

[matrix]

ps
cairnsey

i live in the barossa
lol