Jordan deserves his own Hall of Fame

[puckjim]

Telling people to "**** off" is against the rules, whatever that means.



Being wrong and basing your opinions on half-truths, isn't.



During a debate, the person that resorts to saying "**** Off!" has lost the debate, regardless of the quality of their "truth."



I defended him before he was banned and had those posts deleted.



I'm sure there's some sort of vague board rule that allowed for my thoughts to be censored.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Really? What's your current experience.



Do you warn the users telling fluff to **** off, or "trolling" for him, or do you warn Fluff? Once you warn those users do they get pissed because you arent dealing with the reason they are reaching out in that manner?



Again what's your experience Jim? You feel so confident to tell us it's easy, where do you do it? Is there insight from some place you are a mod?





Maybe we should ask Lady Hawk what she thinks about that? You know the one you went out of your way to show everyone what she looked like on her own site? No one else did that?



"personally you would love lady hawk on here"



So she could in turn **** the flow of the message board and ultimately get existing members warned for calling her a scut or some other comment towards her.



You can't have your cake and eat it too man. Can't.

Even on a small site with a limited number of mods I can see how it probably is a bigger "job" than any of us know. It's a volunteer position to weed out the troublemakers and essentially make this place better for all existing members as well as new members. People with opinions like Fluff are perfectly fine if they actually back their stuff up with facts and not just post something even more irrational when they have nothing to back their original statement up.



If I don't know something about a subject I don't comment... if I do comment on something and am proven wrong I don't keep digging and trying to back it up with more nonsense.



EDIT: Except in regards to John Scott/Sean Avery/Sidney Crosby... I am the 100% expert and none of you can prove me wrong!

 

[R K]

Telling people to "**** off" is against the rules, whatever that means.



Being wrong and basing your opinions on half-truths, isn't.



During a debate, the person that resorts to saying "**** Off!" has lost the debate, regardless of the quality of their "truth."



I defended him before he was banned and had those posts deleted.



I'm sure there's some sort of vague board rule that allowed for my thoughts to be censored.

Again you didn't answer the question. If it's so easy to deal with all these personalities and it's a small site answer the question.



What is your experience at dealing with 200 personalities. What is your experience of keeping the flow and community?





You defended him while others were reporting him. Just because "YOU" defended him doesn't mean thats the et all there Jim. You don't have to deal with everyone else.



Again answer the question. YOu are so adiment you are right. You started an entire thread based on half truths and the others you assumed.



If you think I enjoy dealing with you on a daly basis your nuts. I have better things to do with my time thats for fucking sure.



I also love how the blame some how comes to me when I wasn't the one that warned three of those posters to piss them off and leave. But hey, what ever people want to ASSume is what works I guess.

 

[puckjim]

Really? What's your current experience.



Do you warn the users telling fluff to **** off, or "trolling" for him, or do you warn Fluff? Once you warn those users do they get pissed because you arent dealing with the reason they are reaching out in that manner?



Again what's your experience Jim? You feel so confident to tell us it's easy, where do you do it? Is there insight from some place you are a mod?





Maybe we should ask Lady Hawk what she thinks about that? You know the one you went out of your way to show everyone what she looked like on her own site? No one else did that?



"personally you would love lady hawk on here"



So she could in turn **** the flow of the message board and ultimately get existing members warned for calling her a scut or some other comment towards her.



You can't have your cake and eat it too man. Can't.

My point is this place doesn't need much moderation.



Message boards regulate their own flow. Topics heat up, then they die.



I can't stand Ladyhawk, but I would welcome her here.



If existing members can't control themselves and end up calling her names, **** 'em.



They have no more stake in this place than someone that joined an hour ago.



Again....Ignore Button



FYI: There aren't 200 active posters.

 

[R K]

Even on a small site with a limited number of mods I can see how it probably is a bigger "job" than any of us know. It's a volunteer position to weed out the troublemakers and essentially make this place better for all existing members as well as new members. People with opinions like Fluff are perfectly fine if they actually back their stuff up with facts and not just post something even more irrational when they have nothing to back their original statement up.



If I don't know something about a subject I don't comment... if I do comment on something and am proven wrong I don't keep digging and trying to back it up with more nonsense.



EDIT: Except in regards to John Scott/Sean Avery/Sidney Crosby... I am the 100% expert and none of you can prove me wrong!

You had your time where you were the fluff. And you did it on purpose. It's past us. You changed for the better.

 

[TSD]

My point is this place doesn't need much moderation.



Message boards regulate their own flow. Topics heat up, then they die.



I can't stand Ladyhawk, but I would welcome her here.



If existing members can't control themselves and end up calling her names, **** 'em.



They have no more stake in this place than someone that joined an hour ago.



Again....Ignore Button



FYI: There aren't 200 active posters.

I think i would have an iGasm if Squawk came to this board. Fun times would be had by all.

 

[puckjim]

Even on a small site with a limited number of mods I can see how it probably is a bigger "job" than any of us know. It's a volunteer position to weed out the troublemakers and essentially make this place better for all existing members as well as new members. People with opinions like Fluff are perfectly fine if they actually back their stuff up with facts and not just post something even more irrational when they have nothing to back their original statement up.



If I don't know something about a subject I don't comment... if I do comment on something and am proven wrong I don't keep digging and trying to back it up with more nonsense.



EDIT: Except in regards to John Scott/Sean Avery/Sidney Crosby... I am the 100% expert and none of you can prove me wrong!

But that's you, Stu. I agree I don't get involved in discussions that I don't have an opinion about the topic.



Irrationality is not a reason to ban someone.



Ignore him. If you see his posts, don't read them.



Why do opinions need to be backed up?



It's not debate school.



People can say whatever they want.



I understand the censorship more at the Officials. It's a huge site for a high profile team.



That isn't the case here. As long as there is no verbal abuse, moderation should be negligible.

 

[R K]

My point is this place doesn't need much moderation.



Message boards regulate their own flow. Topics heat up, then they die.



I can't stand Ladyhawk, but I would welcome her here.



If existing members can't control themselves and end up calling her names, **** 'em.



They have no more stake in this place than someone that joined an hour ago.



Again....Ignore Button



FYI: There aren't 200 active posters.

Again it needs the moderation it gets. I have explained to you now several times why things were done and are done and you IGNORE those and continue rambling on Jim.



and FYI there are 200 people on and off here. There are 15-20 people on at most times during the day. Again when you manage those personalities or have then come talk to us. Until then you are giving an opinion and have nothing to back that up other than your assumption.



I gave you the moderation facts earlier in this thread. The number of people banned TOTAL since the site was started and the fact there is a file we save ALL the deleted material which is EXTREMELY small.



Those are facts.





I have though taken some of the thoughts in this thread into consideration, as far as abrasive posting and such but thats just for me personally. If one person disrupts the flow they will be dealt with. Just as on every other board.

 

[R K]

I think i would have an iGasm if Squawk came to this board. Fun times would be had by all.

While it would be HILARIOUS you know where it would end.

 

[E Runs]

Personally the team playing the way it is and the Kerfuffle thing just exaerbated a lot of little things to the point where it wasn't fun anymore. Too many times this place came off as toddlers throwing sand at each other. Waivering opinions were beaten or ridiculed to submission. Someone was asked to provide a link to support what they were saying. Seriously!? RK is right, if someone is afraid to post something they probably shouldn't be on a message board to begin with. But the same holds true if you don't like reading what one has said. Disagree, move on. Don't like what the response is, ignore it. Why waste time and energy? Too many times I felt people just kept picking at the scab to get a response or trolling the troll. Sometimes it seems like there's way too much energy wasted just so one can thump their chest and excliam, "I'm right!"



As far as moderating goes I feel it's in the best interest of everyone involved to keep specific issuences of warnings a private matter. Discuss the problem with the individual and go from there. If postes in general get moved, edited, locked, dealeted it would be helpful to leave a mod note explaining the situation to the class so that people are not left to their own ideas. An example from another board I frequent: Mod Note: 24-hour cooling off period. Meanwhile, take this advice to heart:



"To be respectful and polite to those you disagree with is a priceless act of grace"

-Tom Peters



Nobody wins a prize here by making someone else look like a fool.



Like Mill said we're all not gonna sit around the campfire and hold hands, that would be ghey. But an increase in decorum wouldn't be a bad thing.

 

[R K]

Good point Eric and I'm not sure how you set that up. Something Tony would have to figure out. There are so few posts deleted it should not be a problem.





Good post too.





And some of us do sit around the camp fire outside the boards so to speak. We know each other for bad or worse. I see Mill every game. I bought my phone from little Mill and love those guys as very good friends.



As a lot of us do on here and have done, long before IHN was formed.

 

[supraman]

I'm going to explain why I voted to ban Fluff. You might not like my reasoning but it is my reasoning. I said ban him because he was causing me to tell good posters to stop the personal attacks. Now I don't know any of you personally but I know a lot of you guys by reputation. He's been around awhile and is a good poster. So I have a choice, do I keep warning this poster about it until I have to bring it up to the mods about further action with him. The same with another poster he was getting a little harsh on Fluff, he never got to the point of being a warnable offense but it was getting there.



On top of that I had to close 2 or 3 threads because they devolved into bashing Fluff. I didn't want to kill those threads at least one of them was a great, great conversation. I wasn't happy I had to do it but it got out of hand.



So I had a choice. Do I keep having to squash good threads and warning good posters or do I get rid of the common denominator? I chose the common denominator.



Did I think he did anything wrong? No not really, his calling out of RK on the day he was banned was a no-no.



Also Jim consider this, this isn't the United States of America. It is the Kingdom of Ton, he can censor any of us for any reason he so chooses, its his board, he is god.



So to sum up I decided to get rid of the bad apple before he spoiled the bunch.

 

[puckjim]

I'm going to explain why I voted to ban Fluff. You might not like my reasoning but it is my reasoning. I said ban him because he was causing me to tell good posters to stop the personal attacks. Now I don't know any of you personally but I know a lot of you guys by reputation. He's been around awhile and is a good poster. So I have a choice, do I keep warning this poster about it until I have to bring it up to the mods about further action with him. The same with another poster he was getting a little harsh on Fluff, he never got to the point of being a warnable offense but it was getting there.



On top of that I had to close 2 or 3 threads because they devolved into bashing Fluff. I didn't want to kill those threads at least one of them was a great, great conversation. I wasn't happy I had to do it but it got out of hand.



So I had a choice. Do I keep having to squash good threads and warning good posters or do I get rid of the common denominator? I chose the common denominator.



Did I think he did anything wrong? No not really, his calling out of RK on the day he was banned was a no-no.



Also Jim consider this, this isn't the United States of America. It is the Kingdom of Ton, he can censor any of us for any reason he so chooses, its his board, he is god.



So to sum up I decided to get rid of the bad apple before he spoiled the bunch.

Sorry, but if it can happen to Fluff, it can happen to anyone.



All it takes is for someone to hold an an unpopular opinion, and not concede their point.



What if I thought the Hawks should trade Jonathan Toews?



And no matter how much I get blasted, I stick to my guns and start being called an asshole.



By your logic, I should be banned because I caused someone to break the rules.



How about telling the children that called me an asshole that they will be banned?



Nothing like the crime matching the punishment.

 

[R K]

I'm going to explain why I voted to ban Fluff. You might not like my reasoning but it is my reasoning. I said ban him because he was causing me to tell good posters to stop the personal attacks. Now I don't know any of you personally but I know a lot of you guys by reputation. He's been around awhile and is a good poster. So I have a choice, do I keep warning this poster about it until I have to bring it up to the mods about further action with him. The same with another poster he was getting a little harsh on Fluff, he never got to the point of being a warnable offense but it was getting there.



On top of that I had to close 2 or 3 threads because they devolved into bashing Fluff. I didn't want to kill those threads at least one of them was a great, great conversation. I wasn't happy I had to do it but it got out of hand.



So I had a choice. Do I keep having to squash good threads and warning good posters or do I get rid of the common denominator? I chose the common denominator.



Did I think he did anything wrong? No not really, his calling out of RK on the day he was banned was a no-no.



Also Jim consider this, this isn't the United States of America. It is the Kingdom of Ton, he can censor any of us for any reason he so chooses, its his board, he is god.



So to sum up I decided to get rid of the bad apple before he spoiled the bunch.

The explination won't work for Puck Jim because he does not understand and not willing to understand.



So by your example you then tell those GOOD posters to knock it off and they chose to leave.



In a nut shell thats what will transpire.



Again Puck Jim may not like it but he does not see it from the other side at all. He is going on what he sees, which is limited.

 

[maryo]

it's the holier than thou "i'm right you're wrong, nothing you contribute will change that" attitude that killed it for me; the refusal of some people to listen to anything whatsoever anyone else says that goes against their opinion, regardless of facts. that's what made me stop reading hawk talk all together. and when that bullshit seeped right into NHTA as well, i had enough. i didn't even bother to lurk anymore.



as for the issue of traffic, well i think it's kind of a bullshit stat. you got a lot of clicks one day? meh. it was probably the same person posting the same shit over and over again in the same topic. big fucking deal. like someone else said (sorry, too lazy to go back to find out who), if you were brand new here and read these threads, would you join? i wouldn't. not the way it's been the past several months. and don't blame it on the cup hangover, because this shit started when the hawks were on fire.

 

[supraman]

Sorry, but if it can happen to Fluff, it can happen to anyone.



All it takes is for someone to hold an an unpopular opinion, and not concede their point.



What if I thought the Hawks should trade Jonathan Toews?



And no matter how much I get blasted, I stick to my guns and start being called an asshole.



By your logic, I should be banned because I caused someone to break the rules.



How about telling the children that called me an asshole that they will be banned?



Nothing like the crime matching the punishment.

you do make a great argument to ban you and man it'd be another pain in the ass poster gone.

 

[R K]

it's the holier than thou "i'm right you're wrong, nothing you contribute will change that" attitude that killed it for me; the refusal of some people to listen to anything whatsoever anyone else says that goes against their opinion, regardless of facts. that's what made me stop reading hawk talk all together. and when that bullshit seeped right into NHTA as well, i had enough. i didn't even bother to lurk anymore.



as for the issue of traffic, well i think it's kind of a bullshit stat. you got a lot of clicks one day? meh. it was probably the same person posting the same shit over and over again in the same topic. big fucking deal. like someone else said (sorry, too lazy to go back to find out who), if you were brand new here and read these threads, would you join? i wouldn't. not the way it's been the past several months. and don't blame it on the cup hangover, because this shit started when the hawks were on fire.

I don't know about that I've been agreeing with you an awful lot, or had been.



As for the traffic I think you are correct it's hard stat to grasp. One because of face book and twitter, but another because we have a lot of users that read and just don't post anything. When you compare it to the other four sites the traffic or constant users here is far from the bottom.



We've had a lot of new users sign up lately. Other than the 100 or so Bots I spend a few hours a week deleting so that they don't post keep your dick harder drug advertisements and such.



This board is really no different now that when it started.

 

[Variable]

you do make a great argument to ban you and man it'd be another pain in the ass poster gone.

How about this: get rid of everyone who doesn't agree with you. That would make it a shit ton easier, don't you think? This could be like a 10 person message board and everyone would be happy and everyone would agree with everyone else and everyone would be safe in knowing they know all the facts that everyone else doesn't. I don't know exactly what the intent of this message board is, if it's to stay small between a group of friends or if it's trying gain new members and continue to grow and evolve, but if it's the latter, maybe you shouldn't be a mod either.

 

[Pez68]

The other day Bri was afraid to post something in the Seabs/duncs thread. Is it because she was afraid of being ridiculed? Maybe. And to me that ain't kosher. I think whaler hit it on the head.



I want people to not be afraid of posting here. Yeah, we poke fun at each other, maybe say you're Special person or whatever, but quite a few seemingly never got a proper response.

Bingo. I agree with this, and with the points that Evan has brought up as well. I actually don't post half as much as I used to, and it is mostly due to people's intolerance towards opinions that differ from their own.

 

[BlackHawkPaul]

I'm trying to break this down to the common denominator.

What do posters want? Less moderation? Certain moderators? More contribution without retort? Civil discussion?



A simple revert is impossible. You may be able to get everyone back, but in certain instances the damage has been done.

I cannot get poster A to get along with poster B, and have them both contributing if either of them feel they're existence on here is being compromised. I don't have enough time in the day to mend cyber bridges.



What I do like is airing out the issues at hand. It eliminates the elephant in the room, and we can figure out if we can rectify small issues without people getting red-assed (hopefully).



I'll make a case in point for myself. IcehogsFan and I don't see eye to eye on issues. We are basically polar opposites in NHTA, and really get passionate in our posts. Some one the other day brought it up to me that I "hate" IHF. Not in the slightest. We just don't agree on much that has been posted in the forums. Whooptie-doo. At the end of the day we're still Blackhawks fans. I'm not a person that just has to sit and wait for the next IHF post so I can try to show him up. It's a big house with lots of children. We got this far. Let's try and make it another day.